The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1877-11-04

Sngularly enough, the surgeon who was
present at the post-inortem examination in
behalf OF the prisoners was not called rs
witness for the defence The Judge COM
mcnted strongly upon his absence, ~ show
ing that the theory ri death from tuhcrcular
meningitis. advanced on the trial. could not
be sustained 10y ihc opinion II any one who
actually eSHininci HARRIET S1AI MONS
dead body. II now appear5 that the failure
to call this gentleman wa- owing TO a mis-
apprehension On the part Of the attorneys
for the defendants. He has since sent let
Ter TO the Home Secretary stating that GER
tain of the post-mortem appearances were
incxplicable by starvation alone, hut agreed.
, ~ iaras they went. with the theory ot tuber-
cular meningitis: and he pronounces the
opinion that death wa the result Of starva-
tion alone 10 br mere hypothe This dis
poses OF the point made by llr. Justice HAw-
RlNs ON the medical testimony.
On the other hand. Psychologists of recog-
nined distinction. who heard all the medical
! evidence offered by the prosecution. swore
nnqualiflcdly 10 he opinion that the death
Of HARRIET STANTON was directly occa-
stoned by the acute disease known ~ tuber-
'N'Ai ii''tAhF wv -NhN III wv ''"N'"''SH
that the po-t-mortem examination. a. de-
scribed by the persons who made IL. did not
warrant the inference that death was due to
starvation. the medical profession in Great
Britain certainly seems to concur. This APP
pears not only from the treatment of the
subject by the English medical journals, but
from the scores Of emphatic letters in refer
ence to The ease which have been addressed
t. the London n"w-pa pers by prominent
| physicians and surgeons. The weakness Of
the ease against the prisoners on the med-
cal testimony was doubtless regarded by
the Home Secretary. not only in the light Of
the disability of the accused 10 testify in
their own behalf. but also in connection
with the fact that the only other evidence
IA 10 any actual deprivation of food came
! from servant who was dscreditcd as Il
witness. both by previous contradictory
statements and as being herself an accom-
plicc in whatever crime was committed. As
to the wickedness of the treatment to which
HARRIET SrAUNToN was subjected. there Is
not the slightest doubt but the medical
opinions which have been elected since the
trial make it impossible to conclude posi-
lively that the negligence amounted 10
murder.
few persons have made the PENCE case
a text for the usual auimadversions upon
the system OF trial by jury. but their criti-
cisms have no just foundation. Who can
doubt that If the medical testimony pre-
scented to the Home Secretary had been pro-
duced before the jury. the verdict would
have been different The manner in which
causes OF violent death are investigated in
| the first instance Is more open to objection.
The post-mortem examinations in such
cases should be- assigned by law to persons
specially trained 10 make them, instead Of
being committed TO the practitioner who
! happens To be nearest at hand. rs Is now
generally done. The difference in skill be-
tween n physician who has conducted
thousands Of autopsies and physician who
| has conducted perhaps half dozen, must
be simply immense: and the public should
/ have the benefit OF this difference III such
| Investigations.
The last and most revolving feature Of this
remarkable case TO which We shall refer is
/ the attendance Of fashionable and frivolous
women at the trial. lunching and drinking
/ chant agnc in court. while they watched
/ through opera glasses the emotions mani
Tested 10y the accused in the prisoners dock
| Well does Pmch say: