New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1895-02-01
NEW PUBLICATIONS.
A BOOK ON LEGAL MEDICINE


unique in character 1t is not work on medical
Jurisprudence written by single indiVid-
ual or by number Of individuals as
treatise but is rather en- encyclopaedia OF
legal medicine, being composed OF n series OF
articles by men prominent as physicians. law
yers chemists Of scientists. each OF whom makes
contribution upon a branch OF the science Win
which he has special familiarity. The chief con-
tributors besides Dr. Hamilton and Mr. Godkin'
who are the editors as well as among the contrib
utors are Professor Babcock. Dr. Lewis baIch'
OF Albany: Judge s. +. Baldwin. Louis e. brusse'
c. F. Bishop Dr. A. T. Bristow. +. +. Cardozo'
Dr. c. G. Chaddock. Dr. a. F. CuTr;er, Dr. [. l..
Dana, Dr. G. r. Fowler DR. W. T. Glib. DR..
w Haines. DR.. F. A. Harris W. r. Hornblow-
or DR. Charles Jewett DR.. p. c. Knapp. Il. C.
McMurtrie. DR.. c. X. Mills, John +. Parsons, Pro-
fessor C. f. Bellew. Judge Calvin E. Pratt W. a.
burlington DR.. b. Sachs. Dr. +. X. Sturgls' III
Brandreth Symonds and DR.. V. c. Vaughn.
To those familiar with the professional work
and standing of the men upon this iist no assu'-
ance is necessary Of the value and interest Oh the
contributions that are here combined INTO
system of Legal Medicine AS would be ex-
pected the physicians and chemists upon the list
largely outnumber the lawyers: because the law
yer has little to do with the making OF the science
Of nedica. jurisprudence except to mould into the
nshed to him by the medical expert. Hence the
LAWYERS work is Of little use to the doctor; the
medical experts work is everything to the jurist
Medical jurisprudence until quite recently has
advanced slowly and hes encountered many pre-
1udices and distractions. Even now the results
OF the labors of those devoted 20 Ats development
are not received with the greatest favor ether IN
the courts or by the public. The prevailing sys-
TEN of introducing and using expert testimony
IN American courts is chiefly responsible for this
The EXPERT witness comes to be looked upon as
the medical advocate of the party from wnom ne
receives his retainer and his testimony 10 De
regarded in the same light as the legal arguments
or the LAWYER upon tn, same side. That is TO
say he is frequently considered by court, jury
counsel and parties. ana too frequently, 1t must
he added by the witness himself. presenting
not his unbiased Judgment and opinion OF the
matter in question from all points of view, but
only from the point of view of the side or the
case for which he is testifyng. Not that rep
utabIe and conscientious medical expert would
testify contrary to his positive CONVICTIONS but
having consented to express an opinion upon the
main question favorable to one side or the case.
too frequently he has allowed himself to assume
the position Of medical advocate upon all mat
@ers that might tend 10 support that opinion
and so TO occupy attitude that renders impair
TALLY Of judgment impossible.
It is this tendency and this disposition that have
provoked such sharp criticism OF expert tesu-
monv. Indeed quite incorporate language has at
times been used from the bench to express en-
+rere contempt for all forms of testimony of paid
.xnerts Such indiscrminate criticism has done
;niustce 10 many high minded medical witnesses;
hut Il has also exercised healthy influence in
directing the attention Of doctors and lawyers
alike to the necessity Of putting expert testimony
upon a higher plane and bringing 1t WITHIN the
control Of regulations that shall render 1t more
trrs,wortnv and useful adjunct in the admins
tration of justice. Dr. Hamilton and nearly all
his collaborators in this work show that THIS SUD-
1ect has received and Is receiving their serious at
tention and that one is more desirous than
they to effect needed reforms. Many methods are
suggested. But Mr.. Godk.n. in his historical in
.roductjon proposes as 1.-THE proper solution OF the
difficulty" some plan similar to that which has
been practsed for some time in Leeds. England,
under which medical men refuse 10 testify unless
before doing so they can meet in conference with
the expert witnesses to be called on the other side
of the case and have an interchange OF views.
And II is stated that the result is that at Leeds
medical witnesses are hardly ever cross examined
at all and it is by no means uncommon 10 nave
them called on one side only. If such a system
could be adopted by the profession In America II
xvould be of immense service in raising the stand
ard Of expert testimony and increasing the re-
lance placed upon 1t by courts and juries
But not all medical experts, nor even all the
contributors to this work. are of this opinion.
some eminent physicians cnging 10 the old sys-
tenn as the proper and legitimate one. Dr. Balcn'
OF Albany, secretary Of the State Board OF
Health for instance. has proved his efficiency as
an expert witness in many cases. Especially has
he demonstrated his value to the side by which ne
has been retained. Now DR.. Balch believes tnat
'the doctor is more than a mere witness 1or
while he Is called expert on those SUBJECTS
upon which he is supposed 10 nave speclal kho"i-
edge-knowledge not possessed by laymen, ana In
this is an expert-experience shows he is more
for he is virtually the medical counsel. And II IS
no improper procedure for him TO act in that ca
,pacity; for while he takes no part In the actual
trial in the examining and cross-questioning OF
the witnesses and further has nothing to do with
saving what course shall be followed in the man.
agenent OF the case. he must in the very nature
'of things counsel the lawyers how certain facts
are the leading ones in the medical phases or the
case and why they Before being able TO
act in this way one in which there is not only no
improperly, but also in which his absolute i'm
par;iaty as an expert is not called In question:
ne must prepare himself TO give an opinion which.
TO his mind, covers every medical feature and TO
do this he must. at least should. understand all
the circumstances connected with the crime, that
the bearings they have on the relations OF the
autopsy and the evidence Of the wounds may be
fully and justly weighed" In other words ac-
.cordng to Professor Balch, the medical expert
should not only famarze himself with all the
facts upon which his medical opinion Is to be
predicated, but ne is also to play the de-
aective to determine whether the other facts har-
monize with the medical opinion; and when the
case comes into court. he is to act as associate
counsel and 10 advise the lawyers how to weave
these facts and opinions into perfect whole
1t is fair to say that Dr. Balcn proves his fai'h
BY his works and he gives instances. in MS eX-