The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-11-29
EXPERT TESTIMONY.
Reasons Why 1t Should Not he Chased
with that of Ordinary Witnesses.


! other remuneration than the ordinary wit
ress fee, crave your indulgence to discuss
the subject from the standpoint of the med
/ ical profession. The Supreme Court of In
diana so ruled several years ago. and re-
| Gently the Supreme Court of Illinois con-
! firmed the lower court ruling wherein a
| doctor at Springfield, ILL.,, was fined $25 for
| contempt for refusing, while on the stand
| as an ordinary witness, to give expert tes-
| timony. His plea was that it required the
exercise of knowledge that had cost him
much money, time and experience to ac-
quire, and it was unjust to require the COM
munication of the same for no other COM
pensation than the ordinary witness fee.
The supreme judge was very positive in his
affirmation of the lower ruling, and the
ground for these rulings seems to be
wholly this-it is discrimination in favor
of one special class of citizens to pay an
expert more than an ordinary witness, and
that by so doing the lends of Justice would
be hindered and equal rights infringed.
1 undertake to say that every physician
who desires to uphold the dignity and honor
of the profession, as we'll as his own pro-
fessisonal integrity, will do just what the
for contempt rather than attempt to give
expert testimony as an ordinary witness.
medical expert values his professional
standing and the honor of his calling above
every other consideration. When he en-
cages his services in a suit in court he has
1t distinctly understood that he is to testify
only to the medical, surgical and pertinent
collateral scientific facts involved in the
case, and If the larger number of these
facts are in favor of the litigant paying
MIN for such service, much the better
for that side, but if not, the expert is to be
neld IN no wise accountable. No thor
oughly competent and honorable expert of
any kind can afford to engage in a case
without such contract And 1 contend
that there is as much good old-fashioned
honesty In the medical profession as in any
other calling.
cannot be called an exact science, and like
law, much present advantage may be gained
In court by the subterfuge of senseless and
UNJUST techn1calities, yet the fact is that
all that is ever required of an expert is,
nrst, common plain honesty and pride in
MS professional integrity; next, thorough
acquaintance with the most advanced and
accurate theories and practice of his pro-
fession If with these are combined years of
ripe experience and observation the testi-
mony VIII be unimpeachable, though he is
adequately paid by one side. The writer
has not infrequently known the attorneys
of the opposite side to take medical ex-
pert by the hand and say to him: Although
your testimony was against US, yet / want
to shake hands with an honest man; con-
graduate you on the fairness and accuracy
of your testimony"
The true facts in any given case are al
ways obtainable, but it requires much time,
patience and unbiased investigation by the
expert This he cannot and should not be
asked to do without adequate pay. The
medical expert requires more preparation,
as rule for his case than the attorney
does. In his Investigations as we'll as on
the witness stand, he loses sight of either
plaintiff or defendant; In a case of alleged
damages for personal injury, for instance,
the expert will depend almost wholly upon
the objective symptoms and conditions =
those which he can see and learn by dag
nOStiC lnStrumentS-an0 attention
to the subjective symptoms - the pains.
aches, etc; that the patient himself de-
tiOusly differentiateS and Classics as to the
present and remote effects upon his clients
health. For his guidance in this he has
anatomy, physiology, pathology. surgery,
therapeutics, etc, all of which in the present
advanced state of knowledge should enable
him to come to conclusions and opinions
which, if he keeps on the safe side of truth,
no amount of "badgering, broW-beating or
other methods of shrewd cross-examination
practice can shake. Can any reasonable Iae
be more accurate reliable and valuable 10
1.-The ends of justice" than that of per-
son caught up as an ordinary witness, with
man who is conscientious and thoroughly
competent as an expert, when on the stand
as an ordinary witness and expert knoWl-
edge is demanded of him by a court, will
answer: THE question requires of me
knowledge gained only by a sclentlhc stuoy
of the case and q comparative examination
of the best authorities on the questions IN
volved, which knowledge 1 am not at pres
ent in possession OF.
AS to discrimination and the principle OF
equal rights, l contend that the present
ruling is not only opposed to civil rights,
in that it demands of the indlyldual ms
time and knowledge-personal possessions
against his will, without adequate compen-
sation but it also discrinnates against the
sick and helpless in favor, perhaps h i, OF Tess
need of it, by compelling the physician 10
leave his, patients, sacrifice his pecuniary IN
terests and await the pleasure or attorneys
and court to extort from him his hard
earned knowledge for the paltry Zee OF $l.I9
per day and board himself-a stand ana
deliver" policy, respectable. because sane
toned by law. 1t is presumed the honor
able Judges who make these rulings, IL
critically sick, would deem 1t no hardsmp
to give up their trusted favorite family
physician while he went to distant TOWN.
to give expert testimony to aid In DEFEND
ing some murderer. -, -,
makers are gentlemen of the legal profes-
sion and the fact of their profession pelng
amply provided for is only human. l 90 not
DENY that had the medical profession the
same vantage ground they would be less
mindful of the craft Nevertheless, Inc
oyerrides every other consideration, but IL
always ends with good big attorney ZEE,
and sure pay; The most Vicious tramp ~ de o.,
the land unable to hire an attorney 70 us-
fend him is furnished one by the court.
and the State. or county-the people-ILusse
pay him full fee for ms service c,t,zen en-
10 fair trial and ample defense. Dut an
understanding court should not thus pr a;
vide for attorneys fees and compel pnysl-
clan to leave his sick patients ana sacrlncS
time knowledge and money at $l.zo uay
and find himself No one ever hearu VI q
i1ldee being called from his bencn OF an
attorney from his clients and lucratiVe 1 9
ness to loaf about the courtroom lol 49,
at a time awaiting the pleasure OF a t5 ~,
70 roast out of him expert knowledge OF
some intricate legal question az VI! tue -, 100
of S1 o. day Yet the writer with nun,
dreds of other physicians, nave DeeIl' Gnu
ore 20 continually being compelled TO do TINS,
and these honorable judges rule that II Is
eminently just! .;v,on+ NOT only
of a very large majority OF lne Ine ,i
profession, but of all Iight-Ihillueui isE 49,
apantlemen as well as all GOOD people Wh9
e9ondidIv investigate the question, When
cav that the above method or obtaining ex-
nayt testimony is unjust; that 1t does not
p6tsin efficient testimony, and Is therefore
,,oi,,et both to the litigant and the medical
nrofession or any other calling from wnlcn
sg,cb testimony is thus eXtorted without
en- fticicnt preparation and inadequate re-
rnnneration; that the appointment or eH-
merits by court of employment on salary Dy
Tho State-the European plan-wouid not
ment and bribery; that legal restraints or
any kind never make an honest man OF
one who is inherently dishonest. The IA
borer is worthy of his hire" and 1t is as
unjust and discriminating to compel
skilled mechanic to work for the same
wages as an ordinary laboIer as to compel
an expert in any skilled calling to give
Testimony rs such for ordinary witness
fees No physician has ever. to my known,