They Hanged My Saintly Billy (61 page)

In antimony, great though his faith, The quantity found being small, Taylor's faith in strychnine was yet greater, For of that he found nothing at all.

When
Professor
Taylor
laid
stress
on
this
negative
evidence,
the Lord
Chief
Justice
remarked,
with
a
challenging
look
at
Serjeant Shee:
'Of
course,
upon
this
the
whole
Defence
rests.'
Since
it had
yet
to
be
proved
that
Cook
did
not
the
of
natural
causes,
the absence
of
strychnia
in
the
organs
examined
struck
many
judicious
persons
as
a
most
feasible
defence!
But
Professor
Taylor
led
the hanging-party
with
the
contention:
'Though
no
strychnia
was found,
it
would
be
very
improper
to
believe
that
none
had been
administered.'
'Then
why
trouble
to
analyse
for
strychnia?' some
asked,
'if
its
presence
and
its
absence
may
alike
point
to
its having
caused
death?'
Others
remembered
the
Professor's
strange message,
unwarrantably
presuming
murder,
which
he
addressed to
a
daily
newspaper
some
weeks
before
the
trial:
'Society
demands
a
victim
in
this
case!'
They
commented:
'We
may
legitimately
doubt
whether
Dr
Palmer
fell
a
victim
to
the
demands
of society
in
general,
rather
than
to
those
of
the
racehorse
owners whom
he
had
dishonoured,
and
the
insurance
company
shareholders
whom
he
had
defrauded.
But
certain
it
is
that
British Justice
has
likewise
fallen
a
victim.'

The
Professor's
admission
on
his
volte face
deserves
particular scrutiny.
A
plain
question
was
put
to
him:
'Can
you
say
upon your
oath
that,
from
the
traces
of
antimony
found
in
Cook's
body, you
were
justified
in
concluding
death
to
have
been
caused
by this
poison?'
He
answered:
'Yes,
perfectly
and
distinctly.'
We fail
to
see
what
sophistical
process
can
divest
so
direct,
so
positive, and
so
unqualified
a
statement
of
its
simple
meaning.
Professor Taylor
did
believe
that
Cook
died
from
the
effects
of
antimony; and
he
arrived
at
that
belief
not
merely
from
finding
slight
traces of
the
poison
in
Cook's
remains,
but
from
the
reports
given
him of
Cook's
vomitings
and
convulsions.
Then,
when
a
new
light shone
within,
and
the
claims
of
strychnia
made
him
a
renegade, his
rational
powers
were
severely
taxed
to
satisfy
the
needs
of
this sudden
change.
He
knew
well
that
the
healthiness
of
Cook's
brain was
quite
inconsistent
with
strychnine
poisoning;
and
that
so
was the
length
of
time—one
and
a
half
hours—between
the
alleged adm
inistration
of
the
strychnine
pills
and
the
tetanic
paroxysms. Yet,
for
the
jury,
his
total
conversion
from
antimony
to
strychnia
seemed
a
proof
that
here
was
an
honest
man
who
cheerfully admitted
former
error.

Let
us
now
briefly
summarize
and
compare
some
of
the
many theories
and
views
held
by
the
medical
witnesses.

Dr
Monckton's
post-mortem
examination
of
Cook's
spinal
cord revealed
the
presence
of
certain
granules,
which
he
read
as
indicating
organic
disease.
Dr
Devonshire
and
Dr
Harland,
it
appears, had
discounted
them
during
the
preh'minary
examination;
and
at the
trial
several
shades
of
opinion
marked
the
medical
evidence
on
this
head.
For
instance,
Dr
Todd,
physician
at
King's
College Hospital,
asserted
that
such
granules
would
be
unlikely
to
produce tetanus;
while
Professor
Partridge,
who
lectures
on
anatomy
at the
same
college,
quoted
cases
where
they
had
heralded
fatal attacks
of
tetanus.
Professor
Nunnely
of
the
Leeds
School
of Medicine,
Dr
Macdonald
of
the
Royal
College
of
Surgeons
at Edinburgh,
and
Dr
Robinson
of
the
Newcasde-on-Tyne
Fever Hospital,
confidently
supported
Professor
Partridge.
Other
doctors,
however,
saw
in
the
granules
no
sufficient
cause
to
produce either
tetanus
or
death.

Dr
Todd
held
that
the
state
of
a
person
suffering
from
tetanus
is
identical
with
that
induced
by strych
nine
poisoning—an
opinion
roundly
rejected
by
all
other
wit
nesses
for
the
Crown.
Dr
Harland
remarked
that,
though
he
found
the
spinal
cord
softened,
this
condition
would
not
cause
tetanus;
and
that,
so
far
as
he
knew,
no
disease
of
the
spinal
cord
could
do
so.
Then
young,
plain-speaking
Mr
Devon
shire
declared
that
tetanic
convul
sions
do
result
from
derangements
S
ir
B
enjamin
B
rodie
of
the
spinal
cord;
but
was
dismissed
by
Mr
Baron
Alderson
as
an
ignoramus.
Sir
Benjamin
Brodie,
no
less
skilled
a
physician
than
he
is cautious
of
his
opinions,
would
not
commit
himself
here;
and Professor
Alfred
Taylor,
though
holding
that
strychnia
acts
on
the
spinal
cord,
also
seemed
to
be
in
the
dark
on
this
subject.