Trial and conviction of Dr. Stephen T. Beale : with the letters of Chief Justice Lewis, and Judges Black and Woodward, on his case : interesting ether cases, and letters of Prof. Gibson, Prof. Wiltbank, Wm. Badger, Esq., W.L. Hirst, Esq., Rev. Albert Barnes, Dr. Henry A. Boardman, &c.

Date:
1855
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Trial and conviction of Dr. Stephen T. Beale : with the letters of Chief Justice Lewis, and Judges Black and Woodward, on his case : interesting ether cases, and letters of Prof. Gibson, Prof. Wiltbank, Wm. Badger, Esq., W.L. Hirst, Esq., Rev. Albert Barnes, Dr. Henry A. Boardman, &c. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by the National Library of Medicine (U.S.), through the Medical Heritage Library. The original may be consulted at the National Library of Medicine (U.S.)

    17/40
    tion. A jury of madmen or idiots might believe his individual oath, hut we doubt if twelve men, possessed of the average allowance of common sense, could be found to make up their minds upon such testimony. Now let us look at the antecedent improbability in the case before us. A man of family, living on good terms with his wife, of standing in society, and dependent upon that standing for his livelihood, is charged with having com- mitted a rape upon a young girl. There is nothing peculiar about the circum- stances to rouse the passions of this man ; on the contrary, he has known her from her childhood. She is a familiar acquaintance. She has not dazzled him with any sudden beauty, but seems to have been a commonplace girl, sur- rounded by very prosaic circumstances Now how is this man, to whom his character represents so many dollars and cents in hard cash, accused of having acted? Why, of having made a public appointment to meet her in a public place in broad daylight, in his own house, in a room overlooked from all quarters, open to his own domestics, habitually resorted to by his workmen, at an hour when he was likely to be disturbed by other visitors, under circum- stances in every way unfavorable to the purpose he designed to accomplish. And now for the physical improbability. Look at the dentist's chair; we write for dentists ; and tell us what sort of facilities does it afford for a rape ? Dr. Parmly saw the identical chair and stool, and has published it as his deliberate opinion that such an act there was not improbable, but impos- sible. [The conviction on the mind of Dr. Parmly corresponds entirely with that of Dr. Van Dyke, Dr. Patrick, and two or three other gentlemen who went to Dr. Beale's house, and with Miss Mudge's testimony before them, examined the premises, the operating chair, &c. They said, What can't be, hasn't been, and that's the end of the matter.] According to her own confession she made no outcry, and did not try to make one—does not know whether she had the power to make one, but she did scream after the second dose of ether, when her tooth was pidled. This is a very remark- able statement, and ought to have been carefully weighed by the jury We find it impossible to believe Miss Mudge's statement; first, because her own conduct after the affair is totally inconsistent with the story she tells. Secondly, we disbelieve her statement, because it is inconsistent with itself. Thirdly, we disbelieve her, because she was not in a condition to know positively the facts to which she swears. There are no collateral circumstances to corroborate Miss Mudge's statement, and hence, in the nature of the case, we cannot see that there is any evidence at all. Numerous facts relating to the influence of ether were transmitted to Gov. Biglcr from different and distant parts of the country. We present in this connection a few of the statements. In a letter from Dr. McGuire, Winches- ter, Va., dated Nov. 5th; he says :— But yesterday I amputated a man's finger whilst the ether was given him. He became very unmanageable, requiring the assistance of several students to control him. After the operation, he expressed great surprise and displeasure that I 'struck him.' Upon repeated protestation on my part that I did not, confirmed by many witnesses, he seemed to yield, but again to-day reaffirmed it. It seemed to remain on his mind with all the clearness of a real event. Dr.- J. W. Hazlet, in a letter dated New York, December 2d, says:— The lady at last slept, and I removed her decayed tooth. When she awoke, she evidently had a semi-consciousness of the dream under which she acted, as she seemed very much reassured on finding that a lady w\as present. I have no doubt that, had there not fortunately been a witness present, I should have been in the position of Dr. Beale, a victim to a dream. This lady had the impression that she had been violated.