A complete report of the trial of Dr. E. W. Pritchard, for the alleged poisoning of his wife and mother-in-law. Reprinted, by special permission, from the 'Scotsman' / Carefully revised by an eminent lawyer.

Eminent lawyer

Date:: 1865

Credit: A complete report of the trial of Dr. E. W. Pritchard, for the alleged poisoning of his wife and mother-in-law. Reprinted, by special permission, from the 'Scotsman' / Carefully revised by an eminent lawyer. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by Royal College of Physicians, London. The original may be consulted at Royal College of Physicians, London.

104/156 page 94

$living ; he stated to the doctor whom he had sent for to come and see her that she was in the habit of taking a drop occasionally : the other, that he stated to the washerwoman when she was in the room that she had been indulging in liquor for some days, and had been confined to her bed by an overdose of opium. In addition to that, the first statement of all, which he makes to Dr Paterson, is a verj' strange one. He had told the young man Connell that it was apoplexy, ■when he came down from the bed-room, and was going into the consulting-room, after the short time, so far as we know, he had seen the patient. He sticks to that main point, or rather to an account that looks something like it, for Dr Paterson had been told that for half-an-hour or an hour before, when writing several letters in the consulting-room, after having partaken of some bitter beer, the bitterness of which was remarked upon, she had tumbled off a chair in a fit on to the floor, and had been taken up to the bed-room. That, however, is not according to the truth, for she had walked from the con- sulting-room, where she had been writing her letters, in all probability up to the bed-room herself at nine o’clock. She had had no tumble or fit at all. How, the doctor knew nothing of her having the attack till the bell had rung three times—that hot water had been taken to her by the servant to make her vomit. And even after the third attack he was prevented from going up for a short time from having a patient waiting upon him in the consulting-room. The accounts, therefore, do not agree. It was a strange explanation he made in presence of the servants, as if he had only accidentally discovered from Mary iPLeod—who, by the way, swore that she knew nothing about it—that she had got her a supply upon the Monday. Then it is a singular admission in con- nexion ■with it that before her death—before anything was found in her pocket at all—he told Dr Paterson that a few days before she had purchased something like half a pound of the solution, that she was in the habit of taking it regularly, and that, probably, her illness was to be accounted for by her having taken a good swig of it. That she was in the habit of taking this mixture—this solution of opium—is clear enough, and also that she had done so for years, so that an ordinary dose would have little effect upon her. That he knew that is also very true. Nay, that he knew it is cei-tain, according to the case which is presented to you by the witnesses, if he had availed himself of the knowledge—he had got the bottle which the old lady had to allay her neuralgic headaches, or to ease herself from the excessive perspiration from which she suffered. He had availed himself of the knowledge, and had got hold of the bottle, and into it had in- troduced what he alone had the opportunity or means of introducing — that is, these two deadly poisons. Gentlemen, these falsehoods are very striking —very striking indeed; and they were followed by others. Dr Paterson showed his feeling upon the subject by refusing to gi’ant any certificate of ]\Irs Taylor’s death, and by informing the registrar that the death was sudden, unexpected, and to him mysterious, and that he would grant no certificate. Then Dr Pritchard grants a certificate himself. He says that twelve hours before her death she had been suffering from paralysis, and that apoplexy had supervened an hour before her death. He says—“ Primary disease, paralysis; duration of that, twelve hours; secondary disease, apoj)Iexy; duration of that, one hour.” Dr Paterson had refused to certify. He then certifies him- self, and certifies falsely. She was not suffering from paralysis twelve hours before her death. And he says she was suffering, and again falsely, from apoplexy one hour before her death. There was no paralysis, except the para- lytic affection which was caused by the aconite, and that was not before she$