Trial of Robert Sawle Donnall, on suspicion of poisoning Mrs. Downing, his mother in law, tried at Launceston, March 31, 1817, at the Lent Assize, for the county of Cornwall, before the Hon. Sir Charles Abbott, Knt.

  • Donnall, Robert Sawle
Date:
[1817]
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Trial of Robert Sawle Donnall, on suspicion of poisoning Mrs. Downing, his mother in law, tried at Launceston, March 31, 1817, at the Lent Assize, for the county of Cornwall, before the Hon. Sir Charles Abbott, Knt. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    23/30 (page 19)
    inc of sickness, pains in the stomach, and violent cramp in tba limbs. This tact needs no comment from me. and I will read the evidence respecting- it, and leave it [or your consideration. The next proof rests upon the testimony of Dr. Edwards, a man of great experience and known abilities in his profession ; that evidence is certainly contradicted in very strong terms by one gentleman, and opposed by a host of professional men, in the prisoner's defence. [Here Dr. Edwards's evidence was recapitulated.] Whether Dr. Edwards was right or wrong in Ins treatment of the deceased, is uot a matter for you to con- sider at present, only as it effects the reliance you place on his general opinion. His opinion is in the most pointed terms, that the deceased did not die of Cholera morbus, but that she died of poison. To this the evidence of the defence will not amount to a contradiction, it can only afford grounds for a pre sumption, that the deceased may have died of some other com- plaint, and that these symptoms may have been symptoms of another disorder; still it is acknowledged on all sides that these are decided symptoms of poison, though not exclusively. You have this additional fact, on the side of Dr. Edwards, that he opened the body, and was an eye witness to the appear ance hedecribes. Neither of these gentlemen have ever open . ed a body which died of Cholera morbus, and their opinions can be only drawn from science, and what is likely to be the ap- pearance of the stomach infected with this disorder, and not from actual experience and knowledge. The next evidence adduced on the prosecution, is a Mr. Street, who corroborates the testimony of Dr. Edwards, and describes the stomach in a state of sterile inflammation, the effect of poison, and in his opinion also, the deceased died ot that poison. You have heard the different tests which have been set forth by Dr. Edwards, to prove that the Stomach con- tained some portions of arsenic. : less any degree of mis- understanding should arise upon the terms used, I will en- deavor to explain them in such a way as you may be en* abled to form an opinion, what reliance they deserve. Dr. Edwards takes a part of the contents of the stomach, and adds thereto, a little blue stone, or sulphate of copper, and a green precipitate was produced ; this he considered an infallible test of the presence of arsenic. Then on the part of the Prisoner, it is alledged by a number of highly respectable men, that the food taken into the stomach be. fare, as proved by one of the witnesses, was such as