The trial of Mrs. Ellen Byrne for the murder of Mr. Augustine Byrne, her husband : at the Commission Court, Dublin, on the 15th and 16th August, 1842, with a portrait of the deceased / specially reported by Thomas R. Dunckley.
- Dunckley, Thomas R.
- Date:
- 1842
Licence: Public Domain Mark
Credit: The trial of Mrs. Ellen Byrne for the murder of Mr. Augustine Byrne, her husband : at the Commission Court, Dublin, on the 15th and 16th August, 1842, with a portrait of the deceased / specially reported by Thomas R. Dunckley. 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.
52/64 (page 48)
![but tlie eye that sees all things. That is a feature not peculiar to this case, and I have always felt and understood, that sometimes that evidence of circumstances, brought together without design, without the possibility of contrivance, or concur- rence among individuals, is more cogent and more satisfactory than the positive swearing of individuals, because the individuals who swear to a fact, may easily have motives to swear untruly ; but, generally speaking, the trath can be elicited from the natural concurrence of circumstances with a degree of certainty, I mean moral certainty, far more cogent and satisfactory, than if we rely even on the tes- timony of witnesses speaking to facts. Gentlemen, the evidence with respect to the violent death of Mr. Byrne in this case is of two kinds, the evidence of the medical men on the appearances pre- sented by the body, and the evidence of circumstances, which is a more valuable class of evidence, which has been adverted to by my learned friend. Though he suggested, that in point of law, he might be entitled on the discrepancy in the medical evidence to call for a verdict of acquittal, he did not deny the right of the Crown to call into aid the other circumstances of the case, which have a greater tendency to lead you to a satisfactory conclusion than the evidence of the medical witnesses. A great number of that profession have been examined, some of them, I believe, by universal repute, of the highest attainments, and most eminent in their profession. The evidence of one medical gentleman on the part of the Crown has been com- mented on with a good deal of severity. I should observe, the medical men are divided into two classes ; those who saw the body, and those who never saw it. Among the former a prominent person is Mr. Ellis, a gentleman, I have under- stood, of remarkable attainment and deep study. His evidence has been com- mented on with great severity, and, I am obliged to say, in my judgment, with altogether unpardonable severity. It has been suggested, nay asserted, that Mr. Ellis presents himself here as a partizan. Gentlemen, it is a shocking charge, in my judgment. Even if the person had no character to support as a medical man, as a gentleman, he must have as a Christian and a man ; and it is very shocking to suggest, that he comes here on the part of the Crown to state, (believing it to be otherwise) that this person came by a violent death. But my astonishment was greatly increased, when 1 consider what the evidence of the gentleman really was. He details the appearances he saw. Now, there is not the slightest suggestion, that in detailing these a])pearances, he made the least mistake or misrepresentation. As to what the appearances were, the surgeons are all agreed. As to his opinion, what is it ? Why, at length, without volunteering, in answer to a question put by the other side, his opinion was merely this, “ My general impression is, that these are the signs of violent death ; but that amounts, by no means, to a conviction.” If you could believe it possible, that a person of his high position would come for- ward to assist in inflicting an unjust judgment on the prisoner at the bar ; if you can listen to such a charge as that, there is no ground for it, because that is not the evidence on which we can rely for your verdict. But he did state his opinion with respect to the causes of certain effects he observed ; on every one of these, he was borne out by a gentleman whose character it woiild be idle for me to say one word about. He detailed several circumstances ; protrusion of the tongue, pro- trusion of the eye, contracting of the hand. Why, independently of contradicting opinions of medical men, (and there has never been a case in w'hich the old adage, “doctors differ,” has been more verified than in this case;) independently of these opinions, there is such a thing as common sense, to which each of you lay claim, and I think, in your own experience, if you heard of a person whose eye protruded, and whose tongue protruded, and whose face was black, and fingers flexed, you would say, they are like the appearances we hear of as being produced consistently with a violent death. Dr. Harrison has, in every respect, corroborated Mr. Ellis ; therefore, unless Dr. Harrison be charged as entering into this conspiracy with Surgeon Ellis, there can be no charge of partisanship sustained against him. Certainly, another gentleman was produced,^of whom I have every disposition to believe that he is an able gentleman and knows his profession; but, hearing from such an eminent man as Dr. feUiiK that he thought it almost impossible that de- composition could produce the effect the eye presented, I thought it savoured more of rashness than eoft»idopa4ion to say decidedly, that that was the case and no other. I think, from these conclusions, you cannot fail to draw. (jji,' from the entire of it,](https://iiif.wellcomecollection.org/image/b28267941_0054.jp2/full/800%2C/0/default.jpg)
