“(1) That the arsenic found in Maybrick’s body may have been taken in merely medicinal doses, and that probably it was so taken.
“(2) That the arsenic may have been taken a considerable time before either his death or illness, and that probably it was so taken.
“Our toxicological studies have led us to the three following conclusions:
“(1) That the symptoms from which Maybrick suffered are consistent with any form of acute dyspepsia, but that they point away from, rather than toward, arsenic as the cause of such dyspeptic condition.
“(2) That the post-mortem appearances are indicative of inflammation, but that they emphatically point away from arsenic as the cause of death.
“(3) That the analysis fails to find more than one-twentieth part of a fatal dose of arsenic, and that the quantity so found is perfectly consistent with its medicinal ingestion.”
The Medical Weakness of the Prosecution
Such was the complete evidence of the cause of death. The quantity of arsenic found in the body was one-tenth of a grain, and upon this evidence rests the first issue the jury had to consider, namely, whether it was proved beyond reasonable doubt that the deceased died from arsenical poisoning.
As to the value of the medical testimony on both sides, Dr. Humphreys admitted that he never attended a case of arsenical poisoning in his life, nor of any irritant poison, and that he would have given a certificate of death from natural causes had he not been told of arsenic found in the meat juice.
Dr. Carter laid no claim to any previous experience of poisoning by arsenic, and was unable to say from the post-mortem examination that arsenic was the cause of death, which he could only attribute to an irritant of some kind, and he admitted that it was the evidence of Mr. Davies, as to the finding of arsenic in the body, which led him to the conclusion that arsenical poisoning had taken place.