Question.—“Or even their judicious use?”
Answer.—“It might.”
Question.—“With that knowledge, upon being consulted with regard to Cook, you gave it as your opinion that he died from the poison of antimony?”
Answer.—“You pervert my meaning entirely. I said that antimony in the form of tartar emetic might occasion vomiting and other symptoms of irritation, and that in large doses it would cause death, preceded by convulsions.” [The witness was proceeding to read his report upon the case, but was stopped by the Court.] “I was told that the deceased was in good health seven or eight days before his death, and that he had been taken very sick and ill, and had died in convulsions. No further particulars being given us, we were left to suppose that he had not died a natural death. There was no natural cause to account for death; and finding antimony existing throughout the body, we thought it might have been caused by antimony. An analysis cannot be made effectually without information.”
Question.—“You think it necessary before you can rely upon an analysis to have received a long statement of the symptoms before death?”
Answer.—“A short statement will do.”
Question.—“You allow your judgment to be influenced by the statement of a person who knows nothing of his own knowledge?”
Answer.—“I do not allow my judgment to be influenced in any way; I judge by the result.”
Question.—“Do you mean to say that what Mr. Stevens told you did not assist you in arriving at the conclusion you state in writing?”