Answer.—“I stated it as a possible case—not as a certainty. If we had found a large quantity of tartar emetic in the stomach we should have come to the conclusion that the man died from it. As we found only a small quantity, we said he might have died from it. I attended the coroner’s inquest, first, I think, on December 14. Some of the evidence was read over to me. I think that Dr. Harland was the first witness I heard examined. I heard Mr. Bamford, and also Lavinia Barnes. I cannot say as to Newton. I heard Jones. I had experimented some years ago on five of the rabbits I have mentioned. That is the only knowledge of my own that I had of the effect of strychnia upon animal life when I wrote my book. I have a great objection to the sacrifice of life. No toxicologist will sacrifice the lives of one hundred rabbits to establish facts which he knows to be already well established. I experimented on the last rabbits since the inquest.”
Question.—“Do you not think it rather rash to judge of the effects of strychnia on man by so small an experiment?”
Answer.—“You must add to the experiment the study of poisons and cases.”
Question.—“Do you not think that a rabbit is a very unfair animal to select?”
Answer.—“No.”
Question.—“Would not a dog be better?”
Answer.—“They are very dangerous to handle.”
Question.—“Do you mean to give that answer?”
Answer.—“Dogs and cats bear a greater analogy to man because they vomit, while rabbits do not; but rabbits are much more manageable.”
Question.—“Do you admit that as to the action of the respiratory organs they would be better than rabbits?”