Letter to Lancet of Feb. 2, 1856, read, in which Dr. Taylor said:—“During the quarter of a century which I have now specially devoted to toxicological inquiries, I have never met with any cases like these suspected cases of poisoning at Rugeley. The mode in which they will affect the person accused is of minor importance compared with their probable influence on society. I have no hesitation in saying that the future security of life in this country will mainly depend on the judge, the jury, and the counsel who may have to dispose of the charges of murder which have arisen out of these investigations.”[50]
Cross-examination continued.—“That is my opinion now. It had been stated that if strychnia caused death it could always be found, which I deny. It had also been circulated in every newspaper that a person could not be killed by tartar emetic, which I deny, and which might have led to the destruction of hundreds of lives. I entertained no prejudice against the prisoner. What I meant was that if these statements which I had seen in medical and other periodicals were to have their way there was not a life in the country which was safe.”
Question.—“Do you adhere to your opinion that ‘the mode in which they will affect the person accused,’ that is, lead him to the scaffold, ‘is of minor importance, compared with their probable influence on society’?”
Answer.—“I have never suggested that they should lead him to the scaffold. I hope that, if innocent, he will be acquitted.”
Question.—“What do you mean by the mode in which they will affect the person accused being of minor importance?”
Answer.—“The lives of sixteen millions of people are, in my opinion, of greater importance than that of one man.”
Question.—“That is your opinion?”
Answer.—“Yes. As you appear to put that as an objection to my evidence, allow me to state that in two dead bodies I find antimony. In one case death occurred suddenly, and in the other the body was saturated with antimony, which I never found before in the examination of three hundred bodies. I say these were circumstances which demanded explanation.”
Question.—“You adhere to the opinion that, as a medical man and a member of an honourable profession, you were right in publishing this letter before the trial of the person accused?”