Dr. Cameron, in a speech before the House of Commons of England in 1884, declared:—
“Numerous modern researches have shown that putrefactive fermentation in decaying animal matter gives rise to the formation of sepsine and other alkaloids, some of them intensely poisonous. Little or nothing is known in this country concerning the products of putrefaction. Ptomaines is the general name which has been given to them abroad, and I don’t know that I ever saw it printed in the English language. Little is known of these ptomaines even by those who have studied them most closely, but enough has been discovered to show that we must be very careful as to how far we rely upon what are called physiological tests for poisons in the case of bodies which have been exhumed; and that the fact that frogs, rabbits, or dogs are killed by the action of matters extracted from the viscera of a putrefying body can no longer by itself be held as proving that those viscera contained any poison before putrefaction commenced.”
Is it surprising, when the above is taken into consideration, that the testimony of chemists at trials for poisoning should vary so much and be so contradictory in nature?
Sir Henry Thompson, in his admirable exposition of cremation, which was translated into almost every civilized language of the world, thus disposes of the medico-legal objection:—
“It has been said, and most naturally, what guarantee is there against poisoning if the remains are burned, and it is no longer possible, as after burial, to reproduce the body for the purpose of examination? It is to my mind a sufficient reply that, regarding only ‘the greatest good to the greatest number,’ the amount of evil in the shape of disease and death which results from the present system of burial in earth is infinitely larger than the evil caused by secret poisoning is or could be, even if the practice of the crime were very considerably to increase. Further, the appointment of officers to examine and certify in all cases of death would be an additional and very efficient safeguard. But—and here I touch on a very important subject—is there reason to believe that our present precautions in the matter of death certificate against the danger of poisoning are what they ought to be? I think that it must be confessed that they are defective, for not only is our system inadequate to the end proposed, but it is less efficient by comparison than that adopted by foreign governments. Our existing arrangements for ascertaining and registering the cause of death are very lax, and give rise, as we shall see, to serious errors. In order to attain an approach to certitude in this important matter, I contend that it would be most desirable to nominate in every district a properly qualified inspector to certify in all cases to the fact that death has taken place, to satisfy himself as far as possible that no foul play has existed, and to give the certificate accordingly. This would relieve the medical attendant of the deceased from any disagreeable duty relative to inquiry concerning suspicious circumstances, if any have been observed. Such officers exist throughout the large cities of France and Germany, and the system is more or less pursued throughout the provinces. In Paris no burial can take place without the written permission of the ‘médecin vérificateur’; and whether we adopt cremation or not, such an officer might with advantage be appointed here.”
Sir Henry suggests that in suspected cases the “dead officer” should retain in sealed vessels the stomach and other portions of the viscera for future examination. But I think it next to impossible that such an officer could execute duties so burdensome and so averse to the genius of the people.
Let us for a moment turn to our dear American commonwealths. Do our burial laws aid in the detection of crime? In the majority of states a death certificate, signed by a physician, must be filed with the health officer, who issues a burial permit. This is all which is required. Generally it makes no difference whether the physician or surgeon who affixes his name to the document is reputable or not. The burial permit is looked upon as a mere formality, an unnecessary institution, that owes its origin to some whimsical lawmaker. How often do even the most zealous of health officers investigate the causes of the deaths that are reported to them? The doctor’s certificate is put upon record; that is satisfactory, and no more is asked for. The rest is silence—like that which reigns under the turf, where the undetected victims of the poisoner lie.
Now, if our faulty burial laws, if the indifference of our officers of health, are not a direct incentive to the foulest and most insidious forms of crime, I do not know what is. Were I a secret assassin, I certainly would wish for no more encouragement. As matters now stand, any evil-doer, with the help of some unscrupulous medical man, may commit murder daily without fear of detection.
I propose to show that if incineration were established, the careful scrutiny of corpses and official examinations in suspected cases, which would precede the reduction of the body to ashes, would rather assist in the detection of murder than hinder it.
Mr. W. Eassie, in a lecture delivered at the International Health Exhibition last year, expressed himself anent this question as follows: “With regard to doubtful deaths it would be necessary to make sure that the body exhibited no traces of poison, or that certain small portions of the body should be removed therefrom and kept for a few years. For instance, a small portion of the stomach and intestines and their contents in case of vegetable poisoning, and a small portion of the liver, should mineral poisoning be suspected. There is no difficulty in dealing with this matter in other countries where cremation has become permissive; and it is upon record that the examination of the body of a child in Italy, which had been made in the ordinary way demanded by the authorities previous to the cremation, proved that the child had been poisoned apparently by sweetmeats, and this would not have been revealed had an ordinary burial in the earth taken place.”