Review, opinions, &c., of Dr. Charles A. Lee and others : of the testimony of Drs. Salisbury and Swinburne, on the trial of John Hendrickson, Jr., for the murder of his wife, by poisoning.

  • Hendrickson, John, 1832-1854.
Date:
1855
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Review, opinions, &c., of Dr. Charles A. Lee and others : of the testimony of Drs. Salisbury and Swinburne, on the trial of John Hendrickson, Jr., for the murder of his wife, by poisoning. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by the National Library of Medicine (U.S.), through the Medical Heritage Library. The original may be consulted at the National Library of Medicine (U.S.)

    14/50
    either from the blood, stomach, or brain, accompanied with engorgements of the vessels of the brain and effusion of the serum into the ventricle, while the organ itself is natural; also a turgid and full condition of the lungs and venous system, and an emptiness of the arterial system throughout the body. Your Excellency need not be told that the relations which the living tissues stand to these poisonous agents, can not be changed; neither can the law of specification. These deleterious substances act in their own peculiar modes, and they leave their peculiar marks; and if these marks cannot be found, we have no right to infer their presence. In view, then, of all the results and all the information which I can ob- tain of the chemical and medical evidence given upon the trial of John Hen- drickson, Jr., for the alleged murder of his wife, I can find nothing which goes to prove that the accused committed a murder through the agency of poison. I am, most respectfully, your obedient servant, EBENEZER EMMONS. Hon. Horatio Seymour : Dear Sir :—I have reason to suppose that within a few days certain pa- pers, addressed to me, will be laid before your Excellency, as to the chemi- cal and medical testimony in the case of John Hendrickson, Jr. It is due to myself to say that they were addressed to me without my knowledge,* I would however add, that being asked who were among the most competent analytical chemists in this country, and again, as to pathologists, I ventured to designate nearly all subscribing those papers, with some others. I remain, very respectfully, Your obedient servant, T. ROMEYN BECK. Prof. T. Romeyn Beck : Dear Sir :—A pamphlet, entitled a Trial of John Hendrickson, Jr., for the murder of his wife, Maria, published bv David M. Barnes and W. S. Hevenor, Albany, 1853, has been put into my hands, with the request that I would examine the medical testimony, and express to you an opinion on two points, namely : 1st, whether the post-mortem appearances as there re- ported authorize the conclusion that Mrs. Hendrickson came to her death by a poisonous dose of aconite ; 2d, whether these post-mortem appearances sus- tained the opinion that she had vomited during the last hours of her life. I feel strongly the impropriety of assuming to sit in judgment on the delibera- tions of a high tribunal that had fully considered these questions, and had given its verdict and its sentence in full view of all the responsibilities with which those solemn acts were involved. I was therefore reluctant to under- take the task. But when I learned that the application was endorsed by your approval, I could not but feel that the service asked of me was justified by some good reason, and I consented to perform it. I have read the whole of the medical testimony recorded in this pamphlet—the most important por- tions of it carefully—and I cannot but confess to you, my dear Doctor, that I am pained and oppressed with the conviction that the medical witnesses for the prosecution have, in a main point of this case, abused the confidence with which criminal courts so often compliment the man of science. I do not say that they have procured the condemnation of an innocent man. With the • A sentence is here omitted, referring to a remark of Br. Clark, which, in the absence of 'the Governor, at Utica> I am now unable to supply.—T. R. B.