Illustrations of medical evidence and trial by jury in Scotland.

Date:
1855
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Illustrations of medical evidence and trial by jury in Scotland. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    62/66 (page 60)
    view of giving medical evidence, but solely for the purpose of telling the Sheriff whether he was in a fit state to be examine or no , m IS® „„ in dan gen And ih.ne ,nigl,. have e.n why a magistrate might wish, for such a purpose, to employ a medical mSn who had received instructions as to what was to b attended to, and with the view of ascertaining this particular point And this case afforded a good deal of illustration as to t le necessl • of sending somebody who understood what matters were to be attended to on such occasions; because, having seen the doctor attending the patient, Mr Syme’s assistant that gentleman tott hi that the boy was in great danger—that there was great danger of mortification-and that the necessity of sideration. He did not choose to state that Mr ym ? the chiy0before, that there was no danger, and that there was to he faf^on • and accordingly, Mr Syme had the satisfaction o .. ^« any body could have. But, supposing that gentleman had state bofh his own opinion and Mr Syme’s, the pohee-sur^on would naturally have reported these opinions to the Sheriff, and t , acting on the opinion of the medical attendant, or on the more skil¬ ful opinion of Mr Syme, might have taken such steps as were ren¬ dered necessary. All this just shows that, for that special puipos , it may be proper for a magistrate, if he thinks fit, to ^d a person whom he has instructed to attend to particular points in that case, and so to make such a report as the police regulations .eem tore- quire. Whether or not such report should be made y 1 who is not the individual in attendance, is a different question I was anxious it should not be given forth, on the authority of t lecture, that I had assented to the substitution, m the criminal courts, of inadequate medical evidence for the best My colleagues know that I have the reputation of being too quick in _ n defects in the evidence. It was a matter of great surprise to me to see that remark made by Mr Syme. However, so far as I was o cerned personally, I should never have noticed it, but that it_ g have created great distrust in the administration of criminal jus re if that statement went forth without contradiction. I theiefo think it right to notice it, though I would not otherwise lia e so It must be satisfactory to Mr Syme to be informed that statement was a total and complete misrepresentation of what passe at the trial.”