CASE OF ALLEGED POISONING BY ARSENIC.

609

New Invention. AN IMPROVED BINAURAL STETHOSCOPE. THE weak point of the binaural stethoscope, as usually constructed, is the spring. If srrong enough to keep the instrument in position, its constant pressure hurts the ear, and if made weak enough to be harmless to the user, it fails to keep the stethoscope properly applied to the auditory meatus. These remarks apply equally to the common elastic loop and to the metal serins which is now in more general use ; besides which, the former has the fault of always slipping out of position, while the latter invariably causes loud musical sounds, which materially hinder accurate diagnosis. I venture to think that I have succeeded in overcoming these drawbacks. to the use of the binaural stethoscope by doing away with the spring and substituting a clamp at the joint. This is actuated by a hanging tail-piece or lever, moved by the second finger of the right hand, the arm being held between the first finger and thumb; the other arm is held between the corresponding fingers of the left hand. When the lever is in the position A, the hinge is loose, and the instrument can be applied to the ears and adjusted to press as lightly or as heavily as desired. The lever being then moved into the position B, the instrument is fixed, and remains in position. It can then be easily removed from the ears and closed without touching the lever. A minor improvement consists in enlarging the orifices in the ivory ear-pieces, so that the bore of the instrument may remain in continuity with the axis of the auditory meatus during the rotatory movements round the said axis made in altering the position of the stethoscope. Messrs. Down Brothers, of St. Thomas’s-street, have carried out my idea completely to my satisfaction, and produced an instrument which does everything that I

anticipated.

West-street, E.C.

GEORGE

HERSCHELL, M.D. Lond.

CASE OF ALLEGED POISONING BY ARSENIC. a short interval following the many cases of which occurred in 1889 and the previous years comes the report of another trial for murder by arsenic, this time from Scotland. The trial took place at the High Court of Justiciary, Edinburgh, extending over Feb. l7th, 18th, and 19th, the presiding judge being the Lord Justice Clerk (Lord Kingsburgh). The accused was John Webster, tenant of the Newton Hotel, Southmuir of Kirriemuir, and the following is a brief recapitulation of the principal facts revealed in the evidence. The household consisted of the prisoner, his wife (the deceased), two children, one female servant, and the barman. Neither of the two Jatter slept in the house. The prisoner and the deceased effected in October, 1889, a joint policy of insurance for £ 1000 in the Prudential Insurance Company, the amount of the policy being payable to the survivor on the decease of the first. Two premiums of jE24 14s. 2d. were paid, one before the policy was issued-on Oct. 31st, 1889-and the second six months after. The deceased and her husband

AFTER

poisoning

had a serious quarrel in the following April (1890), which led to a temporary estrangement, but subsequently the prisoner returned to her, and she was in her usual health on Thursday, July 31st. On the following day the servant, Helen Grant, on first seeing her mistress, thought her looking pale. Later on Mrs. Webster, saying she felt sick, Jay down on the children’s bed and vomited. 8be ate very little dinner, and in the afternoon vomited again, the vomited matters being, according to the witness Grant’s description, "grey and white mixed stuff." The vomiting continued the following day, though potash and milk were taken to allay it, and the deceased also complained of thirst. She had some "brandy toddy"that night, but next day (Sunday) the vomiting continued in spite of repeated doses of potash and milk. That evening about 7 P.M. she was seen by Dr. Clark of Kirriemuir, who had not attended her previously, she and her husband being perfect strangers to him. He found her very pale, weak, and exhausted, complaining of vomiting and retching which she said had commenced on the morning or forenoon of the previous day. She complained of uneasiness and pain in the stomach, which was slightly intensified on pressure. The thirst was very great,

and there were ordered six

no

indications of intemperance.Dr. Clark

of subnitrate of bismuth, one to be When he saw herthe next day (Monday), between 10 and 11 A.M , the vomiting and retching were slightly relieved, but she was weaker. The powders had been all taken, and Dr. Clark now prescribed oxalate of cerium in dosps of one or two grains, to he given every three hours on jelly or buttered bread. When he next saw her, between 1 and 2 P.M. the same day, she was in a state of complete collapse, but conscious. She He ordered stimulants was very feeble, cold, and pallid. to be given and hot applications to the feet and hands, but Dr. Clark certified the death as she died soon after. from gastritis of four days’ duration, and the body was But subsequently, in consequence of some buried. and other suspicions as to the real cause of circumstances, it was exhumed on Nov. 27th and examined by Dr H. D. Littlejohn of Edinburgh and Dr. Clark. It was found remarkably fresh and free from putrefactive odour, this being partly due to the wet condition of the grave, partly also to the presence of arsenic which was subsequently found by Dr Littlejohn and Mr. Falconer King, analyst to the city of Edinburgh. As the necropsy had revealed no appearances of death from any natural disease, Dr. Littlejohn removed the stomach, intestines, liver, kidneys, spleen, one lung, and the uterus for chemical inspection and more minute examination. The stomach was empty; there was externally a yellow patch the size of a florin, internally some dark mucus. Dr. Littlejohn found the presence of arsenic in the stomach, and, on communicating with the Crown Office, was associated with Mr. Falconer King. They found arsenic in all the abdominal viscera and in the lungs. Unfortunately they made at first an erroneous calculation as to the quantity, making that found in the stomach as three-fourths of a grain, whereas upon verification it was found to be less than half a grain. A further examination was made by Professor Crum Brown of the Edinburgh University, with the result that he also found arsenic in all the viscera, and he estimated that, calculating from what he found, the total would be 1’76-1 grain of arsenic for the whole stomach. Marked quantities were also found in the duodenum and intestines. It was therefore clearly proved that death resulted from arsenical poisoning, the symptoms observed during life, the appearances seen after death and four months’ burial, and the chemical examination all bearing out this conclusion. The possibility of accident was apparently excluded, and that of suicide almost equally so. The barman, Peacock, who would have been an important Crown witness, committed suicide by drowning a few days before the trial was first fixed, and his depositions (or precognitions) do not appear to have been tendered in evidence. The prisoner was ably defended, and there were points in his favour, especially the entire absence of any proof of the purchase or possession of arsenic by him. The verdict of " Not guilty"was therefore justified. Seeing that Dr. Clark had only seen the deceased for the first time the day before her death, and only three times altogether, and bearing in mind how often gastritis has been caused by poison, it would have been more satisfiotory had a post-mortem examination been asked for before a certificate of death was given.

taken

powders

every three hours in milk.

death

THE FACTORY BILLS.

610

because they emanate from the same family. Also, what are the limits of family relationship? How many times "removed"may cousins be who work together? and does Mr. MATTHEWS seriously imagine that a British magistrate will ever be able to unravel the intricacies of family relationship betweeen the Polish Russian Jews, who, to the number of several thousand, have taken refuge

THE LANCET. LONDON:

SATURDAY,

MARCH 14, 1891.

THE five Bills before Parliament, all

dealing

with

our

not suffice to do away

in the East-end of London ? It will be found quite im. practicable to make distinctions between members of the same family and strangers ; and as the dangers to health are the same in both cases such distinctions should not be

fear, factory legislation, will, with the evils of the sweating system. Even if the best attempted. Some of the suggestions which we pressed forward during clauses of each Bill are grafted on to the Government Bill No one has our campaign against sweating have, we are glad to note, we shall still have an imperfect measure. studied the question of sweating without realising that, been adopted. On many occasions we have urged that the from every point of view, the greatest evils are to be local authorities are the principal offenders. Mr. MATTHEWS found in the domestic workshops or among the home now proposes that where the local authorities do not fulfil workers. Even the disciples of the extreme individualistic their duty the central Government may send down any school are on this point at one with those who, on number of inspectors to "sweep the Augean stables clean." the contrary, rely principally on the interference of This, too, is to be done quickly and without the interference the State. Both sides are aware that the sweater’s of local magistrates. Mr. MATTHEWS is further to be victim cannot alone free himself from his economic congratulated on abolishing the distinctions formerly made thraldom ; but the one party urges that the State should between factories and workshops, and between the fac. help him, and the other side argues that he should help tories and workshops where adult males alone were himself by forming a strong organisation such as a trade employed, where women were employed, and, finally, where union. While, however, the workers are separated one "young persons" worked. All are now to be placed on from another, hid away in the noisome dens of the sweater the same level with regard to ventilation, overcrowding, &c. Where alterations are or toiling in their garret or cellar dwellings, they cannot be cleanliness, limewashing, brought together into an organisation. From the sanitary necessary, the inspector may cause these to be made and point of view, it is the working at home in bedrooms and recover the cost by summary procedure. But we miss in in private dwellings which most offends against the laws of the Government Bill a clause which is to be found in other decency and of health. The first object, then, of any measure projects of law-to the effect that where men and women dealing with sweating should be to reform the present dan- are employed there shall be separate sanitary accommodagerous condition of domestic workshops. Yet Mr. MATTHEWS tion for each sex. Again, the Bill, though it provides for deliberately exempts domestic workshops from the opera- ventilation in a vague manner, does not lay down any we

tion of his Bill. Clause 29 of the Government measure does contain an important alteration exempting from the future Act"a room solely used for the purpose of sleeping therein," whereas the existing law exempts "a place solely used as a dwelling." The sweater can now, on the approach of the inspector, liide his workwomen and "young persons" in any part of his private dwelling adjoining his workshop. In future he will have to hide the women and children he is employing after regulation hours, not in his dwelling generally, but only in his bedroom. There, by Mr. MATTHEWS’ considerate clause, the inspector will not be able to follow them. But, says Mr. MATTHEWS, "the Bill does not deal with what is commonly called domestic workshops," and it would seem that he agrees with Lord DUNRAVEN’S definition that a domestic workshop is a place, perhaps merely a bedroom, where only members of the same family work together. Places sufficiently good for a to live in are, according to the Home Secretary’s family opinion, sufficiently good for a family to work in. This, we maintain, is not at all the case. First of all, it does not in the least matter whether the workers are of the same family or not. Their relationship to each other does not in any way lessen the amount of oxygen they consume in breathing. We never heard that less ventilation was required for a family gathering than for a gathering of strangers. Nor are the germs of disease less infectious

rule as to the minimum cubic space that should be allowed to each worker. the work of women, the Government Bill proposes to do away with the existing difference made between the factories where only women work and those where young persons also work. In both cases the hours of work shall be twelve, with one hour and a half for meals. This will simplify matters, for formerly, where only women worked, the hours were fifteen, with four and a half for meals, and it was no easy matter to ascertain whether the women really did enjoy to the full the four hours and a half of relaxation, as stipulated by the law. These are, however, all very small advantages compared with what we had a right to expect. For instance, no promise is made as to the increase in the number of inspectors; though, on the other hand, the certifying factory surgeons are to be abolished. This very unfortunate proposal was the subject of special criticism in our last issue. There are actually 134,000 factories and workshops registered, and the visits made by the inspectors last year were in all 114,000. Thus the average is less than one visit a year, though a visit every three months would not be too much. Nor is it easy to understand why the Government did not follow the recommendation unanimously given by the Berlin Labour Conference, that children should not be allowed to work before they had reached the age of twelve. Mr. MATTHEWS In

dealing with