- Email: [email protected]
THE QUEEN v. GLOSTER.
636
prepared to account for Dr. Gloster’s movements from this hour until 5 P.M. of that day, the time during which tli3 alleged operation at Moreton-place, a considerable distance THE trial of Dr. James Gloster, of Upper Phillimore-off, was performed. The next he heard of her was through a telegram summoning him at once to Moreton-place, winch place, Kensington, for the wilful murder of Eliza Janehe received about 3 P.M. on the following day. He hesitated. Scbummacher, who died at 21, Moreton-place, Pinilico, onto obey the summons, but on consideration determined to visit June 27th, was concluded on Tuesday, the 25th inst., and her, which he did, arriving at her house about 4 P.M. He fond ended in a verdict of acquittal, the Crown withdrawing theher in bed, evidently very ill, complaining of great abdominal charge, after the direction of the judge (Mr. Justice Charles) pain. He was shown into her room by a party not produced that the statement of the deceased, on which Dr. Gloster at the trial, and not to be found at the inquest or at the magisterial investigations. He expressed surprise at the was incriminated, could not be received as a dying declaraof the telegram, made a digital examination, found tion. The facts of the case are as follows: Mrs. Schummacher, receipt the abdomen tender, and a slight sanguineous discharge age thirty-nine, was married for eight years, but had been from the uterus. He refused to continue to attend, advised separated from her husband for the past seven years. She her to have some medical attendant living conveniently near, had during this time one living child, and is said to have had or to go to a hospital. He also charged her with doing or had something done to herself. This she did not deny.. other pregnancies. And there was a sworn statement for No one was present during this interview save a workwoman" the prosecution that, even so late as the Saturday night and she only for a portion of it, who is acknowledged to previous to her death, her paramour visited her and remained be of intemperate habits. Some recriminatory remarks. with her for the entire night. She made no mention that passed between the women, the deceased declaring that, as. Gloster would not help her, she should do the best she night of Dr. Gloster’s name or of any operation having been Dr. could for herself. Her sister, a Mrs. Baker, called at his. her. on This was June the after but 23rd, performed night house the next requesting him to attend, but he de-one of the day she was first seen by Dr. Crane of Pi1ll1ico. She clined to do so. day, From this time until his arrest on July lst had been to see Dr. Crane early in April, to ascertain if she he heard nothing of the case. Dr. Gloster was at first bailed for ;f25 by the magistrate, but after the verdict of the was pregnant, stating that she believed she was encei7ate for a period of at least some weeks. He, on a digital exa- coroner’s jury he was re-arrested and confined in Holloway July 4th to August 15th. It appears that on mination, assured her that she was not pregnant. But she from June 22nd Mrs. Schummacher sent for Dr. Crane, whom she returned after some days, requesting him to give her had previously visited in April. He found her dangerously medicine to induce the catamenia. This he refused to do. ill, so much so that he summoned to his assistance Mr. Dr. Crane did not see her again from this date until the Frankish, especially in consequence of the incriminating. occasion of her fatal illness in June. Nothing is known of statements of the patient with regard to Dr. Gloster. her movements from this time until the night of June 5th, Both made a digital examination and concurred in the when she came at a rather late hour to Dr. Gloster’s house serious view of the case. It would appear from Dr. Crane’s during his temporary absence, when she was seen by evidence at the trial that no accurate clinical observations. Mr. Meredith Townsend, who was sent for to see her, he or records were made, either with regard to temperature, being in the habit of acting for Dr. Gloster in the absence pulse, or treatment. Dr. Crane continued to attend until of the latter. Dr. Gloster some few years since had attended the 27th, when the alarming state of the patient induced her child for some trivial illness. She solicited Mr. Town- him to summon Dr. Fincham, who confirmed the fears of send to procure abortion, who decidedly refused to have any- Dr. Crane. The latter went then to the police station with. returned, and the view of having dying depo-itions taken. Not being ablething to say to her. Just then Dr. heard Mr. Townsend’s report. She repeated the request to to find a magistrate, he returned with Mr. and Dr. Gloster, but he emphatically refused and sent her away. " told the deceased that he wished her to make a, From her own statement it appears she next visited a statement."" In this latter she accused Dr. Gloster of "Dr." Tarico, of Wardour-street, an unqualified practi- having, both at his own house, on other occasions, and at hers,, tioner, who has, since the investigation before the magis- on the 18th, passed instruments, causing great pain, trate, disappeared from the locality. She represented that it and also of having twice applied cotton wool to was onDr. Gloster’s suggestion(whichhedenies)that shewent relieve her of the pain. Neither Dr. Crane nor Mr. to Tarico. But she also subsequently admitted in her state- Frankish told her the purport or serious nature of the statement that he passed what she termed a "small iyastrecmerat," ment she was making, nor did they lead her to believe that which, she asserted, did not hurt her. This was on the it was a dying declaration. The deceased died about mid8th of June. She again appeared at Dr. Gloster’s house on night the same day. It is right to say that the identificaJune llth, stating that she had gone to Tarico, and said tion of Dr. Gloster on the 18th at the house of the deceased nothing at that time of Tarico’s examination, but urged depended on the evidence of a woman who it was known Dr. Gloster to " help her," which he for the second time did see him going in on the 19th, and who stated she saw him refused to do. It may be right here to state that Mrs. from the kitchen window of a deep area passing out on the Schummacher was not in good circumstances, and that 18th, yet hesitated to recognise him when taken for that, there has been no motive of any kind ascribed by the purpose to the police court, only going as far as a certain Crown, or any that can be conceived to have induced similarity of appearance, and using the words "I am not sure,’" Dr. Gloster to gratify the deceased, and risk the penalty it is like him," &c. The post-mortem examination, confor such an act. It would seem from the evidence that at ducted by Mr. Bond, revealed these facts :-A normal, this visit to Dr. Gloster she must have secured possession of multiparous, healthy, unimpregnated uterus, with a wound a scrap of paper, portion of a used envelope, that Dr. Gloster two inches long, commencing at the isthmus, running had on that morning given his servant. It had on it a through the posterior wall of the uterus, and emerging request to his grocer to change a cheque for 95. The servant, close to the summit of the fundus. Lying in the peritoneal however, had the cheque changed without giving this order, cavity, and resting on the uterus, was a piece of wadding, she being well known in the shop. This circumstance such as that used by dressmakers, two inches in length by a. was used by the Crown against Dr. Gloster with the view of quarter of an inch in thickness. There was present, coverproving a certain degree of familiarity with the deceased. ing the wound and surrounding the wadding, some lymph called at Dr. Gloster’s on the 17th, at 9 P.M., in his and purulent matter. The uterus was subsequently subabsence, stating that she would call the next morning. She mitted for Dr. Gloster to examination by Dr. Macnaughtondid call at 12 o’clock on that day, June 18th, Dr. Gloster Jones, Mr. Bland Sutton, and Dr. Hamilton Bland. Dr. being again from home; she left to return at 1.30; when she Lombe Atthill, a letter from whom is published in another waited for him until nearly 2 p. M. Dr. Gloster had then, column, was present in court, ready to testify from personal in the presence of his housekeeper, to direct her to leave his knowledge to Dr. Gloster’s character and capacity, having house and not to come again. She was only for a few come specially from Dublin for this purpose. Dr. A. Routh, minutes in the house after his return, and neither on this for whom, at the Marylebone General Dispensary, Dr. Gloster nor on any other occasion was she allowed into his study. His has acted while resident, was to have been called ; while housekeeper was prepared to swear that as the deceased Dr. Robert Barnes and Dr. Macnaughton Jones, to whom was leaving the hall door she used words to the effect that all the facts of the case were submitted, were also prepared he might regret not having helped her. Several witnesses to give evidence on his benalf. THE
QUEEN
v.
GLOSTER.
were
having
Gloster
She again
Frankish,
prepared to account for Dr. Gloster’s movements from this hour until 5 P.M. of that day, the time during which tli3 alleged operation at Moreton-place, a considerable distance THE trial of Dr. James Gloster, of Upper Phillimore-off, was performed. The next he heard of her was through a telegram summoning him at once to Moreton-place, winch place, Kensington, for the wilful murder of Eliza Janehe received about 3 P.M. on the following day. He hesitated. Scbummacher, who died at 21, Moreton-place, Pinilico, onto obey the summons, but on consideration determined to visit June 27th, was concluded on Tuesday, the 25th inst., and her, which he did, arriving at her house about 4 P.M. He fond ended in a verdict of acquittal, the Crown withdrawing theher in bed, evidently very ill, complaining of great abdominal charge, after the direction of the judge (Mr. Justice Charles) pain. He was shown into her room by a party not produced that the statement of the deceased, on which Dr. Gloster at the trial, and not to be found at the inquest or at the magisterial investigations. He expressed surprise at the was incriminated, could not be received as a dying declaraof the telegram, made a digital examination, found tion. The facts of the case are as follows: Mrs. Schummacher, receipt the abdomen tender, and a slight sanguineous discharge age thirty-nine, was married for eight years, but had been from the uterus. He refused to continue to attend, advised separated from her husband for the past seven years. She her to have some medical attendant living conveniently near, had during this time one living child, and is said to have had or to go to a hospital. He also charged her with doing or had something done to herself. This she did not deny.. other pregnancies. And there was a sworn statement for No one was present during this interview save a workwoman" the prosecution that, even so late as the Saturday night and she only for a portion of it, who is acknowledged to previous to her death, her paramour visited her and remained be of intemperate habits. Some recriminatory remarks. with her for the entire night. She made no mention that passed between the women, the deceased declaring that, as. Gloster would not help her, she should do the best she night of Dr. Gloster’s name or of any operation having been Dr. could for herself. Her sister, a Mrs. Baker, called at his. her. on This was June the after but 23rd, performed night house the next requesting him to attend, but he de-one of the day she was first seen by Dr. Crane of Pi1ll1ico. She clined to do so. day, From this time until his arrest on July lst had been to see Dr. Crane early in April, to ascertain if she he heard nothing of the case. Dr. Gloster was at first bailed for ;f25 by the magistrate, but after the verdict of the was pregnant, stating that she believed she was encei7ate for a period of at least some weeks. He, on a digital exa- coroner’s jury he was re-arrested and confined in Holloway July 4th to August 15th. It appears that on mination, assured her that she was not pregnant. But she from June 22nd Mrs. Schummacher sent for Dr. Crane, whom she returned after some days, requesting him to give her had previously visited in April. He found her dangerously medicine to induce the catamenia. This he refused to do. ill, so much so that he summoned to his assistance Mr. Dr. Crane did not see her again from this date until the Frankish, especially in consequence of the incriminating. occasion of her fatal illness in June. Nothing is known of statements of the patient with regard to Dr. Gloster. her movements from this time until the night of June 5th, Both made a digital examination and concurred in the when she came at a rather late hour to Dr. Gloster’s house serious view of the case. It would appear from Dr. Crane’s during his temporary absence, when she was seen by evidence at the trial that no accurate clinical observations. Mr. Meredith Townsend, who was sent for to see her, he or records were made, either with regard to temperature, being in the habit of acting for Dr. Gloster in the absence pulse, or treatment. Dr. Crane continued to attend until of the latter. Dr. Gloster some few years since had attended the 27th, when the alarming state of the patient induced her child for some trivial illness. She solicited Mr. Town- him to summon Dr. Fincham, who confirmed the fears of send to procure abortion, who decidedly refused to have any- Dr. Crane. The latter went then to the police station with. returned, and the view of having dying depo-itions taken. Not being ablething to say to her. Just then Dr. heard Mr. Townsend’s report. She repeated the request to to find a magistrate, he returned with Mr. and Dr. Gloster, but he emphatically refused and sent her away. " told the deceased that he wished her to make a, From her own statement it appears she next visited a statement."" In this latter she accused Dr. Gloster of "Dr." Tarico, of Wardour-street, an unqualified practi- having, both at his own house, on other occasions, and at hers,, tioner, who has, since the investigation before the magis- on the 18th, passed instruments, causing great pain, trate, disappeared from the locality. She represented that it and also of having twice applied cotton wool to was onDr. Gloster’s suggestion(whichhedenies)that shewent relieve her of the pain. Neither Dr. Crane nor Mr. to Tarico. But she also subsequently admitted in her state- Frankish told her the purport or serious nature of the statement that he passed what she termed a "small iyastrecmerat," ment she was making, nor did they lead her to believe that which, she asserted, did not hurt her. This was on the it was a dying declaration. The deceased died about mid8th of June. She again appeared at Dr. Gloster’s house on night the same day. It is right to say that the identificaJune llth, stating that she had gone to Tarico, and said tion of Dr. Gloster on the 18th at the house of the deceased nothing at that time of Tarico’s examination, but urged depended on the evidence of a woman who it was known Dr. Gloster to " help her," which he for the second time did see him going in on the 19th, and who stated she saw him refused to do. It may be right here to state that Mrs. from the kitchen window of a deep area passing out on the Schummacher was not in good circumstances, and that 18th, yet hesitated to recognise him when taken for that, there has been no motive of any kind ascribed by the purpose to the police court, only going as far as a certain Crown, or any that can be conceived to have induced similarity of appearance, and using the words "I am not sure,’" Dr. Gloster to gratify the deceased, and risk the penalty it is like him," &c. The post-mortem examination, confor such an act. It would seem from the evidence that at ducted by Mr. Bond, revealed these facts :-A normal, this visit to Dr. Gloster she must have secured possession of multiparous, healthy, unimpregnated uterus, with a wound a scrap of paper, portion of a used envelope, that Dr. Gloster two inches long, commencing at the isthmus, running had on that morning given his servant. It had on it a through the posterior wall of the uterus, and emerging request to his grocer to change a cheque for 95. The servant, close to the summit of the fundus. Lying in the peritoneal however, had the cheque changed without giving this order, cavity, and resting on the uterus, was a piece of wadding, she being well known in the shop. This circumstance such as that used by dressmakers, two inches in length by a. was used by the Crown against Dr. Gloster with the view of quarter of an inch in thickness. There was present, coverproving a certain degree of familiarity with the deceased. ing the wound and surrounding the wadding, some lymph called at Dr. Gloster’s on the 17th, at 9 P.M., in his and purulent matter. The uterus was subsequently subabsence, stating that she would call the next morning. She mitted for Dr. Gloster to examination by Dr. Macnaughtondid call at 12 o’clock on that day, June 18th, Dr. Gloster Jones, Mr. Bland Sutton, and Dr. Hamilton Bland. Dr. being again from home; she left to return at 1.30; when she Lombe Atthill, a letter from whom is published in another waited for him until nearly 2 p. M. Dr. Gloster had then, column, was present in court, ready to testify from personal in the presence of his housekeeper, to direct her to leave his knowledge to Dr. Gloster’s character and capacity, having house and not to come again. She was only for a few come specially from Dublin for this purpose. Dr. A. Routh, minutes in the house after his return, and neither on this for whom, at the Marylebone General Dispensary, Dr. Gloster nor on any other occasion was she allowed into his study. His has acted while resident, was to have been called ; while housekeeper was prepared to swear that as the deceased Dr. Robert Barnes and Dr. Macnaughton Jones, to whom was leaving the hall door she used words to the effect that all the facts of the case were submitted, were also prepared he might regret not having helped her. Several witnesses to give evidence on his benalf. THE
QUEEN
v.
GLOSTER.
were
having
Gloster
She again
Frankish,