^v^-^e  (sT)
INQUES'J
./•«*y ■';
<>,"' HELD AT
%
c
PROVINCIAL:
AMUM, TORONTO,
.Vl'H AM) 6th Mav, 1868.
tfnulnuc ami 0!ovvrsjiondfucr in full,
   WITH COMMENTS OF THE TORONTO PRESS.
But is this law '?
Ay marry is't: Crowner's-quest law.
.OH t?i^
Hamlet.
/>.

TOEONTO
PRICE lO CENTS.
/y^A ]
 
 
INQUEST
MAEY    BOYD,
HELD AT
PROVINCIAL LUNATIC ASYLUM, TORONTO,
."irn and Gth May, ISfiS.
t&viftmtt and ®mmpn&mtt in MI,
WITH COMMENTS oF THE TORONTO PRESS.
Hut is this law?
Av marry is'f: Orownor's-qucsf law.
    ^GC<^/>     l,,n„lrt.

  ^      %
 co TxnrrirrrY. 2


   'f'o u () NT O:
1 S <j S .
65 
**
'JJ 
PREFACE.
     On Saturday, 9th May, 1868, there appeared in the Toronto Daily Telegraph,
some portions of the evidence given at an Inquest held at the Provincial Lunatic
Asylum, Toronto, on the body of Mary  Boyd.   This partial publication  of the
evidence, and an editorial article in the issue of the  Monday following, reflected
most unjustly and calumniously both upon me and upon my son.   I had an ex-
planatory letter inserted in the Telegraph of 13th inst.  A very limited edition of
that day's paper was printed, and it was soon found impossible to procure a copy
of it at any price.

     Since then, on the  18th May, a letter appeared in the Daily Telegraph, from
Dr.  Workman, Superintendent of the Provincial Lunatic Asylum, making no actual
charges, but rather insinuations against  me ; I answered this by a communication,
which from its great length the Editor of the Telegraph refused to insert, although
I told him that  I would not object to its being published in two successive issues
of his paper if he thought it too long for one.

      Whnt the respectable portion  of the Toronto  press, think of  the  verdict of
the jury, will be  seen from the extracts first given from the Globe and the Leader.
At the end will be found  the comments of the same papers on the  whole case.

      The  garbled report of the evidence given in  the  Telegraph, very  greatly
 misled  the public  upon  some  important points;  I have, therefore, thought  it
 better  that they should see the evidence in full.  I have procured a certified copy
 of  it  from the  County Crown  Attorney, from which  it has here been  printed
 verbatim,  just  as the Coroner wrote it  down with all its errors of punctuation.
 grammar  and  arrangement  uncorrected.   I  did   not,  however,  consider  it
 proper to  put in italics  the words that  Dr.  Hallowell so unwarrantally under-
 lined,  (see  note, page 19,) to give intensity to  what he  thought would be
 injurious to me.

      The  time  that  was spent in  procuring the evidence and getting it printed,
 must be my excuse for the delay  that  has occurred in setting my  refutation  of
 Dr. Workman's  slanders before the public.

      I  have reprinted  both Dr.  Workman's letter, and  the editorial article from
 the  Telegraph, as  without  them  the  dialogue   which  follows  would  be
 scarcely intelligible—and it is only fair that  both  sides of the question should
 be  seen. 
I'REl ACE.
iii.
     1 have also given a short narrative of some of the particulars of Mary Boyd's
illness and  death.    This, with  the  evidence  taken at the inquest  will enable
those who have not yet heard anything of this  distressing case to understand  it
more easily.

     It will  probably be asked by many, why such delicate and painful matters
should be placed before the public at all;  this sin does not  lie  upon  me, but
upon those who have attacked me and whom I am answering.

  I  should have been  content with a much briefer defence had the vindication
of my son and myself been my sole object.  For the length  to which I have been
led  I must plead in justification  my  urgent desire to redeem from foul slander
the  fair fame  of a modest  and  virtuous young woman.   She is now dead  and
beyond the reach of scurrilous newspapers,  but her good name  and  memory arc
 doubtless dear to those  whom  she has left behind.

     Another  and  even  more  powerful motive has been, to vindicate the sacred
cause of  the great truth to which I have given my allegiance,  and which might,
in some measure be prejudiced through me.   I, of course, refer to Homoeopathy,
which I  firmly believe to be the greatest  boon  which  has, in  these latter  ages,
been vouchsafed to afflicted humanity by the Giver of all good.

     This  is  my  apology for  obtruding  upon  the  public matters  of so ex-
tremely painful  a  nature, and  I hope it will be found sufficient to justify the
expressions of reprobation  which T have allowed  to  appear in regard to those
who  have imposed  upon me this moT unpleasant duty.

                                                 I). CAMPBELL, M.  D.

  108 Bay Street,  Toronto. 
EVIDENCE.
[L.s.]  Office of the County Crown Attorney,
               COUNTY OF  YORK.

     I, John  McNab, County Crown Attorney
in and for the County of York, hereby Certify,
that the annexed paper  writing contains a true
copy of the  papers connected  with  the In-
quisition held on the  body of Mary Boyd, as
the same were filed in this office, on the  28th
day  of May, A. D. 1868.

       JOHN McNAB,  C.C.A., County of York.
                           per J.  Jackes.

Dated this Thirtieth day of May, A. D. 1868,
         First Day of Inquest.

  Matilda Campbell.—I am the wife Dr. Duncan
Campbell.  I knew the deceased Mary  Boyd.  I
last saw her alive on Wednesday, the 29th.   She
was then in good bodily health.  Her mind  was
very unsettled, wandering.   At the time she had in
my employment from the 1st of Jan'y last. * When
I took her into my service her mental and bodily
health were perfect.  I did  not observe  anything
wrong in her state of mind until a fortnight before
she left me to be removed  to the asylum.  From
that period she  spoke from time to time of hell,
and subjects pertaining thereunto.  She  was nat-
urally of a religious turn of mind.  She had pre-
vious to this been attending on Rev. Mr. Caughey's
ministration.  Although her conduct had  been
strange for a length of time previous to the fort-
night above indicated, I did not take alarm until
she threw herself into the well in my  house  on
Monday the 27th, in the afternoon; she was rescued
by the servant boy hearing  the splashing.  I saw
her immediately after.   Upon asking her why she
had done this, she said it was better to be drowned
than to be burnt.
   She had  been constantly  talking  about being
burnt in  hell since  she  attended  Mr. Caughey's
minstrations; certain that she would be  one of the
victims.  She was moved the same  night  into  a
bed upstairs, and was never afterwards left alone.
   She had been considered by Drs. Campbell, Hall
and Adams as a fit subject for the Lunatic Asylum,
and was  examined on Monday by these gentlemen
with a view to having her removed thither.  She
was about to be removed on Wednesday between
4 and 5 in the afternoon.  She had been dressed by
my daughter but pretended  to be sleepy  and want-

  * Erroneously printel 1st June in Telegraph.
ed to lie down, and after sleeping some time  she
said she was hungry.  I made some toast for her,
and while I was getting  the toast and tea for her,
she jumped out of bed, on  my  return I saw  her
with a knife in her  hand and cut  her throat
with it.f    I  knocked  the knife out of  her
hand. I then went for the Doctor into the next room
to call him,he being up stairs.  While I was calling
the Doctor she seized  another  knife, with which
she is supposed to  have cut her throat a  second
time.   When the Doctor came down I retired.  I
came down very soon after. She was  then on the
bed, and Dr.  Campbell with Dr. Lizars were dress-
ing the wound.  Immediately after that she  was
removed to the Asylum.  I have  not seen  her
since.  I heard of her death this morning.
  To the Foreman.—She went out generally twice
a week and returned about 9 o'clock.  She attend-
ed a night school, Mr. Haskett's on  Queen street,
accompanied by  some  girl.  I never saw  any
young man with her.  She attended church regu-
larly and Sunday school too.
  She went head first into the well.  She was not
more than a minute in before she was rescued.
  She was perfectiy  aware of  coming here.  It
was her wish  to go the asylum as she  had given
so much trouble to the family.
  She  had  never been  in bad health that  1
am aware of.
  She never staid away over hours from my house.
I looked upon her as a faithful  servant while in
my employment.
  She was a scholar in the Presbyterian Sunday
school.
  Was of a religious turn of mind.
  She was nineteen years of age.
  She was only  an attendant at church,  not  a
member.
  Duncan Campbell, M. D.—I am the  husband of
former witness, Mrs. Campbell.
  I may  premise  that having  been present, and
heard the evidence of Mrs. Campbell, I corroborate
it in all respects, so far  as my knowledge  goes.
For about two weeks previous to Mary Boyd being
taken to the Asylum I had began to  see that she
was drifting  into insanity; at times she appeared
perfectly well, at others talked  as no sane person
would talk, chiefly  about  death and hell, and the
speedy termination of the world.
   Upon one occasion she said  it was better to  be
dead than alive.  From that time I began  to ap-
prehend the possibility of suicide.  I called in Dr.

  t The Coroner has here succeeded  in making it
look as if Mrs. Campbell said that she herself had
cut the girl's throat! 
VI
EVIDENCE TAKEN  AT THE  INQUEST.
Adams in consultation, and administered the rem-
edies myself.  They consisted chiefly of calmatives
(to soothe the irritability of  the mind), but they
had no effect.
  On Monday I sent for the  Rev. Mr. Young, but
he told me her mind was quite gone.  She told my
wife that her female condition was deranged, but
afterwards found that it was not so bad;  that it
passed off.   I used some remedies, with a view of
improving  that  condition, after  which  she  was
better, but I cannot say  whether on  account  of
these or after these.   After cutting her throat she
remained ten minutes in great excitement, notable
to speak.   I sent for Dr. Lizars to help me  dress
the wound.   The excitement  abated in ten min-
utes.  Resisted all efforts to give assistance until
Dr. Lizars came  or soon after.  We then managed
to get hier  carefully  bandaged  up.   I left her  at
the  Asylum under favorable  circumstances, and
but  for the attack of bronchitis she might have
got better.   I continued to see her with Dr. Work-
man in my professional capacity until  yesterday,
at  one  o'clock,  p.m.   I  heard of her death this
morning from Dr. Workman.
   To the Foreman—I never administered medicine
to the deceased for the purpose  of regulating her
female condition, before the insanity.  I am pretty
confident she never  consulted  any  medical man
except myself while in my service.
           Second Day of Inquest'

  Joseph Workman, M.D., Medical Superintend-
 ent of  the Provincial Lunatic Asylum, being duly
 sworn, deposeth as follows :—
  The deceased, Mary Boyd, was admitted by me
 into the Provincial Lunatic Asylum on Wednesday
 last, the 29th  of April, on  a certificate  of lunacy,
 signed  by three  Homoxopathic  physicians and
 verified  by the Mayor of this city.* Application for
 her admittance was made  on  the 27th April by Dr.
 Campbell's son to whom 1 gave the usual printed
 circular  of questions,  issued   to all  applicants
 for admission of lunatics, >equesting him to have it
 filled up and  sent in  to mj  as soon as possible.
 Between twelve and one  o'clock on the 29th, Dr.
 Campbell himself brought  the circular,  and I gave
 him a printed form of medical certificate of lunacy
 to be used in the case, awarding to the  patient, in
 consideration of the urgency of  her symptoms, pre-
 ferential admission,  though a  very large number
 of applications before this one stood on  the  regis-
 ter,  as is constantly the fact.   The deceased was
 brought to the Asylum  in the  evening in a cab,
 accompanied  by Dr.  Campbell  and his son.   1 re-
 ceived her at the front door.  She was in the cab,
 sitting by the side of Dr. Campbell, and leaning her
 head  on his breast.  She looked very pale.
  Dr. Campbell told  me   a  great calamity had
 arisen since he last saw me,  1  asked  what it was,
 and he informed me by a sign of his hand that she
 had cut  her throat, but he and Dr. Lizars had applied
 sutures to the wound.  I had her carried up stairs
 to Ward No. 3, and placed in the only single-bedded
 room at command.  I placed two nurses in charge of
 her, with instructions that, on no account, she should
 for a  moment  be left alone, and I applied a leather

 *. The words in italics were omitted from the re-
port given in the Telegraph.  The term " Homoeopa-
thic " in the same sentence, gives the clue to the whole
persecution that followed.
muff to the hands to  prevent her attempting further
injury to herself, being well aware that lunatics who
have failed in accomplishing suicide are never to be
trusted, as many of them have been known to tear
open the wound after dressing if their bauds have
been left unrestrained.
  The patient was able to speak, but  I  did not en-
courage her  to do  so.  I talked soothingly to her,
hoping to calm her mind, which I found was fearfully
disturbed under the conviction that  she was dam-
ned, and, as she said, would  go  into the flames of
•hell.  She complained much of pain from the man-
ner in which her head was made fast, by bringing
her front hair on each side down  to her breast, and
passing it  through backwards under the armpits,
the two ends  meeting  behind  being tied.*  Dr.
Campbell explained that this fastening was made in
order to keep down the chin  and prevent the head
moving, and be requested that it, should not be  in-
terfered with.  I saw the patient several times be-
fore I went to bed.
  I gave  her some  medicine prescribed by Dr.
Campbell.  He  asked me had I any objections to it.
He called  it Bryonia.   I  said I had none, as I be-
lieved his doses would be of the infinitesimally small
order,] and therefore the next best to cold water. I
could not myself then see any clear medical  indica-
tion, and in sush circumstances I think the correct
course  is to give no medicine, bat to  watch  closely
until we see what is really called for.
  I was informed by  the  attendants next morning
that the patient had refused  to take the medicine
after she learned  that  it was  prescribed by Dr.
Campbell.  The attendants also  informed me she
disliked  Dr. Campbell very much, and had  talked
much about  him and his son,  but, as I em  always
very cautious in interpreting the expressions of the
insane,  1  did not  attach  any  importance to those
statements. It is  very common for insane persons
to manifest strong dislike for those whom  before
their insanity they have liked  best.  Dr. Campbell
came to the asylum to see the  patient on the fore-
noon of the next day, 30th, but I refused to let him
see her for the reason above given.  I did  not tell
Dr. Campbell the actual reason, as I did not wish to
hurt his feelings, and as he manifested much kind feel-
ingfor the patient,and great solicitudefor her recovery.
I told him  I felt convinced his  presence would dis-
turb her, and therefore 1 must decline allowing  his
visitation at that time.
  There  were  then  no symptoms of inflammatory
action, but  the face was puffed  and the eyelids
much swollen.   On  the  night Thursday, the 30th,
I prescribed for her, as she was very restless and
much excited in mind, four drachms of watery in-
fusion of Opium, of the strength of eight grains to
the ounce, a teaspoonful  to be given  every hour,
if the excitement continues-
  On the morning of Friday, 3rd May,}; I saw her
early, and learned that  my brother had been with
her in the night owing to the severity of her mental

  * This mode  of securing the  closure of the wound
was the most effectual and the least painful.
 t This sneer of Dr. Workman was not likely to in-
crease the confidence of the patient in the efficacy of
the remedy, and it is no great matter of wonder that
she soon refused to take any more of it.  Dr. Work-
man has tried  to make  it appear that this was a
proof that the girl was afraid to take anything from
Dr. Campbell's  handl
 I Friday was the 1st of May, but it is given as above
in the official copy from which this is printed verba-
tim. 
EVIDENCE  TAKEN AT  THE INQUEST.
Vll
symptoms.   She was  now  manifestly  suffering
under insufficient breathing.   The cheeks and lips
were of a livid hue, the  countenance showed great
distross, and the inspirations were very laborious.
There were, besides, clear indications that air had
entered the cellular tissue beneath the skin, over
the breast, neck and faco.  It was my opinion that
one or more of the sutures  in the throat should
be  undone, but I  wished to have Dr. Campbell
present at this  process.
  I therefore, at a quarter past seven, sent a note
to him apprising him of  the state of the case, and
of my views.  He sent me a  note in reply, saying
ho  would  corno  up between eleven and  twelve
o'clock.*   Ho  came  accordingly, accompanied by
Dr. Smith,  of  the  United States,  and his  (Dr.
Campbell's)  son.   He  at once acquiesced in  the
proposal to out tho suture; and ho  cut it himself.
Relief to the breathing  was thus given.
  Dr. Campbell objected to the temperature of the
room, as too low,  I did not coincide in this view,
but, being desirous of meeting his wishes as far as
at all possiblo, I pointed  out another room,  then
occupied by a very feeble patient,  but I said the
heat mi^ht be too great at times, as the room was
just over tho heating furnaces, tho  flues of which
passedup in one of the walls.   He approved of it,
and the patient was very soon placed in it.
  At this time  it was ascertained  by the stetbe-
scope that no air was entering the right lung.   Dr.
Campbell expressed his belief that this wa3 caused
by blood in  the bronchial tubes of this lung, which
had  passed down  into them from the  wound.|
Within a couple of hours the aspect of the paient
had  changed from  a livid to a rosy hue, and  the
pulse  had  become  very rapid.   These were the
clearest  indications  of  inflammatory reaction.
Frequent couching  took place, and  the fluid thus
brought up escaped by tho  wound  and by  the
mouth.   Dr. Campbell  visited her again  before
bed-tihio.
  On the  next  day, Saturday, she expectorated
largo  quantities of very offensive  matter, which
from its colour and  consistency  was  evidently
pus.  I  piescribed for her tincture  of Digitalis
and Hyoecyamus,  with simple syrup.  She  took
from me everything I offered,  and manifested much
kind feeling.  She  always pressed  mo to  stay by
her or to  return soon.   I conversed with her a
great deal, but  confinod my word3 to religious con-
solation,which she appeared to receive very gladly.
I also read to her from the New Testament.!  'Ine
Rev.  Provost Whittaker  visited  her on Sunday,
and on Monday, and spoke very calmly  and  con.
 * Dr. Workman'-1  note by no means sufficiently de-
scribed  tho  extreme urgency of the case, or  Dr.
Campbell would have attended to the call at once.

 t This  is incorrect. Dr.  Campbell no doubt told
Dr., Workman that a <"onsidora-ble quantity of blood
had  got do'.> 11 the trachea :  biu he attributed the
dullness of the sound on the right side of tho chest,
to which he called  Dr. Workman's  attention to in-
flammatory  engorgement ;  stating  at  the  same
time, that this, if not caused,  was  at least greatly
*gsravnted by the cold, dry air thnt she was breath-
ing', and thatunless at once removed to awarinerand
moister atmosphere, she  would very soon  die.  Dr.
Smith late of the  United States  army,  and  Dr.
Campbell's son were both present, and can  corrobo-
rate this statement.

 t Dr. Workman ig a Unitarian.
 solingly to her.  He prayod with her, and  she
 manifestly  followed his prayer, and repeated, as
 well as sheoould, his words.  She frequently asked
 me would she go to Jesus, and when ?   1  replied
 that if sbe wished to go to Jesus, and prayed to go
 to him, she certainly would go to him.  This is
 but a  sample of her latter  words.  I  think  her
 mind became peaceful as to her hopes of salvation
 —so far at least as her insane state permitted.
  She died on the morning of Tuesday, 5th instant,
 at a quarter past three, I was  not present at her
 death.  The cause of death will  be best explained
 by  the gentlemen making  the  post-mortem  ex-
 amination, and their discoveries may clso throw
 same  light on the cause of her insanity.
              yi^oed, Joseph Workman,  JI.D

 Sworn before me, this sixth
  day of May, 1868.
Signed, w>r. Hai.lowei.l, M.\).,
                       Coroner.
  To  the  Coroner.—I  had not the least doubt of
her insanity when admitted.   Dr. Campbell  as-
 signed  to me as tha  immediate cause of insanity*
 words used by Rev. Mr. Caughey, while  preaching
 and directed  (as she supposed) specially  to her,
 while sitting in the gallery of Elm  Street Church,
 as I  heard afterwards. Tho  words were  to  the
 effect " that he Mr. Caughey saw a yonns?  fomale
 sitting in tho gallery that wa3 going to he'll," and
 sho applied  it to herself;  in  conversations I had
 with her she ratified that statemeut.
  From  Dr.  Campbell's   statement to  myself,
which I had no reason  to  doubt, there  was sup-
pression of the menses.f  He also stated that  the
restoration of this function was most important,and
that a means  he had  found of great  value was
in this case used by  him which  he  explained to
me consisted in the application of galvanic  exeite-
ment% by means of galvanic apparatus being appli-
ed to the mamma or breast of the female and  the
other extremity  to the  os uteri  or  mouth  of  the
womb.  I expressed no  opinion upon the propriety
or impropriety  of this  proceeding.   He further
stated that after this, there appeared a discharge. §
  He told  me she was in love with his son and that
she had said tohim(Dr.Campbell)thathemustgive

  *  Dr. Campbell  viewed this religious exeitement
as theevidence, but never as the ca/iseof her insanity,
and stated this to Dr. Workman.

 t Dr.   Workman has  again incorrectly reported
what Dr. Campbell stated to him.—The actual words
 used were  "she suffers isom difficulty at her mens-
 trual periods, and will most likely have  an  aggra-
 vation of her  mental  troubles when her next period
 comes on." The apparently slight  difference between
 "difficulty" and "suppression," which  it would
have appeared mere hypercriticism to have noticed at
 the beginning of the Inquest, became all-important
 in its bearing towards the close.
 ; Dr.  Campbell never made use of the term galvanic
"e.i. ciUment," as that word would  have given an er-
roneous idea of the vitalizing influence  exerted by
galvanism or more properly  " Faradization."  But
this idea of excitement, seems to be the only notion
entertained of the effect of this agent by the medical
witnesses,  none of whom  probably could tell the  dif-
ference between the action of the  positive and nega-
tive poles.
  §  The actual words used by Dr. Campbell were :
"the discharge re-appeared." 
via
EVIDENCE TAKEN AT THE  INQUEST.
her his son in marriage.   He mentioned as indica-
tive of her mental aberration (to convince me) that
she had stated that his son had sexual intercourse
with her in her bed.I said that such a revelation from
a person really insane conld not, uncorroborated, be
regarded as of any value.  During her illness she
expressed a wish to see Dr. Campbell's son which
I did not  desire to  gratify.   Some  time  on
Saturday  during  Dr. Campbell's  presence  she
manifested  very angry  feelings towards  him.
She said Oh I the man that brought me to this ; ho
(Dr. C.) asked what she  said?*   He then said to
her "you  committed the act yourself," which I
understood him to moan the wound in the throat.
Dr. Campbell stated to me that he had given her a
dose of  Podophyllin on the day she was admitted
to the Asylum.
  To the Foreman"—She was quite quiet when she
arrived  here  (at the Asylum).  She complained of
no pain, except that which referred to the wound.
The room was not a hot room, it  was heated with
the same apparatus as the rest of the  establish-
ment ; the views  of  Dr.  Campbell  were  carried
out, in  so far as removing her to a higher  tem-
perature were  concerned.   I was  apprehensivo
that she might not recover from  the first.   Two
nurses were in  constant attendance night and day
and did not find any  inconvenience from the  tem-
perature.   Podophyllin is a powerful  cathartic. |
Mary Boyd was unwilling to see Dr. Campbell, his
visits were distasteful to her. Dr. Campbell was
uniformly kind and solicitous for the girl's welfare.
  To the Coroner—I made no critical examina-
tion in  the case of Mary Boyd as  I  adopt as  a
rule to treat  all females as  I should wish own
daughter to be treated.

                Signed,  Joseph Workman, M.D.
Sworn as above,
    W. II., Coroner.

  To a  Juror—Other causes might have caused
insanity,  but not of  the religious form  under
which she was admitted.

                     Toronto, May  6th, 1808.

   Charles Valance Bkkryman, D.,  and James
H.Richardson M. D., being sworn depose and say :
We this morning  made a post mortem examina-
tion of the body of Mary Boyd, lying  in the  Mor-
tuary of the Provincial Lunatic  Asylum.  It was
of middle stature, well formed and well nourished
apparently that  of   a  person  about  twent/ or
twenty-one years old.   There were no marks of
violence about the body, with the exception of a
wound on the front of the neck.  This was about
3 inches long, irregularly  concave downwards on
upper border, passing through the  anterior half
 * Her articulation of words was so imperfect, from
the state  of her throat, that almost anything could
be made out of the indistinct sounds she uttered.
Dr. Campbell was quite as close to her as Dr. Work-
man on this occasion, and is of  opinion that she tried
to say to him, with reference to her throat: "why did
you do this'?" upon which Dr.  Campbell answered :
" youforget, Mary, you did this yourself." Dr. Work-
man has endeavoured to give this a totally different
meaning.
 t Its "power " as a cathartic of course depends upon
the dose administered.
of the ring lormed  by lower  border  of  thyriod
with  the  cricoid  cartilages.   The edges  of the
wound were in a semi-gangrenous condition with-
out any sign of attempt at repair; offensive  pua
escaped freely from the wound. On laying open
the  chest  and  removing  the  coverings  of  the
trachea, the right lung was throughout in  a state
of red hepatization, the  left lung adherent but
otherwise  healthy.   Intense  oonge*tion  of  the
trachea throughout its whole extent, and its upper
portion, as  well as the parts  superficial to it be-
neath  tho  integument  wore  in a semi-gangre-
nous  state.  Heart normal.  Intestines and liver
and  other  abdominal organs  healthy.  All  the
organs of  generation highly  congestod, particu-
larly  the left ovary, and the  posteriar surface  of
the fundus of the uterus.  The uterus was about 3
inches long from its  fundus to the edge of the os.
Its cavity was normal in dimension and  its struc-
ture normal.* Some blood, apparently menstrual
in its character, was found in the upper part of the
vagina, and a fibrinous coat about  the siz9 of  a
small  goose-quill occupied the interior of the cavi-
ty of the  uterus.f
  The head was also examined.  There was nothing
whatever abnormal in the brain or its membranes,
excepting that the vascular points of the cerebrum,
especially on tho right side,  were more  numerous
and larger  than usual.
  The death of the  deceased  no doubt resulted
from the combined  effect oi aouto inflammation  of
tho right lung (which, in all probability resulted
from the irritation  of tho air passages  caused by
the wound  in the larynx), and vital depression as
manifested by the entire absence of any effort at
repair of tho wound.

       Signod, Charles Valance Berryaian, M.  D«
       Signed, James H. Richardson, M. D.J

   To  the  Coroner,—We  examined the parts  of
generation, and from  this examination  we  found
the hymen almost obliterated,! altho'  we  do not
think this is an invariable mark of the  absence  of
virginity.  In tho  state of congestion in which we
found the ogans,  the application of galvanic elec-
tricity would aggravate congestion,  and  was a
proceeding entirely contrary to decency and  pro-
priety.
             Signed, James H. Richardson, M.  D.
             Signed, Charles V. Berryman, M.D.
Sworn before me this
  sixth day of May,
  1868, W.Hallowell, M.D.

  By the Coroner,—If the application of galvanism
as described by Dr. Campbell in a case of arrest  of
menstruation were to be  followed  by a return  of
discharge,  would you still  consider that  it would
aggravate  the condition ?
  Answer by Dr. Richardson,—I do not think  that
 * Dr. Workman subsequently tried to make it ap-
pear that the womb was twice its proper size.
 t This is the Dysmenorrhoeal membrane to which so
much reference will be found hereafter.  It  has been
considered by most authors,  a  certain evidence  of
sterility.
 % The time when, and the probable mole  in which
this partial obliteration was effected, will be con-
sidered  hereafter, in the "Dialogue  between Dr.
Campbell  and  Mr Blank," where  the question  of
"propriety" i? also discussed. 
EVIDENCE TAKEN  AT THE  INQUEST.
IX
the fact of a sanguineous discharge coming on after
such application could be any proof that tha con-
gestion had beon relieved, on tho oontrary I think
the congestion might be aggravated.*
                  Signed, James  H. Richardsox.
  Answer by Dr. Berryman,—I am of opinion that
in a case in which active congestion of the uterine
organs exists, associated with Dysmenorrhoea—the
application of electricity to the congested  organs,
even if a partial discharge were to show itself—the
powerful stimulus^ would undoubtedly aggravate
tho hyperoemic condition of the parts.
             Signed, Charles V. Berryman, M. D.
   As to indelicacy of the  application, would it be
more so than the use of a catheter, or of the specu-
lum in uterine disease, and are not such means in
constant use  by medical men of high  standing in
the case of unmarried females ?
   By Dr.  Richardson,—I do not think  that  any
medical man of high standing, or of any  good
standing, would over think of proposing to an un-
married woman, such a proceedure as  tho intro-
duction of any instrument,  either  of catheter into
 the meatus urinarius or into the vagina,J or of spe-
 culum, except in  the most  urgent  necessity, and
 after all other available  means of relief had  been
 entirely exhausted.
                   Signed, James II. Richardson.
   I am of opinion that the catheter, or  any other
 instrument should not be introduced into the blad-
 der or vagina of any woman,  more especially into
 the parts of a virgin girl,§ unless when every other
 remedy fails.  I would further add that the spec-
 ulum  has unfortunately been much abused in tho
 hands of unprincipled practitioners.
  ,          Signed, Charles V. BerrymanTM. D.
   1 quite coincide with Drs. Richardson  and Ber-
 ryman as to  the  impropriety of using such means
 except in  cases of extreme peril.

                       Signed, D. Campbell, M.D.

    Jane  McConnachty—I  am  one  of  the  day
 nurses  in  the  Asylum,   and  have  been  here
 about seven months,  I recollect seeing the lata
 Mary  Boyd about 9 in tho  evening of the day
 Wednesday    29th, she    was   admitted.   She
 appeared very weak.  She was immediately at-
 tended to by Dr.  Workman.  I was fetched out  of
 my own bedroom to  attend her during  the first
 night of  her admission.

   * Educated physicians to whatever school of Medi-
 cine they may belong, will read  with surprise the
 strange statement that "congestion might be aggra-
 vated by a discharge."  It only shows the length to
 which a really intelligent man may be induced to
 go against his better judgment, while trying.to  throw
 discredit upon a system of Medicine to which he is
 opposed.
   f The medical witnesses have apparently no other
 idea of galvanism than stimulation.  It is  very well
 known to the public that it is  the speediest remedy
 for Neuralgia ; is  it by stimulation that it cures?
   1 This utter nonsense is copied verbatim  from the
 official report of the evidence.
   §  When Dr. Campbell's treatment was to be repre-
 sented to  the  jury as "improper" Mary Boyd was
 allowed to be, what she was in  truth, a "virgin girl."
 When it was wished to give a colourtoother charges,
 then the poor girl'e purity of conduct was  basely
 called in question.
  She was very weak, but I heard her distinctly
say that Posie (Dr. Campbell's son) was the cause
of her illness:  She said she believed  she was in
the family way to him for six weeks j that on the
14th of March* tho Dr.  (Campbell)  and  his son
took her into a room and gave her  medicine that
burnt her inside.  She said that Posie sinned and
she sinned.   She loved him so much.   She said he
would  have married her but the mother would not
let him.  I saw her  frequently from the  time  of
her  admission until  she  died.  I  was  with her
the last night of her life, and until she died.  My
impression was that she was giving me a true
statement of her case.  She  never spoke of Mr.
Caughey's preaching to me.  When Dr. Workman
spoke to her  consolingly on religious subjects she
appeared  to  be perfectly sensible and to take what
he said kindly.
   I  think that the last night she was more  com-
posed then when she first came  in.   I was present
when Dr. Campbell  was with her.  When he left
she  said,  '-For God's sake, do  not let him near
me again."   She never liked Dr. Campbell's  pre-
sence,  but always preferred Dr. J.  Workman.
                            her
                   Sd., Jane X McConnachty.
                            mark.
 Sworn before me, this
   sixth day of May, 1868.
         Wm. HALLOWELL, Coroner.

   Alice Clarke—I have been three years in the
 capacity  of  nurse in this institution.  I  first saw
 deceased,  Mary Boyd,  at  9  on  the evening of
 the 29th.   She was very  weak.   I attended to
 her during  the  night with Jane McConnachty.
 She was quieter than on the succeeding nights.
   She said  that Dr. Campbell's son went to where
 she slept, and when she woke she found him there.
 In  a while after  she  did  not  feel well, and she
 wanted him to marry her.  He seemed not to pay
 any attention to her, and she  told his father.
 The father  paid no attention, and then they took
 her into a room and gave her medicine that burnt
 the inside out of her.f When she made these state-
 ments she appeared to be sensible, and said one or
 two nights  before  her  death that she  was  not
 insane until " this  was done to her."  She never
 spoke of  Mr. Caughey during the time that I was
 nursing her.  She  appeared to bo sensible up to a
 short  time  of her death.  She appeared  to be
 raving at times but sensible at others.
                           Sd.,   Alice  Clark.
  Sworn before me, this
    sixth day of May, 1868.
         Sd.,  Wm, Hallowell,  Coroner.

    Mary  Ellen Hanxf.s—I have  been  in this
  institution  and  the University  branch  about  Zl
 years. I first saw  deceased, Mary Boyd, on Wed-
 nesday evening at 6:30 p.m.   She was  very weak,
 leaning on the arm of Dr. Campbell and the night
 nurse.  I helped to put her in bed.   I sat up with
 her the succeeding night, Thursday.  She did not

    # This is erroneously printed 4th  March in the
  report of the Telegraph.
   t  This is referred to afterwards in the  "Dialogue.'' 
X
EVIDENCE*TAKEN  AT  THE INQf'EST,
rave much during  that night.  I sat all day on
Sunday and  all that night.   She  prayed  and
said that Satan had tempted  her  to commit the
act from which she was suffering.

                         Sd., .Mary Hannts,
Sworn before  me, this
  sixth  day of .May, 1868.
        Sd.,   W. Hallowkll, M.D.,
                                Coroner.
  Mary Ann  Corbitt. — I have been  about 2^
years nurse  in this  Asylum.   I  first  saw de-
ceased  on  Thursday evening, the  30th  ult.   I
attended to her all Friday until 5:30 p.m.   All
that she stated to me was that Dr. Campboll had
given her medicine, and  that she had never been
well since.   She  said  that going to  hoar Mr.
Caughey was not tho cause of her  trouble.*  I
would not place implicit dependence on  anything
she  said respecting her illness.

                   Sd.,   Mary Ann Corbitt.
Sworn before  me, this
  sixth  day of May, lBfiS

        Sd.,   W. Hallowell, M.D.,
                               Coroner.
  Mary Ann  Galbraith.—I have  been 3 years
and  3 months in  this  institution.   Corroborates
former witness, and said  she  attributed  all her
trouble to  Dr. Campbell's  son, and no one else :
that '■' she had been ruined innocently by him, and
  * The Telegraph report erroneously prints this :
"She said that she was sorry Mr. Caughey wa.s
not the cause of her trouble."
 Dominion of Canada,   j  An  inquisition  indent-
Province  of  Ontario, i  cd taken for  Our Sor-
   City of Toronto.     j  ereign Lady the Queen,
       To Wit :        j  at tho Provincial Luna-
tic  Asylum,  situate  on  Queen Street, Toronto,
County Of York, on the fifth and sixth days of
May, in the  thirty-first year of  the reign of  Our
Sovereign Lady the Queen, before William Hal-
lowell,  M.D., one of the Coroner'? of our said Lady
the Queen, for the said City, on view of the body
of Mary Boyd, then and there lying dead upon the
oaths of John  Howe, (Foreman) George Hender-
son, William Wright, Robert Peter, Charles Main-
price, DanianMcFee, Luke Hozack, John Kitchen,
William Stibbs, W. Woods, John Matthew, Robert
Smith,Thorns Waldie, good and  lawful  men of
the said City, duly chosen, and who being then
and there duly sworn and charged to enquire fer
our said La.dy  the Queen, when, how, and by what
means said Mary Boyd came to her death, do upon
their oaths  say, that said Mary Boyd came to her
death by the infliction of a  certain wound  across
her throat  with  her own hand, by  means of  a
earving knife.  Verdict Felo <!**>; while laboring
under temporary insanity.   In witness whereof, as
well  the said Coroner, as the Jurors  aforesaid
hereunto subscribed their hands and seals  on the
day and year last above written.
 God knew it. '    When she made this statement I
 was satisfied sho was saying what was correct, and
 that her mind was  clear at the time.  I nevet
 hoard her  say anything of Mr. Caughey  or his
 preaching.

                   Sd.,  Mary  A.  Galbraith.
 Sworn before me, this
  sixth  day of May, 1868.
        Sd.,   W. Hallowkll,  M.D.,
                                Coroner.

  Sarah Elliott.—I have been .'!] years in this
 establishment.    I assisted  deceased, Mary  Boyd,
 up stairs with Dr.  Campbell.    In  answer to my
 question, whether Dr. Campbell's family had been
 kind to her, she said "it was false."  She wanted
 to soe Dr. Campbell's son, that she loved him and
 would die for  him.   She appeared tolerably sen-
 sible when I saw her.
                     Sd.,  Sarah J,  Elliott.
Sworn b afore mo, this
  sixth day of  May,  1868.
        Sd.,   W. Hallowkll, M.D,,
                                Coroner.
  Mary Ann Parkes.—I am  matron of the P. L.
 Asylum, and have been for  14 years.   I  met Dr.
 Campbell at the  bottom of the stairs on tho 20th
ult, when  deceased  was admitted.   The rest of
the  evidence is  merely corroborative  of former
witnesses.
                        Sd.,  M. A.  Paskks.
Sworn before inr.. this
  .sixth clay of May,  1868.
        Sd-,  W. Hallowkll, M.D.,
                                Coroner.
Signed,  William Hallowell, M.D., Coroner.  [LS.]
   "    John Howe, Foreman,               "
   "    George Henderson,                  "
   "    William Wright,                    "
   "    Robert Peter,                       "
   "    Charles Mainpricc,                  "
   "    Duncan McPhee,                    "
   "    Luke Hozack,                       "
   "    John Kitson,                        "
        William J. Stibbs,
   "    AVilliam Woods,                     "
   "    John Matthew,                      "
   "    Robert Smith,                       "
   "    Thomas Waldie.                    "

  The jury empannelled in the case of  Mary Boyd
cannot part without  recording their sense of the
highly improper  medical  treatment pursued  by
Dr. Campbell towards  the said  deceased  Mary
Boyd.  This action upon their part is  based upon
the evidence of high medical  authority,  adduced
in the course of a long and painful investigation
of a very melancholy case of suicide before Coroner
Hallowell.
                 Signed, John  Howe, Foreman,
                        On behalf of the jury.
Provincial Lunatic Asylum,
   Toronto, 6th  May, 1868. 
ARTICLE  FROM  "TELEGRAPH.
   It has been found necessity to reprint
the following editorial article from the
Telegraph,  to  make  intelligible  what
will be found  hereafter :—
                 MARY BOYD.
  The  facts in  this  lamentable  case  have
already  been made   public  through   these
columns.   The girl, Mary Boyd, when a servant
with Dr. Campbell, became insane, and  while
in that condition cut her throat with a  knife.
She  was  removed to the  Lunatic  Asylum,
where she died from the effects of the wound.
She  was admitted as a  patient suffering from
religious  insanity.  But it is not all certain,
from  the  evidenee given on the inquest, that
religious excitement was the cause of her aber-
ration ."■  Dr. Workman found her fearfully dis-
turbed under the conviction that she was  going
to the flames  of hell.  To the nurses, who
Avere  constantly with her—for they never left
her for a moment-—she said less of religion and
more of the sin of forbidden love, in which she
constantly repeated she had  indulged with a
son  of Dr. Campbell.  Of the nurses, the ma-
jority  put faith  in her story ;  but Dr. Work-
man's experience teaches  him that no impor-
tance  can be attached  to  the unsupported
statements of the insane.  We  are naturally
led to  ask whether these statements of hers
received any  corroboration from ascertained
facts  or circumstances.  Dr. Campbell  admit-
ted to Dr.  Workman  that, at  the commence-
ment of the difficulty, she alleged an  illicit
connection with  his  son.t  The statement he
chose to construe into a  symptom of insanity.
It might  have  been so ; but this assumption
certainly does not resolve the difficulty  which
arises  out of such  a statement.  There was
one fact which might have been a corroboration
of her statement.  Wo do not say that it was,
but  that it may have been : and it  cannot  be
questionable that this possibility ought not to
have been ignored.  The ascertained derange-
ment of her female condition might have been
a consequence of what she stated to Dr. Camp-
bell regarding his son ; and we think the doc-
tor was bound to have regard to this possibili-
ty.  If such a  cause of the irregularity were
possible—and this cannot be denied % he was
not justified in treating it as entitled to no sort
of consideration.
   It is in this view of the matter that the ver-
dict of the coiner's jury becomes intelligible.
  * It was never stated by Dr. Campbell that reli-
gion was the came of her insanity.
  t This is incorrect.  She stated that she had been
violated, but never that she had carried on any "illicit
intercourse."
  % Tho whole of this article is based on an assump-
tion by the writer,  which is hereafter  shown to be
incorrect, that a suppression of the menses existed.
They give it as their opinion that the medical
treatment of the girl was  highly improper.
That conclusion was founded upon highly re-
spectable  medical  evidence.   Dr.  Berryman
gave it as his opinion that  the application of
galvanic electricity was entirely " contrary to
decency and propriety."*  Might it not, let us
ask, be even criminal ? If the irregularity
had arisen  from a cause which there was no
warrant for assuming to be improbable,! and if
it had been removed by this means the charac-
ter  of the  treatment could not  be qualified,
even by the comparatively mild terms used by
Dr. Berryman.   There is evidently  something
more than a question of decency and propriety
and their opposites.
  On one  point, Dr. Campbell's evidence  is
very remarkable.  He used remedies to remove
irregularity, and there was an improvement in
this particular of the girl's  condition ; but he
could not say whether that  improvement was
a consequence of these remedies, or whether it
preceded or followed  their administration. J
This is a very strange admission.  This con-
fusion of times and alleged want of observation
of the results of applied remedies—so called—
would argue,  if nothing else, a  negligence
which borders on culpable.  But it  is  difficult
to believe this is the true  explanation.  Dr.
Campbell must have felt that the  efficacy of
his remedies,  in this particular, might have
been the  worst  thing  that could  happen.
We are assuming nothing  to his  prejudice;
but it is very certain that if the girl's statement
regarding herself and his son could  have awa-
kened in his mind the least suspicion of its pos-
sible correctness,!! he would have  had a motive
to pursue the  treatment which  the medical
witnesses and the jury hare so pointedly con-
demned.  He  ought, under circumstances of
such great delicacy in every respect, to have
abstained from doing what might bear the ap-
pearance of a possible wrong.  In this respect
he  altogether failed;  and he must not complain
if, under the circumstances, the public be found
endorsing the censure of the coroner's jury.

  *  Dr. Berryman kindly suggested bleeding from the
arm as a better remedy for dysmenorrhoea!
  t It will be shown not only that it was improbable,
but impossible.
 tThe editor must have very carelessly read the evi-
dence even as published in his own paper, or he would
have seen that it  is  reported that Dr. Campbell said
" I  used some remedies with a view of improving her
female  condition, after which  she was better;"
the exact words which Dr. Campbell added at the In-
quest were  " I cannot  say whether  on  account of
these remedies, or merely after them ; Post hoc not
being invariably  propter hoc."   Nor should  any
medical man ever venture to speak more confidently
of the result of his remedies.
  II  It did not awaken in Dr.  Campbell's mind tho
slightest suspicion.  The reason of this will be seen
hereafter- 
 
MARY    BOYD.
Facts Respecting her  Death and the  Inquest  held at  the  Lunatic
                              Asylum  Toronto.
   Mary  Boyd,  whose  melancholy end
forms  the  subject of  the  following brief
narrative,  was  born  in Lower Canada  of
Irish  parents,   who  removed to  Upper
Canada about three  years ago, and now
reside in the Township of Eldon,  County
of Victoria. She went to live in Dr. Camp-
bell's family, 108  Bay-street,  Toronto, on
the  1st January last.
   She  was nineteen  years of age,  rather
tall, of engaging appearance, intelligent, and
well educated for her position in life, modest
and retiring in manner, well behaved, quiet,
mild and gentle in  disposition—attentive to
her household duties.   She was a member
of the Piesbytenan Church, which, as well
as the  Sunday  School,  she attended regu-
larly. She  seemed to be of a religious turn
of mind.    It may be added  that  she was
much liked by the  family.
   Her health was uniformly good, except at
certain periods.
   About the middle  of April  a change was
noticed  in  her demeanour.   She became
restless  and  unsettled —  spoke strangely
about religious subjects, dwelling with great
pertinacity  upon  something she imagined
that the Rev.  Mr. Caughey   had  said  to
her, or which, at all events, she specially ap-
plied to herself,  as to repentance—hell-fire
—the burning of  the world, &c.
   Not  long after  this, she one  morning
startled Mrs. Campbell with a  very strange
and most improbable declaration, the parti
culars of which will appear in  Dr. Camp-
bell's letter to the Toronto Daily Telegraph
of the 13th instant, which is given hereafter.
  Her mind continued to become more and
more  unsettled from day  to  day, and she
began  to  speak  so much  about its being
" better to be dead than to be alive,''  that
fears being entertained that she might make
away  with herself, Dr. Campbell, on the
morning  of 27th  April, aft*r consultation
with his medical friends, determined to send
her to the Lunatic  Asylum, and applied the
same day for the papers necessary to obtain
her admissiou  into  it as a  patient.
  On  that same afternoon, about 4 o'clock
she  made  an  attempt  at   suicide,  by
trying  to drown herself in the well, which,
though  nearly forty  feet deep,  was for-
tunately full up to  the brim, and this saved
the girl's life for  the  time, as her clothes
prevented her  from sinking.   She was dis-
covered by the noise and the  splashing she
was  making,  and  rescued by  the servant
boy, who happened  to  be in an adjoining
room.   When asked  why she had  done
this, she said  she  was  convinced  that the
world was about to be  burnt up,  and that
drowning was an easier death than burning!
  Her father, Thomas  Boyd, of the  town-
ship of Eldon, county Victoria, was at once
sent for, but did not arrive in Toronto until
late  on Saturday  evening, 2nd May ; he 
<?
went up to the  Asylum on Sunday morn-
ing, but he never was  allowed  to  see bis
daughter until after her death !
  It took  nearly  the whole of Tuesday,
29th,  to prepare the  certificates required.
She was pretty quiet during that day, and
as she  felt perfectly well  in body, she was
allowed to go on with her household work
as usual, with a view to  divest  her mind
from the vexing thoughts that harassed her.
  She   was  constantly  watched  by some
member of the family,  and was  made  to
sleep that night,  as she had been  the night
before,  in the same room with one of Dr.
Campbell's daughters.
  During the night of Monday she became
greatly  excited.  Got  out of bed  and broke
a large  mirror into pieces.
  On "Wednesday, 30th April, she spent  a
great part of the forenoon in bed  in her
own room.   About 5  o'clock  in  the after-
noon, Dr. Campbell sent Mrs. Campbell to
tell her to get ready to go to the Asylum.
It bad been  distinctly told her where  she
was going, and she readily assented to it, as
she said she was sorry that she was giving
Dr. Campbell's family so much trouble, and
would gladly go any where that was thought
best for her.   When Mrs.  Campbell went
to Mary's room,  she was horror-stricken by
seeing   her sitting on  a trunk, nearly un-
dressed, sawing at her throat with  an  old
blunt table-knife without  a handle !  This
knife was at  once wrested from  her hand,
but she rushed past Mrs. Campbell into the
kitchen, which  adjoined  her room, and
snatching up another very sharp table-knife,
she  cut  her throat  completely  across,
severing the windpipe between the thyroid
and cricoid cartilages.   Dr. Campbell, who
fortunately happened  to  be  in  the house,
hearing  screams, ran down  at once, and
found that she had staggered  back into her
room,  on the floor of  which she writhed
about in great agony, the blood from the
wound trickling  down  the windpipe  and
nearly choking her, she showed  moreover
great  mental excitement at the time, ob-
stinately  resisting all attempts to assist her,
and trying to tear the wound open with her
fingers !
  Dr. Lizars, whose office was near at hand,
was sent for, he  came at once, and  with
Dr. Campbell, dressed the wound.   None of
the important bloodvessels  of the neck being
injured, it was confidently hoped that she
would recover, as  far at least as the wound
was concerned.  She was removed in a cab
to the Asylum, a  little over two miles, Dr.
Campbell and his son accompanying her, and
supporting her during the  passage.
  She was perfectly quiet, both on the way
and on her arrival at the  Asylum—mani-
fested no reluctanc to going to the bed that
had been prepared for her, and submitted
readily to the application of a leather appara-
tus to keep her hands confined,  and prevent
her tearing the stitches from  the wound in
her throat.  Two nurses were placed at her
bedside to watch  her.
  On the morning of the second day (Friday,
1st May)  the  larynx, or that porfcioiv-ef the
throat immediately above the wound, had
swollen  so much that  she could scarcely
breathe, a.nd her face became livid from im-
perfect oxygenation of the blood. The  remo-
val  of some of the stitches enabled her to
breathe more freely,but she was never after-
wards able to speak without the attendant
first closing the aperture thus made, and as
her h;:nus  were  confined, she could not do
this for herself.
   Inflammation of the membrane lining the
windpipe, and of  the right lung then set in
—the wound in tho throat did badly, showing
no signs whatever of healing—very offensive
matter  was discharged from it—she sank 
3
rapidly, and died about  3 o'clock on the
morning of Tuesday, the 5th May.
  An inquest was held at the Asylum on the
evening of 5th May, by Coroner Hallowell,
and continued all the  next day.  A post
mortem examination of the body was made
in the forenoon of 6th  inst., by Drs. Rich-
ardson and Berryman.   Dr. Campbell was
present, but  took  no part beyond a  close
inspection of  what was laid  bare  by the
incisions.   His  letter  given  below, will
shew the result of the  examination.
  Several witnesses, such as  Dr. Lizars,
Dr. Adams,  and  Dr.  Campbell's servant
boy, who could have  thrown  some  light
upon the cause of the girl's death—the only
matter  into  which the jury  were met to
inquire—were not called, but in their stead
a number of  the nurses  were examined
after all the  medical witnesses had  left
the  Asylum !
  The verdict  of the  jury  was —" That
the  said Mary Boyd  came  to  her  death
by the infliction of a certain  wound across
her throat, with her own hand, by means
of a  carving kuife;   verdict felo  de se,
while  laboring under temporary insanity."
  After rendering their verdict the foreman
handed a document, of which the following
is a copy, to the coroner :—"#The jury em-
panelled in the case of Mary Boyd  cannot
part without recording their sense of the
highly improper medical  treatment pursued
by Dr. Campbell towards the said deceased
Mary Boyd.  This action upon their part
is based upon the  evidence of high medical
authority adduced in the course of a long
and painful investigation of a very  melan-
choly  case of suicide before  Coroner  Hal-
lowell.  (Signed,) John Howe, foreman, on
behalf, of the jury.   Provincial Lunatic
Asylum, Toronto, May 6, 1868."—Leader
May 7.
 The opinions of the Toronto Press on the
     verdict of the jury will  be  gathered
     from  the following editorial which
     appeared in the Globe of 9th May :—

   " Very absurd and silly was the conduct
 of  the Coroner's jury  on the case of the
 young woman who  died in  the  Lunatic
 Asylum from wounds inflicted on her throat
 by herself, in condemning, at the instiga-
 tion  of two bitterly prejudiced old school
 doctors, the treatment of the young woman's
 case, by so able and experienced a physician
 as Dr. Campbell.  The  use of the  galvanic
 battery had nothing to do with the girl's
 death, which was  the  sole matter for the
jury to deal with, and the idea of a Coroner's
jury, picked in haste off the commons, at-
 tempting to decide between contending Doc-
 tors is perfectly  absurd.  What could they
 know of the use of the galvanic battery, and
 who but a born fool would pronounce an
 opinion on one medical man, on the faith of
 statements made  by others of a  rival school ?
 Dr. Campbell used all his skill on behalf of
 the poor girl, and the criticism of his treat-
 ment was  simply the result of  spiteful feel-
 ing."— Globe, May 9.
  " The Coroner's jury which enquired into
the  cause of the  death of Mary Boyd, a
former servant of Dr.  Campbell's, went out
of their way to declare that the Doctor's
treatment of the girl was " highly improper."
We hardly know whom to blame most, the
medical men who put  their heads together
to endeavor to injure a successful rival,  or
the members of the jury  who, in the pro-
fundity of their wisdom and knowledge, had
the impertinence to pass  censure  upon Dr.
Campbell's treatment.  It is not very much
to the credit of the " high medical" gentle-
men who primed the jury that, because Dr.
Campbell happens to be a practitioner of a
different school from themselves, they should
by such petty artifices seek to injure him in
the  eyes of the public.   There is probably
more excuse for the  jury,  and  we  think
that, under  the circumstances, the coroner
would  not  have  been  overstepping the
bounds of duty had he reminded  the mem- 
4
bers of that august body that it was no part
of their  business to pass judgment upon
medical  treatment  regarding  which  they
were  themselves entirely  ignorant.   AVc
publish   to-day a letter  from  Dr.  Adams
which fully  justifies Dr. Campbell's treat-
ment."—Leader, May 8.
Dr. ADAMS'  LETTER.
        To the Editor of the Leader.
  Sir,—I see that the Coroner's jury  at
the  inquest held yesterday,  at the Asylum,
on Mary Boyd, in addition to their verdict
have stated, on what they  are pleased  to
term " high medical authority," that Dr.
Campbell's medical  treatment  of the  de-
ceased  was  " highly  improper."    I  feel
bound to state, that I was called on by Dr.
Campbell  to  aid him in  the treatment  of
this unfortunate young woman ;  that I have
full knowledge of all the remedial measures
that were used, and  that  Dr. Campbell's
treatment of this patient was, iu my opinion,
perfectly judicious, and that the manner in
which  he employed galvanism  in this case,
is recommended and used  by far  higher
medical authorities  than those who have
presumed to  censure it, and those too  not
belonging to our School of Medicine  but to
their own.
                      J. ADAMS, M.  D.
    54 Bay Street,
 Toronto, May 8,1868.



FIRST LETTER OP DR. CAMPBELL TO
        " DAILY  TELEGRAPH."
       (Editor Daily  Telegraph.)
  Sir,—Euough,  and most  people  will
probably think, far more than enough, has
already been given to the public on this pain-
ful and delicate topic I have hitherto refrain-
ed from iuterfering,not thinking myself called
upon at this late period of my career, to de-
fend my professional reputation from the cri-
ticism of  a  eoroner's jury.
  In the portion of the  evidence given  at
the  inquest which was held on the body of
Mary Boyd at the Lunatic, Asylumon  5th
and 6th inst., which you published  in your
paper on Saturday the 9th, there is a charge
recorded against my son, a young man now
preparing himself 1'or the medical  profes-
sion, which, if it could be believed, might
interfere with his  success in life.  These
charges I know to be  untrue ;  the medical
men°who testified  at  the  inquest  knew
them to be untrue ;  the jury  knew them
to be untrue ;  the coroner when  he wrote
them  down   and  handed  them   to  you
to  publish,  knew   them  to  be   untrue!
And your article of yesterday now makes a
farther and most calumnious charge against
myself,  of having used  improper  msansto
bring on menstruation in a case of Amenor-
rhea, where you say there was a possibility
of pregnancy existing.
  Dr. Workman stated in his evidence,  that
when applying for the admission  of  this
patient into the Asylum, and before she had
wounded herself,  and when she was  likely
to  be  an  inmate  of that institution  for
a considerable time, " Dr.  Campbell in-
" formed  him that she had  been  suffering
" from   suppression  of the menses,  and
" that   he, (Dr.  Campbell,)  considered  it
" of great importance to restore the func-
" tion."   At the  time when Dr. Workman
gave this evidence, nothing had come up,nor
did I ever imagine that anything could likely
have come up, to render it necessary for me
to point out to the coroner that Dr. Work-
had slightly misunderstood me ;  that what I
really did say to him was :  " she suffers from
" menstrual difficulty, and I wish to cali your
"attention particularly to the next menstrual
" period, as it will most likely be attended by
"an aggravation of her mental troubles."
At the  same  time I  suggested to  him  the
use of galvanism in a certain manner which
I described to him, as a means of facilitating
the menstruation,  and  told  him  that  I
thought it had done so at the period she
was just getting over.
   The   pointing  out  to  the  jury  the
difference between  Amenorrhcea,  (which
means  suppression  of  the menstrual dis-
charge)  and  Dysmenorrhea,  (paiaful  or 
5
difficult menstruation,) seemed to be totally
irrelevant to  the matter, when I gave  my
evidence, but  it now turns out  to have
been  all  important.   I  conceived  that
the jury were there to enquire into the cause
of the death  of the deceased, and  nothing
else ;  and that they had no business what-
ever  with  the   details  of her  female  ail-
ments.
   Whatever  "  confusion of times " there
may have been  in your  mind,  there  was
none  in mine, as to whether the galvanism,
the use of which has been so much called in
question, had been employed before or after
the last periodical  discharge appeared.   I
distinctly stated at the inquest that it was
used  after it had once  appeared, but had
became again interrupted ; all your  insinua-
tions  as to any intent on  my part  to use it
i jjproperly, consequently  fall to the ground.
   It  seems to surprise you that  I   should
refuse to swear  that the   discharge which
followed tlie galvanism  was necessarily  the
result of that remedial  agent.   It  would
be  well  for  medical men if  they were
always equally  cautious in attributing  the
recovery of  their  patients  to the remedies
which  they  may   happen to  have used
previous to  that  recovery.   In  this case
all that I can say is, that the application of
galvanism was followed by a moderation of
the symptoms of Erotomania,  but by an ap-
parent  increase  of  the  manifestations  of
Religious excitement.  But  what  would
be said if I  attributed this aggravation of
the religious excitement to the galvanism ?
What I told the coroner was, that it by  no
means followed  that because  an improve-
ment, or  an aggravation  of  the   disease
was  "2>ost  hoc,"  that  it was  necessarily
"propter hoc."  Does this imply any such
" negligence  as  borders  on the  culpable,"
as you charge me with, because 1 expressed
this most reasonable doubt ?
   It  is  well known that  there was  a post
mortem examination of the body, at which I
was present, and at which both Dr. Lizars,
who had given me  the benefit of his well-
known surgical skill in dressing the wound-
ed throat; and Dr.  Adams who had through-
out consulted with me on the medical treat-
ment  of the case, and who knew all that  the
patient had fancied about herself, should
also have been notified to be present.
   The inspection of the wombat the  post
mortem examination  completely  disproved
the delusion which  had taken possession of
the poor girl's crazed  mind  as to her preg-
nancy.  All  the  generative  organs,  from
the ovaries downwards, were in a very re-
markable state of vascular excitement and
congestion—the  ovaries  especially.    The
womb  contained only  the  plastic  shreds of
lymph or fibriue,  common  in Dysmenor-
rheca;  but  not   the   slightest  indication
that pregnancy  existed either at the  time
of  her death, or  that  it ever had  exist-
ed  at  any former period /   The  mem-
brane  above alluded  to,  showed clearly
that a  Dysmenorrhea d   condition   must
have existed at her last period, and  it fol-
lowed  of  course   that the  idea of preg-
nancy having existed  at the same time was
absurd.   These  points were  all  distinctly
sworn to by the  medical  witnesses !  It is
painful to  me  to  have  to  obtrude  such
matters on  the public.  I know  that the
pages of a  medical journal  would be the
proper  place  to  discuss  the   pathological
phenomena of such a  peculiar  case, but
such journals have a very limited  circu-
lation,  and you have left  me  no alternative
but to  speak out   plainly  to   the  general
public  iu the  same  paper   where I was
attacked, and  where  the  matter was  first
made known to them.
   Erotomania,  of  which this was a  well
marked mstince, is a  condition differing in
a great many respects from Nymphomania,
with which it has sometimes been confound-
ed, it is compatible, as this sad case showed,
with perfect modesty of demeanor and pro-
priety  of conduct, on  the  other hand, it
gives  rise  to  the  strangest hallucinations,
the unfortunate sufferers will give the most
minute and circumstantial details of scenes
shown  by subsequent  investigation to  have
been wholly imaginary !
   Mary Boyd never stated to me, nor  to my
wife, nor, I am quite  sure, to  any one else,
that she had  had, as you allege, illicit  inter-
course with my son.  I am as positive as it
is possible for me to be on a point, Which no
medical jurist  will  undertake in certain 
6
conditions absolutely to decide;   that  she
never had had any such, either with my son
or with any other man, but that she died
as she had lived, a spotless  virgin !   What
she told my  wile  was: not  that  she had
carried on illicit  connexion with my son,
but that  she had been  violated by him,
a  month previous to  the  time  at  which
she  told  the  story!    When  asked  at
what hour  of  the  day  it  had   occurred,
she  said  that   it  was  at night  during
her sleep,—that she had not seen him,  but
felt  convinced  on awaking that  he must
have been there, from the condition in which
she  found  herself!   She  said,  moreover,
that although he hid never been  with  her
but that  time, she was  sure  that she  was
pregnant by him !  as  she  felt  that  her
monthly  illness was  trying to come on,  but
did not come on '' as it should do." It was at
this time  that she first toid my  wife that
she loved my son very  much !   In an hour
or two after this, she came  to my wife  and
said that she "was all  right," that the ex-
pected discharge had  appeared, and  that
she was convinced that she  must have been
mistaken about  my son having  ever been
near her  ; and a subsequent examination of
her person convinced me of the impossibility
of her story being true.
   For some days previous to all this, she
had been talking very strangely about the
end of the world being immediately  about
to happen ;  about the  Rev. Mr. Caughey,
the Revivalist,  whose  church she attended
occasionally  in  the  evenings,  having very
greatly alarmed her about hell-fire ; thinking
that lie had  actually addressed  himself to
her specially as being about to be burnt up
in it!
   She had two predominating ideas about
which  alone she  would talk;  one was  her
love for  my son, a lad two years younger
than herself, and she was only nineteen ; the
other was the burning up of the world.  But
she never, in my hearing, nor in that of any
member of my family,  ever joined the two
subjects together, as cause and effect, which
the nurses of the Asylum,  in reporting her
ravings, have apparently done.  Mary Boyd
was continually  importuning my wife to
allow my son to marry her, as she  " could
not live  icithout him /"   He,  I am  quite
certain, both from his own assurances, and
from  my  personal observation,  did not  in
any  way  encourage   her  infatuation,  but
felt perfectly  indifferent to her.
   If the coroner, as he ought to have done,
had taken  the evidence of my servant boy,
who  rescued  deceased  from  the well,  on
her first attempt  at  suicide,  and whom,
although brought by me to  the  inquest for
that  purpose, the coroner  refused  to  ex-
amine,  it  would  have been  seen clearly
that, from the situation of the girl's  room,
it was  next to an  impossibility for my sou
to have had  access to it during the night,
without  this  boy's knowledge,  as he slept
close to the very door of the room in ques-
tion.
   That  the  deceased was  insane, in  the
fullest sense of the  term,  is  beyond all
doubt.  That her insanity was continuous,
however calm  she  might have appeared at
times,  is  also beyond all doubt.  If  the
statements of  the nurses as to her calmness
and intelligence were correct, why, in  the
name  of humanity, was her poor old father,
whom  I had sent for,  and who had  come
from  a great  distance to attend upon  his
dying  daughter, never allowed even to see
her ?   Why   did  the authorities of the
Asylum consider it impossible to relax  for
one instant  the  pinioning  apparatus  by
which  she was restrained, up to the very
moment  of her death ?   1  don't  at all
blame the Asylum Superintendent for keep-
ing on this  restraint,  but could it  have
been necessary,  with two powerful  nurses
constantly  at her bedside, had she been
as collected  as  they  describe  her to have
been  when she made  the statements they
allege her to have  made ?
   And even if Mary Boyd  had been ever
so sane, such hearsay reports are not  evi-
dence, and the coroner had no right what-
ever to receive them  as  such, nor to listen
to them at all—far less to publish them.
   I leave it to  the  Superintendent of the
Asylum to deal as he thinks fit  with those
nurses, who, as their  own admissions show,
instead of carrying out the orders which he
gave, or, at all events, ought to have given;
by enforcing silence., by  which  alone the 
7
injured throat could have been kept at rest,
and allowed to heal, worried their unhappy
and helpless charge with impertinent ques-
tions (see Sarah Elliott's evidence)  to gra-
tify their prurient curiosity.
  The full extent of this fiendish cruelty on
their part, will not be understood, until it is
explained, that for several days preceding her
death, it was  altogether impossible for the
poor suffering girl to utter a word, without
her attendants first closing up the aperture
in her throat through  which she breathed !
and  the  post  mortem  showed that though
the patient survived  the injury nearly  a
week, not  the slightest progress towards
repair had  taken  place  in the  wound.
This word " wound '  you have erroneously
printed " womb" in  the  partial report of
the evidence given  in your  paper of Satur-
day, giving a  totally different meaning to
the statement and leading people to imagine
that the ' womb1 might possibly have received
some  injury, from which it had not  recov-
ered, whereas, the medical evidence showed,
that,  however,  inflamed  or congested it
might be,  that  it  had  never received  any
injury at any time.
   What,  however,  are we  to  think  of  a
coroner  like  Dr.  Hallowell  who,  with
all the medical testimony before him,  dis-
pelling, as it did, the  deceased's  hallucina-
tions as to her pregnancy (remember that
this testimony  was  not given in the order
in which you  printed  it,  but before that
of the  nurses) notes  down  as evidence,
records officially, aud hands to a city paper
to publish, the ravings of a poor manacled
maniac, making serious charges against one
whom  he was  pleased  to tell his jury he
looked upon as his oldest friend in Toronto !
while  all the while he well knew  that it
was a mere delusion that he was recording ?
  Was it any part of Dr. Hallowell's duty
as a  coroner, to defame the memory of an
innocent,  virtuous  girl;   to  harrow  the
feelings  of her  i'ather,  a most  respect-
able  farmer, who  was  pres nt during  the
whole of the dismal investigation—to slan-
der  my   son,  whose   future  professional
career he might blast by those imputations,
and outrage public  decency by  publishing
these  indelicate details, when it had been
already fully proved to him and to his jury
that the idea on which they were based had
no existence in reality ?
   Moreover,  what right had this  coroner
to permit  his jury to  tack  on  to their
verdict a most absurd and injurious com-
ment upon  my medical  treatment  of  the
deceased,  when,   whatever  the merits  or
the demerits  of that treatment may have
been, it could have  had no  possible  con-
nexion with  the  fatal result of the case,
and  that  was all that the jury had any
business to deal with ?
   Dr.  Hallowell's  conduct throughout this
enquiry, I am inclined to attribute more to
incapacity, and to a total ignorance of what
really  constitutes   evidence,  than   to  any
actual  malignity  towards  myself,  whom
he allowed his jury improperly to censure ;
or towards the unfortunate deceased, whose
good name he has tried to tarnish.   There-
fore  I  freely forgive him, and I hope that
the poor girl's relatives may  be  induced
to forgive  him too for the  slanders he has
propagated and the  misery that he has occa-
sioned  them.
   The fragmentary report which you pub-
lished  of the evidence given at the inquest,
and  the  total  change you were pleased to
make in the  order  in  which  that  evidence
was  given,  may  lead  people  to  wonder
why  the jury asked  me  no questions,
and why I said nothing,  as to the condition
in   which   deceased  imagined  she was.
When  the Coroner  allowed his jury to  lis-
ten to  matters totally foreign to the enquiry
that  they  were  called  upon  to  make,
which  was, as  I have already said, " how the
deceased  had  come by  her  death," and
nothing  else,  then  it  became clearly  his
duty to recall me,  and  ask  me to  tell  the
jury what I could, upon the new point thus
raised  by  the so  called evidence  of  the
nurses. I knew nothing whatever of these
strange charges  raised  against  me  and
against my  son,  until  I read them  in
your paper of Saturday last! 
8
  Throughout the whole of this melancholy
case, however distressing  tho  disclosure of
such delicate matters might  be to the feel-
ings of my  family, I  have felt it to  be
my duty to  make  no  concealment  of any
important  facts from  those  who  had  a
right to be made  acquainted with them,
or the telling of which  could aid the poor
sufferer, by enabling  those  physicians who
were  to prescribe  for her,  to do so with
full  knowledge  of  her  condition.    Thus,
before she  had been taken to the Asylum,
and  even  before she had wounded  herself,
I told the  whole  of her  sad  story  to Dr.
Workman,  as by that means alone could he
have been able to treat her case properly, as
far  as the insanity  was concerned, and this
he stated at  the inquest.   If Dr.  Adams
had been  called upon  to  give evidence at
the inquest,  as  he should  have been,  he
would in  like  manner  have testified that
before asking him to help me to, prescribe
for  her, I  had informed  him fully of the
hallucination as to my  son  that had taken
possession of ker mind.   The  letter which
he  kindly  wrote to the  Leader  on  the 7th
inst., is  conclusive on this  point.   I sent
for the Rev. George Young,  at the poor
girl's request,  to  endeavor  to  sooth her
mind with the  consolations  of religion,
would any man, if his conscience told him
that  there  was,  in his dealings with the
young woman,  any mystery or impropriety
that required to be concealed,  have  asked a
clergyman, as I  did,  to sit with her alone
and hear all her self-accusations,  and those
that   she  might have  to  bring  against
himself?
  I feel assured that  a  calm consideration
of all the points which I have here faith-
fully, and  I trust clearly, set  forth, will
remove  any  possible unfavorable  impres-
sion that your partial  report of the evidence
and  your most unwarrantable  comments
thereupon may  have created, and convince
the public  that, in  all my  dealings with
poor  Mary Boyd. I have acted towards her,
both  in my capacity as  her physician, and
as the head of  the household of which she
was a member,  faithfully, uprightly, and  to
the very  best  of ability,  and that  I could
not have done  more  for her had she been
my own daughter.
  In all the distress that this sad calamity
has brought upon my  family, we have the
gratifying consciousness that both   myself
and  my wife have  done our  duty honestly
and  kindly  to  one who,   while  she lived
with us, was a most faithful servant, whose
loss we deplore, and  whose sad  fate, and
the sufferings which she endured before her
death, have  deeply afflicted us all.
  In spite of the wild delusions  that took
possession of her mind, and vexed her latter
days, we shall  always think of poor Mary
Boyd  as  a  most   virtuous, modest,  and
exemplary young woman.
                D. CAMPBELL, M. D.
     108 Bay Street,
Toronto, May 13th, 1868. 
9
   A few days after  the  publication of
the preceding letter of  Dr. Campbell,
the following communication appeared
in the Telegraph  from Dr.  Workman,
Superintendent of the Provincial Lu-
natic  Asylum.

     LETTER  FROM DR. WORKMAN.
   Editor Daily Telegraph.—Sir—The communi-
cation  of Dr. Campbell, published in your issue
of the  14th inst., has imposed on me the un-
pleasant necessity of requesting space in your
columns for a few  observations on the mourn-
ful case of the  late Mary Boyd, which I would
gladly have  been spared from  presenting to
your readers ; but  the ill-advised and untruth-
ful statements of your correspondent, together
with my conviction of  official public respon-
sibility, and a  solemn regard to the interests
of humanity and truth, appear to me to  render
it imperative that I should  not pass  over in
silence the numerous untrue  assertions,  and
gross  exaggerations of fact,  involved  in  his
communication.
   Before,  however, entering on this part of my
unpleasant duty, permit me to  observe,  for the
more correct guidance of your readers, that Dr.
Campbell has appropriately remarked that  the
order  in  which the testimony of the various
witnesses before  the  coroner's inquest  was
printed, in your report of the proceedings, was
not that in which if took place.   Mrs. Camp-
bell was the first witness examined, and  Dr.
Campbell's testimony was taken next.   Their
evidence  closed  the proceedings of the first
day.   My evidence  was the  first taken  on the
second day; then followed that of the two
medical gentlemen  who made the  post-mortem
 examination, and  after theirs the evidence of
the nurses and the matron.
   It is by no means  unimportant that this
 relation in point  of time be kept in view, for
 otherwise it cannot but  appear to the reader
 unaccountable,  that Dr.  Campbell,  in his
 evidence, said  not a word on several important
 facts stated in  my evidence relating to himself
 and his treatment of Mary Boyd, but especially
 that portion of it which, in  his  conversations
 with me,  and in  his discussions  before the in-
 quest  on  the  second  day,  with the medical
 witnesses, he certainly endeavoured to repre-
 sent as the  most important of all—I mean his
 employment of the  galvanic apparatus, with a
 view,  as he stated, to a  restoration of the men-
 strual discharge.
   I would also observe that, whether through
 mistakes in the notes of the coroner, errors in
 the transcription  of them by your reporter, or
 by  the compositors in setting the type, a few
 other  corrections are called for, but I shall not
 trespass on your valuable space with the whole
of them.  In my  answers to the foreman of
the jury,  in relation to  the room in which
Mary  Boyd  was kept, for the first two nights
after admission, the words of your report might
lead to doubt as to whether this room was, or
was not heated in the same manner as the adja-
cent rooms.  My statement was.  "Itis&c,
In the evidence of Jane McConachty,  the  4th
of March is given instead of the 14th.
  In the evidence of Mary Ann Corbitt, instead
of " witness said she would not place  implicit
confidence in anything she said respecting her
illness," the report  should  have been, " She
would not  place implicit confidence in every
thing she  said."*
  Having made these preliminary observations,
I would now address myself to the main subject
of this communication,—Dr. Campbell's letter
above  referred to—not that  I purpose to reply
to its entire contents, for neither your space,
nor my time, warrants such  extension.
   Dr. Campbell was not present when my tes-
timony was  taken by the coroner and the jury ;
but it was handed to him for perusal as soon as
he came  in from the post mot-tern examination,
and after reading it, he  expressed himself to
the effect, that it was correct. Any allegations,
therefore, which Dr. Campbell may now make
to  impugn  its correctness, are quite out of
place.  I was not  present at the post mortem ;
but in company  with Dr.  Richardson,  Dr.
Berryman, and the coroner, Dr. Hallowell, on
the  previous afternoon, I assisted in a  very
careful and  close examination of the external
sexual parts of the deceased, Mary Boyd.  There
was not  a particle of doubt  in the  minds of
any of the four of us, that the recognized ana-
tomical  evidences  of virginity were decidedly
absent; and Drs. Richardson and Berryman, in
reply  to  a  question from  the coroner, as to
whether they had found these anatomical evi-
dences  present, replied emphatically,  they
" most  decidedly  had  not  found them."t
 Whether the coroner took down their answer-,
 I cannot state :—that they made it, as I  have
here given it, I am perfectly certain. 1 have not
seen  Dr. Berryman since the inquest, But  I
have met both the coroner and Dr. Richardson
 since, and they both state that I am correct in
 this matter.
   Dr. Campbell, however, affirms that he knows
 that " she," Mary Boyd, " died as she  had live-
 ed, a spotless virgin."  He also states, with re-
 gard to her delusion, as  to pregnacy, and to
  * The words of the witness, as taken down by the
Coroner, were : " I would not place implicit depend-
ance on any thing she said respecting her illness."
  t The words  of  Drs. Richardson and Berryman
taken down are as follows : " We examined the parts
of generation and. from this  examination we found
the hymen almost obliterated, although we do not
think this is an invariable  mark of the absence of
virginity." 
10
 sexual  intercourse with his  son, that "a sub-
 sequent examination of her  person convinced
 him of the impossibility of her delusion."
   To the  severely  critical  the  above words
 might appear under  an aspect of Delphic am-
 biguity.  There  can, however, be  no  doubt
 that Dr. Campbell's object has been to establish
 not the impossibility of the girl being under de-
 lusion as to sexual intercourse and pregnancy,
 but  the contrary; nay,  the certainty  of her
 delusion.  It is very much to be wished that
 Dr. Campbell had stated the exact time  at
 which he made the above " subsequent examina-
 tion" and the names of the person or persons,
 medical or non-medical, in whose presence he
 had made such  examination.  It is, I  appre-
 hend, quite  apparent from  the  context, that
 he made it after he thought the girl was insane
 or " drifting into insanity."   Perhaps his friend
 Dr. Adams, will come forward and tell us if he
 was present, as he has  informed us, through
 the Leader, that be had " full knowledge of all
 the remedial measures that were used."  This
 examination, to be sure, was  not remedial; but
 it was by no means  unimportant in a  thera-
 peutic point of view ;  for any man who would
 employ galvanic excitement to the uterus of a
 young woman, of whose pregnancy he had even
 the shadow of a suspicion, is, in plain  language,
 no  other than  a criminal  abortionist, and
 should be alloted his proper place in the world,
 by the  side of Notman, and other destroyers of
 life
   If Dr. Campbell  found, in his " subsequent
 examination," clear proofs of the virginity of
 Mary Boyd, and if neither he, nor I, nor Dr.
 Richardson,  Berryman  or  Hallowell,  found
 these, in the mortuary of the Asylum, when
 and where,  I demand of Dr.  Campbell, did
 these proofs cease to exist ?  Will Dr. Camp-
 bell insinuate that the change took place after
 he handed the patient into my care!  That a
 change—a great  change—(it being assumed
 that Dr. Campbell's assertions, as to  what he
 saw in  his  "subsequent  examination," of the
 person of Mary Boyd are true,) had taken place
 is beyond all question ; for any medical man,
 who,  from  inspection of the external  parts
 after death, in this case, would assert that sex-
 ual intercourse had never taken  place, would
 be something more, and worse, than an ass.
   With regard to the discussion, permitted by
 the Coroner, between  Dr. Campbell and the
 medical witnesses, as to the true character of
 the uterine condition of Mary Boyd, I have no
 desire to identity  myself with the  views of
 cither party.   Dr.  Campbell spoke of the case
 to me, as being one of amenorrhcea, and he con-
 tended for the like view before the jury. *Drs.

  * Dr. Workman is entirely mistaken here.  Dr.
Campbell considered this a case  of Dysmenorrhoea
and called it so both to Dr.  Workman in his first
Richardson and Berryman  appeared to hold
that the case was rather one of dysmenorrhea,
and if so that galvanic excitement was totally
unsuited to it.
   I have, perhaps, examined more dead bodies
of men and women than any medical pactitionev
in the city.  I have, since the inquest, minutely
and patiently  examined  the uterus of  Mary
Boyd and its appendages, and I am decidedly
of opinion that when she died she was labour-
ing  under inflammation of the womb and the
fallopian  tubes.  The former was fully  twice
the normal size,t and its colour showed fearful
vascular engorgement.  Both Fallopian  tubes
contained pus.   The  right one  was, in fact,
distended with  pus, and myriads  of  epithelial
cells, as  proved  under the  microscope, Dr.
Bovell, Dr. Richardson and Dr. Benj. Workman
can corroborate this statement.  If these facts,
and the  universal congested condition of the
blood vessels  of the entire sexual organs, do
not indicate the existence of inflammatory dis
ease, I wonder what other proof would do so.
   The right ovary showed a very distinct cor-
pus  luteum.  Medical readers will neither un-
derrate nor overrate  the value of this fact.
  Dr. Campbell has asserted that the " poor old
father"  of Mary Boyd "was  never allowed
even to see her," though he (Dr. Campbell)
had sent for him, and he  " had come from a
great distance."   Dr. Campbell  could,  if he
wished to state the whole  truth, have told the
public why Mary Boyd's father did not see her
before death.   I did  not prevent him from see-
ing his daughter ;  on the  contrary  I  did my
utmost to effect an interview ;  but Mary  Boyd
persistently refused to see her father on every
occasion but one, on which I pressed her to
see him.   When at length she assented to my
bringing him to her room, and I went to bring
him, he declined to go, saying to me  he "could
look on her calmly  if she  was dead, but not in
her present state !' I replied to him, "Mr. Boyd
had you asked my advice as to what you should
do, that is exactly what I would have suggest-
ed to you."   This is the sum and  substance
of the matter.  I leave your readers to judge of
the  grounds  (for  they were  known  by Dr.
Campbell) on which I have been charged with
want of feeling towards the distracted father
of poor Mary  Boyd.X
consultation in the case,  and subsequently to the
jury.
  t The evidence of Drs. Richardson and Berryman
shows this to be incorrect, they state that the  womb
was of the natural size.
  X It was only as an evidence that Dr. Workman
believed in the continued  insanity, that his refusal
to allow Mr. Boyd to see his daughter was referred
to.  Dr. Campbell thought Dr. Workman perfectly
justified in this refusal.  Had Dr. Workman believed
her to be sane it would have been cruelty indeed. 
11
   I fear, indeed I know, Dr. C, is in  the habit
 of using strong figurative  language.   He tells
 your readers that Mary Boyd was kept pinioned
 without relaxation up to the time of her death.
 The term pinioning is one of most disagreeable
 association.   It is now rarely used,  unless in
 horrifying details of a public  execution.  It is
 very painful to find it associated with the name
 of such a sufferer  as  Mary Boyd was ;  what-
 ever feelings it might evoke  when employed
 on a more appropriate  relation.
   Mary Boyd was not pinioned.  On her admis-
 sion, so soon as she was placed in bed  I sent
 for a leather muff, such as we employ in all sim-
 ilar cases, and I applied it myself, in presence
 of Dr. Campbell, not indeed up to her  death,
 but until a day or  so before it, when I substi-
 tuted two  soft chamois gloves, coupled by a
 strap; and  these  Dr.  Campbell  saw on  her
 hands at his last visit to her.
   The leather muff is the  safest and  least an-
 noying restraint appliance  known to  me.  I
 obtained the pattern from the Utica  Asylum,
 where it is highly prized,  and I have had sev-
 eral others made from  it by a  saddler, avIio, I
 believe, has also made  several for  parties out-
 side, in tire management of certain persons re-
 quiring to be denied the free use of their limbs.
   I regarded as of vital importance, that a sui-
 cidal patient who had two davs before attemp-
 ted drowning, and was now brought to me with
 her throat cut, should not  have the free use of
 her hands, and I  believe every  professional
 man, possessed of common sense and common
 humanity will concur with me in this view.*
 I do not conceal that Dr.  Campbell urged me
 more than once to set Mary Boyd's hands free.
 I replied " I dare not do so, for she might writh
 them tear open the  wound  in  her  throat."
 His answer was, " what if she does\"  I now ask
 what if she did?   Two residts would  have en-
 sued ;  Dr. Campbell would have been supplied
 with an important fact, which, from all I have
 seen, read and heard, he would not have failed
 to use to my  prejudice.  If he has  made  so
 much out of what he calls my pinioning, does
 any one believe he would not have left me pin-
 ioned with the responsibility of having allowed
 Mary Boyd to tear open the wound in her throat
and thus to have created an  additional fact in
the pathology of the case.   He may allege that
 two nurses could  have  held  her  hands, and
 thus I might have avoided the use of the muff.
 Any one who will say or believe that this sort
 of restraint is less  irksome to the patient, than
 the muff, must be utterly ignorant of the subject
  * Dr. Workman  was perfectly right in using the
restraint and no one could think of blaming him for
it, until he began to throw doubt on the  insanity of
the patient, of course if she was as sane and calm as
the nurses allege, the binding her arms was an un-
necessary cruelty.
he presumes to  speak  on.   The  second fact
would have been, no more speaking h\- the pa-
tient.f

   With respect to Dr. Campbell's turning over to
me the nurses of the Asylum, who gave testimony
at the inquest, to deal with them as I think fit, I
shall have pleasure in discharging  this  duty.  I
therefore avail  myself of this occasion, to thank
those  nurses  for  the assiduity,  kindness  and
fidelity, with which they  carried out my instruc-
tions, in the care of Mary Boyd ; I am sure, too
I  am  expressing a  conviction in  which every
member of the intelligent and respectable jury who
sat on the inquest was a sharer, when I  say that
never did  an equal  number  of young  women,
under a similar examination, evince more  modesty,
coolness, good sense and propriety of demeanour.
This is the  only visitation which  I think their
conduct calls for.  Dr. Campbell's allegation as to
their " worrying the poor girl with their questions
to gratify their prurient curiosity," is as unfound-
ed as it is beastly.    The only question  I  have
heard of being  asked by them was that by Sarah
Elliott,  and this is the only one Dr.  Campbell has
been able  to instance.^   It is  my belief Sarah
Elliott  had no  anticipation of  a negative reply
from Mary Boyd, or she would not have asked the
question.  The nurses, and myself, and all assist-
ing me, abstained from questioning  Mary Boyd,
but it was impossible  to keep  Mary  Boyd from
speaking, or  (after the suture in her wound was
cut) endeavouring to speak.§  I now take no credit
to myself for this abstinence,  On the contrary, I
am very sorry  I did  not  question  her,  for with
the aid of statements made to me by Dr. Campbell,
I  think I  might have elicited  from her some
valuable information.

  I fear, Mr. Editor, I have unduly  trespassed on
your space, if  not  on your patience, though  I
have not written all that  I might write, nor  all
that the  public  may  think I should write.  All
who know me will believe that it would have been
very satisfactory to  me  to   have  escaped  the
necessity of putting before your readers  the un-
pleasant statements contained in this communica-
tion ; but a due consideration of the position oc-
cupied by me in the largest public  institution in
Canada has constrained  me  to correct, through
your columns, some  of  the  misstatements and
fallacies  involved in  the  communication of  Dr.
Campbell.

             JOSEPH WORKMAN,  M. D.
                  Med.  Sup't. P. L.  Asylum.

  Toronto, May 16, 1868.
  f This surely, whatever Dr. Workman may think,
would have greatly assisted the healing of the wound.

  t See  evidence.

  § No  doubt it is true that the girl was constantly
trying to speak, but it was the duty of Dr. Workman
to have given orders to prevent it altogether, if he
wished the wound to heal. 
12
  In answer to the above Communication of
Dr. Workman, a letter was sent to the Editor
of the Telegraph, which he thus acknowledges
in his paper of Friday, 22nd May.
  The  Mary Boyd Case.—We  have, to-day,
received a lengthy Letter  from Dr. Campbell
in connection with this matter, which we will
publish  in  the  early part of next  week...
Daily Telegraph, Friday, May 22, 1868.
Second  Letter of Dr,  Campbell to Editor
            Daily  Telegraph.
Editor Daily  Telegraph,
   Sir,—On  the day after Dr. Workman's
letter appeared in  your  paper, a friend,
whose real name it is not necessary to dis-
close, but whom for convenience I shall call
" Mr. Blank,"  called at my house  for pro-
fessional advice;  when I had done what he
required,  he  asked  me  to  explain  some
points connected with the " Inquest at the
Asylum," which did not seem quite clear  to
him.    We had  a long  talk,  or  to  speak
more correctly, " Mr.  Blank," who is  a
lawyer,  subjected me to a most searching
cross-examination, at  the  end of which he
told  me that he was perfectly satisfied with
my explanations, and that, if I could put
the matter  before the public, as clearly as I
had done to him, the public would be satis-
fied also.
   It then  occurred  to me  that instead  of
writing  a  formal  letter in  answer to Dr.
Workman,  I should ask you to put in print
a report of  our colloquy.   I  have written it
down in the order, and as nearly in  the very
words in which it was held, and I now ask
you to publish it.
   You  may possibly demur  to  its length,
but I had to reply to two columns of insinu-
ations, and  you can hardly expect a shorter
reply to so  long an indictment.
   If any of your readers should complain
that  I have spoken of matters  better fitted
for a medical  periodical, they  must not
blame me, but rather those who first brought
the subject before the general public in your
columns.
   Those  who  know the grief which my
family  feel at the  untimely end of this
young woman, will freely acquit me of any
desire  to  treat so  sad a subject with any-
thing like levity.
   Some  remarks  of  my friend I have bad
to modify, when they were too flattering to
myself; and I have greatly toned  down the
terms in which he spoke  of Dr. Workman.
   Should Dr. Workman, nevertheless, com-
plain of my letting  the public  know his
character as delineated  by  " Mr. Blank,"
he  must  remember  that  I  was  not  the
aggressor, that he made a most unprovoked
attack upon me in  your paper, and that the
motto of my native country is " Nemo me
impune lacesset."
                 D. CAMPBELL, M.D.
108 Bay Street,
     Toronto, 20th May, 1868.
  Dr. Campbell, at the request of the Editor of
the Telegraph,  took the trouble to have  his
letter copied out in  a clear legible hand, so as
to enable  the  Printers  to  do their work  as
expeditiously as possible.  Nevertheless, after
this had been done, he was told by the Editor
that  unless  this  article  were  cut  down
to what would be  equal  to four columns of
type it could not be admitted.  Dr. Workman,
he said, had only taken up two columns in
his attack, and he thought he was dealing very
liberally in allowing Dr.  Campbell four col-
umns for his reply.
  It was in vain pointed out to him that this
was  not  like  a  controversy on  a political,
religious, or medical topic, where each party
could only fairly expect to be allowed to  say
as much as his opponent; but  that it was a
refutation  of serious charges, which could not
be done  in the same  number  of words as
sufficed for the accusation.   Moreover,  he  was 
13
reminded  that  he  had distinctly told  Dr.
Campbell  before he  began  to write, that he
would not restrict the length of his reply.
  A letter of the length the Editor of the Tele-
graph called for might possibly have been more
acceptable to the public than the conversation
hereafter  reported, but  it could not have put
the subject in so clear a light.
  To condense much matter in small  space is
a work of great  labour and involving  far
greater loss of time than to write at full length.
Talleyrand said once  to a friend, I have written
you a long letter, but I really had not time to
make it shorter.  Dr. Campbell felt,  that he
had already given to  the refutation of ground-
less slanders, time  that  ought  properly  to
have  been devoted to his  professional duties
He therefore, looked upon the  condensing
work asked for as being out of the question, he
had no time  to undertake it, and the insist-
ing of it  amounted  to an absolute refusal to
allow him the use of  the columns of the Tele-
graph at all.   He has,  therefore,  been com-
pelled to  have  the  communication  printed
elsewhere, and it now appears for the first time.
Dialogue on the  Mary Boyd case between
      Dr.  Campbell and Mr. Blank-

  Mr. Blank. Have  you seen yester-
day's Telegraph, Doctor?
  Dr. Campbell.  Of course  I  have,
such agreeable matters never take long
in reaching the party they are intended
to compliment.
  Mr. B.  What do you  prcrpose  to do
about the slanderous attacks made upon
you in that paper ; do you  mean to go
to law for redress ?
  Dr. C. I had some  such notion,  and
wrote a letter to  that  effect  to  the
editor of the Telegraph.
  Mr. B.  Which  I  see  he  published,
although  I  scarcely suppose  you  feel
obliged to him for having done so, but
it supplied him with matter for a spicy
paragraph,  so  you  must  not blame
him.
  Dr. C.  He is  perfectly welcome to
all he made by it.  As to going to law;
this morning I had a long consultation
with a legal friend of very high stand-
 ing—(I hope yon will excuse me for
 not relying  upon  your  professional
 advice  alone in such  an  important
 matter)—well; my friend spoke to me
 with his usual frankness  and. honesty.
 and advised me to have nothing to do
 with law.
   Mr. B. Why?  Did he  think  that
 you had no ground of action ?
   Dr. C. Far  from it,  bethought I had
 the very strongest grounds,  and  was
 almost  certain that I should  obtain a
 verdict.
   Mr. B. Then why did he advise you
 against it ?
   Dr. C. Because lie is an honest man.
 He  said  that the vindication  of my
 character, private and professional, was
 more  my  object  than  mere  money
 damages, and  that he was very far from
 sure, that however fully my connexion
 with the "Asylum Inquest " might be
justified, of which he was kind  enough
 to add  that  he entertained  not  the
 slightest doubt, yet that the  evidence
 by which my  conduct would  be vindi-
 cated,  would  necessarily  involve so
 many technical details, intelligible only
 to my own profession, that the  general
 public would  never get a clear idea of
 the  matter, and  might, perhaps, even
 after a  verdict in my favor, say, " Oh
 yes !  we remember;  Dr. Campbell got
 involved in a  law suit about some un-
 pleasant  case in  the Asylum; there
 were many curious points set  up,  and
 the  doctors involved  the  -whole in so
 much mystery  with their long words
 that we really cannot tell  exactly  how
 it ended."
   Mr. B. What, then, did he advise you
 to do?
   Dr. C. He  said : " You  had better
 write a letter in as plain  language as
 possible, meeting all the  charges, or
 rather insinuations, for I see they bring-
 no actual charge against you,  and get
 it published before the  subject grows
 cold."   I thanked him for his candour,
 and  intend  to follow his  advice  and
 write a letter this evening.
   Mr. B. And where do you propose to 
14
publish  it?   Neither  the  Glohr nor
the Lead.er will have anything to do
with it,  and the  Telegraph  will not
likely allow you the use of its columns.
  Dr. 0.  Yet I  may  fairly ask the
editor  of the Telegraph  to do so,  as
as it was in bis paper that the charges
were made.
  Mr. B. Well, possibly he may.  He
has  no reason to entertain any  ill-
will towards  you.   Besides  he  will
readily enough put in anything sensa-
tional, as your letter on such  a subject
is likely to be; and remember this, that
however hard the Telegraph may have
been upon you, it has not been half so
much so as Dr. Workman.
   Dr. C. True; and I am quite at a loss
to understand what I can have done to
Dr. Workman, to induce  him to  make
such horrible insinuations  as he does
in  his  letter, or  use  such  language
towards me.
   Mr. B. You don't  know Dr. Work-
man half as well as I do.   If you did,
you would  be at no loss whatever to
understand it.   An  old  newspaper
man, he delights in strife and  party
warfare.  For some  time back he has
been getting rather  " blue-mouldy for
want of a  tight," and  your letter has
given him a pretext to attack you.
   Dr. C. I don't think  it did.
   M. B. Anyhow, he has jumped at it,
and you had. better look out,  you have
roused  a most formidable  antagonist.
When editor of a Boman Catholic paper,
the  Toronto Mirror,  he  was looked
upon as the most bitter  and reckless
slanderer that ever handled a  pen;
perfectly  unscrupulous,  but far  too
practised and wary  a controversialist
to make a direct charge when an  in-
sinuation would  answer his purpose.
   Dr. C. I am really shocked at your
giving Dr. Workman such a character,
to me he has always'been most  polite
and courteous; in fact I have  been par-
ticularly impressed with the mildness
of his address, and the gentleness of hie
manner.
   Mr. B.  What  I say  is nevertheless
true, and you will find it out before you
have done  with him; any of the old
stagers  of Toronto will  corroborate it.
You  have hitherto felt only his velvet
paw, now he means to give you a taste
of his claws.  You little know the man
whose ire you have  awakened, nor the
rancorous and  vindictive heart  that
beats beneath that smooth, smiling ex-
terior.   He is quite in his element now
that  he has some one upon  whom  to
discharge the venom accumulated dur-
ing some years  of comparative  inac-
tion.  Once when he was  *   *  *  *
  Dr. C.  Stop!  I cannot listen to any
more of this.  It  is  really dreadful to
hear you talk so.  But, in reading my let-
ter can you see how I have  offended Dr.
Workman so as to make him select me
as the object of his rancour.  I brought
no charge against him  whatever, but
on the contrary,  gave him full credit
for having  issued judicious  orders to
his  subordinates  for the management
of this most painful case.
  Mr. B. I know that you  said nothing
whatever against Dr. Workman himself
in your letter;  but it matters not; you
have  been  presumptuous enough  to
hint that something could exist in the
Provincial Lunatic Asylum which was
not absolute  perfection,  and that, in
Dr. Workman's eyes, is an unpardona-
ble crime.  It was Dr. Workman's toes
you trod upon, when you  attacked his
" Sarah Gamps," and let me  tell -you,
that you had  better have trodden on a
rattlesnake.
  Dr. C. I confess that I could  not re-
strain my indignation when  I thought
of how that poor suffering girl had been
worried by those women's questionings,
but if Dr.  Workman himself had not
proclaimed it  to the  world, I  could
never have imagined that it was with
his full  consent and approbation that
she had been so tortured.  I am sorry
to see that  he so far forgets himself as
to express  his  regret  that he did not
himself assist them in tormenting her
a little more.
  Mr. B. Yes, to elicit some " valuable 
15
information" as he expresses it; though
I really don't see what more Dr. Work-
man  could expect to squeeze from
her.  I think  you must have told him
all that the nurses subsequently worried
out of her.
  Dr. C. True, in the consultation I had
with him on her case I told him all
her delusions,  all her ailments and all
tho treatment  that she had received.  I
think he cannot mention a single point
that has since  been made  out, that  I
did not fully and frankly state to him,
before ever the girl was  sent  to the
Asylum—not that I ever expected he
was going to make these  professional
communications the talk of the whole
town.
  Mr.  B.  Was it not a most improper
and a gross breach of professional confi-
dence to reveal anything thus told him?
I, as a lawyer, see that no man has any
business to give as  evidence anything
which another  man  has told him,
And I suppose  you would say  on your
part that no physician has any  right
to communicate what may have passed
between himself and another medical
man in consultation with  reference to
any patient.
  Dr. C. Dr. Workman was perfectly at
liberty to  tell  the jury all he could as
far  as I am concerned, if he felt himself
warranted by professional etiquette in
giving the details of a consultation, for
such it really was.
  Mr. B. I don't see why you should be so
annoyed at the nurses for  giving the
evidence they did before the Coroner ?
It told nothing against you.
  Dr. C. I know it did not, nor  am  I
at all annoyed at their having given it;
they, at least,  had a perfect right to
tell the Coroner  everything that they
had heard Mary Boyd say, if he knew
so little of his duty  as to put it down
as evidence.
  Mr. B.  I suppose if their prototype
the original " Sarah  Gamp,"  had pre-
sented herself at the inquest and com-
municated some mysterious fact that
her mythical friend " Mrs. Harris" had
just told her, Coroner Hallowell would
have thought it his  duty forthwith to
record it.
   Dr.  C.  What  I  cannot forgive is
the torturing process by which this so
called evidence was  obtained.
   Mr. B. Have you read Charles Reade's
book,  " Very hard cash "? if not, get
it at once,   and  you will find a de-
scription of some nice parallel cases.
of Asylum torturing;  the  callousness
to human suffering  which  is  engen-
dered by daily contact with lunatics is
also very strongly brought out.   But
what was the special process that these
brawny attendants of poor  Mary Boyd
put  in  practice to  extort answers to
their importunate questions.
   Dr. C. After the second day, to get
her to speak at all they were obliged
almost to stifle her, by closing the only
orifice through which she could breathe
freely.
   Mr. B. How do you mean ?
   Dr. C. You  must understand  that
for at least four days before her death,
from noon on the Friday,  until Tues-
day when she died,  her  chief,  I  may
almost say her only means of breathing
was through the wound in the wind-
pipe, from which the stitches, being of
no further use, had been removed; the
larynx,  or  vocal   apparatus,  being
above  this cut, no speaking could be
done without first preventing the air
from escaping through the hole in the
throat,  some of  it could  thus be
passed  up through  the larynx,   and
words  imperfectly  articulated.   The
choking effect of this must  have been
fearfully painful,  and the motion thus
caused in the wound destroyed all pros-
pect of its healing.
  Mr. B. But how came the larynx to
be so stopped up as to prevent breath-
ing, except through the hole  in the
throat; and  why was the removal of
the stitches necessary ?
   Dr. C. Inflammation had set in,  ori-
ginally, no  doubt, occasioned  by the
wound, but very greatty aggravated by
the cold dry atmosphere of the Asylum. 
16
  Mr. B. Then, why did you not tell
them to put her  into a warmer room ?
  Dr. C.  They had  not,  in  the  whole
establishment, as the Superintendent
admits, a single room in which, judging
by my feelings, (I saw no thermometer
to refer to) the  temperature  could be
raised  above  50°, while no  surgeon
would ever dream of putting a similar
case of wounded throat in a  lower tem-
perature than 75 or  80°, particularly
where the breathing had to be carried
on by the aperture in the throat:  you
will understand that in such cases the
air has to enter the  lungs without the
benefit of the warming and moistening
which it would get in passing through
the mouth or nose ;  the whole Asylum
could not afford such  a  room!  Even,
that into which at  my urgent remon-
strance  they removed her,  and which
Dr. AVorkman considered a hot room,
was far too cold and dry.
  Mr. B. But do you think that this had
anything to do with the  fatal result ?
  Dr. C.  Undoubtedly it had, the girl's
death was  caused, as the post mortem
clearly shewed, in a great measure, if
not  solely  by  inflammation  of the
lungs, and  that inflammation was ag-
gravated by the miserable  arrange-
ments of this Asylum, which costs the
Province so much money!
  Mr. B. But, I presume she would
have died under any circumstances?
  Dr. C.  I do  not think  it at  all
certain that she would, had she  re-
ceived  proper treatment; I mean,  if
she had  been kept  in  a sufficiently
warm and moist atmosphere and above
all absolutely prevented from speaking.
  Mr. B. Dr. Workman  stated, that at
your request,  he  removed  her into a
room which he was  afraid was too hot.
  Dr. C. Dr. Workman testified that I
was often in this so called hot room. I
am convinced that it "was far too cold for
such a case, and, what was a still more
serious objection to  it, the air was far
too dry, in  spite of the miserable at-
tempt made to keep it moist with a pail
of tepid water,which was all that I could
get them to do; I reiterate  my opin-
ion, that Mary Boyd came to her death
from the insufficiency of the means in
the Asylum, for treating, any case of
simple" bronchitis.  I hope  the  new
hospitals attached to the building may
afford  such means, but  Dr.  Workman
told  me that this room was the  only
suitable one he had at the time.
  Mr. B. The word " pinioning," which
you used in your letter,  has roused Dr.
Workman's wrath.    How  was  this
"pinioning " done ?
  Dr. C. I am sorry that 1 used the word
as it seems offensive to Dr. Workman ;
I ought, perhaps, to  have  preferred
the more delicate  term "  restrained."
It was done as he  correctly describes,
by a stiff leathern muff, which a few
days before her death was changed for
one of chamois leather.  However, I
think the apparatus an improvement
on the old strait waistcoat of madhouses,
and I told Dr. Workman so.
  Mr.  B.  One would  suppose from
what  Dr. Workman says about  the
softness of  the leather, that  he thinks
his patients have come to like it. I don't
know whether the bowstring by which
the victims of  Eastern  despotism are
strangled, is a whit more acceptable to
them,because it is made of silk instead of
hemp.  But, tell me Doctor, when Dr.
Workman  objected to  loosening  the
girl's hands on the ground that  she
would put them to her throat, wffiat you
could have  meant by saying " What if
she does ?"  Is this really true ?
  Dr. C. Perfectly true.
  Mr. B. And what did you mean by
it ?
  Dr. C. You  will understand  that at
that time all hope of the wound  healing
by the "first intention" having been giv-
en up, the stitches had  been removed
from the front of the wound to prevent
suffocation.  She  was, as  I  told  you,
breathing through the  aperture  thus
made almost exclusively, it followed, as
a matter of course, that  even if she put
her fingers to the opening and widened
it ever so much, no harm could be done - 
17
it would not retard the healing by the
"second intention,"  she  would  have
breathed all  the more freely, and she
wrould have been able in this way to
allay the  annoying  itching which  at-
tends  all  suppurating  wounds.   I
mentioned all this very fully to Dr.
Workman at the the time.
  Mr. B. Indeed ! But it was quite like
him to forget it  when  it  suited his
purpose to do so.  His memory is re-
markably convenient.
  Dr. C. It was  from pity for the poor
sufferer and at her request, that I asked
Dr. Workman to do this.
  Mr. B. I understand, and I  am glad
that you have so  clearly explained the
matter, for, as Dr. Workman put it, the
story told very much against you. Only,
from what I know of you, I think you
would be the very last man to be guilty
of  anything  like cruelty.   I see that
even Dr. Workman himself, who brings
or  rather,  according to his habit,  in-
sinuates this charge, said at the inquest
" that Dr. Campbell was uniformly kind
and solicitous for the girl's  welfare."
  Dr. C. He only does me justice there.
But, let me  ask you  Mr. Blank, as a
lawyer,  whether  the Coroner was
justified  in taking down  as evidence
all  this talk of the poor girl, not as I
said before, that I care the least about
it myself,  but it has  been very un-
pleasant for  my  family to have  all
these delicate matters paraded before
the public, and made the town talk.
  Mr. B. A Coroner's inquest  is not a
judicial trial, but  merely an enquiry,
and Coroners  generally   do  pretty
nearly as they please as to what they
put down as evidence.  Of course, such
delusions as the girl gave utterance to,
reported at second hand,are no evidence
at all.   They were not under oath;  I
mean that though the witnesses were
sworn, the party whose language was
reported was not.  Such so called evi-
dence  is what wre lawyers designate
mere hearsav, and would  not be ad-
missible, even if the person making the
reported statements  were  perfectly
sane.  In the present case, to call these
statements evidence, is absurd.   I cer-
tainly never heard of  a lunatic being
allowed  to  testify  in  a witness box,
even under oath.  If the Coroner had
taken  this  evidence  in order  to as-
certain the state of the girls mind, he
would have  been  quite right,  but  it
was  not  received in this way, the in-
sanity had been already fully proved,
and these statements should not have
been  published,  more  especially as
there was not the slightest intention of
founding a criminal  charge upon it.
A Coroner can allow the publication of
such evidence, only at the  risk of an
action against  him for defamation of
character.
  Dr. C. That is exactly what I thought,
although, so far as the inquest  was
concerned, I had  no objection to the
" evidence " being received.   And
with reference to a criminal charge,
Dr.  Hallowell in  a   curious  letter
he  wrote  to  the  Telagraph,  hinted
that if it had not been for him the jury
might have brought a criminal charge
against me.
  Mr.  B.   Then, if as he  alleges, he
did  this  out of favor  to you, then he
acted most  illegally  and reprehensi-
bly.  Then I wonder you did not in your
letter,say a little more of Dr.Hallowell's
" intelligent" jury and their verdict.
  Dr. C.  What do you object to in it ?
  Mr.  B. If the insanity of the deceas-
ed was established, as it was by the
evidence of Dr. Workman and yourself;
the jury  had no right to return  a ver-
dict  of " felo de se," which  means cri-
minal  deliberate   suicide;  besides,
what did they mean   by  temporary
insanity?
  Dr. C.  That is more than I can tell.
How they ascertained that the insanity
would  not be permanent had the  girl
lived, I am at a loss to  imagine.
  Mr. B.  That is not exactly the point; a
verdict of " temporary insanity "  is usu-
ally rendered in cases  of suicide when
the insanity is not proven  at all,  but
merely inferred from the fact of  sui- 
18
cide j being a mere formula  used to
sootbe the  feelings of relatives.  In
the present case I fancy the jury must
have meant to insinuate that the injury
which Mary Boyd inflicted upon  her-
self, and  which led to her death, was
done  under  the  excitement  of  in-
sanity merely  temporary, caused by
something wrong that you had done to
her.  Perhaps they wanted to express
their opinion that the insanity had only
existed at the time she wounded her-
self;  but  had  passed oft'  after she
reached the Asylum, and  that she was
quite sane when  she made the  state-
ments the  nurses report.
  Dr. C.  Probably that may have been
what they meant to  insinuate ;  even
though such a verdict would have been
in direct opposition to  the professional
testimony they had heard.
  Mr. B. I see that  Dr.  Workman as
usual has vacillated as to  the question
of the insanity of the girl—when he
wanted to give weight to any  charge
against you,  he appeared to  lean to
the  view that  she  was  quite sane
enough to make  the accusation—and
when he wanted  to justify  his own
treatment of her then her insanity was
according to him beyond all doubt.
  Dr. C.  He certainly seems to qualify
his opinion in his letter  very  dexter-
ously.
  Mr. B. The evidence of the  state of
Mary Boyd's mind involves Dr. Work-
man in this dilemma : if she was sane
why was she "pinioned" to the last, and
her father prevented from seeing her ?
If  she   was  insane,  why   did  Dr.
Workman bring forward  his nurses to
the inquest to report her ravings ?
  Dr. C. Dr. Workman's evidence to
the jury, whatever  he  may try to
make out since, was  no doubt  clear
enough as to the insanity.
   Mr. B. Then the Coroner should not
have accepted  such a verdict from his
" intelligent " jury in the face of the
evidence of two experts, Dr. Workman
and yourself, who  were  paid  by  the
public for their  professional  opinions
on this point of insanity.   Besides I
always  thought  Dr. Hallowell  was a
friend of yours, and not an  enemy  as
his conduct at this inquest would seem
to indicate.
  Dr. C. I thought so too ; we were at
college  in Edinburgh together,  nearly
forty years ago, and have remained  on
cordial terms  ever  since,  for though
since I  abandoned  the errors  of the
school in which we were both brought
up,I have been treated with the greatest
discourtesy by many of those whom I
used to meet in consultation,  and  to
hold friendly intercourse with,yet there
has  been  no apparent alteration  in
my relations with Dr. Hallowell.
  Mr. B. Perhaps he did not intend to
wrong you, but his mind has lately lost
a good deal of its vigor, and I daresay
he had not firmness of character enough
to prevent himself being made a tool of,
even against one whom he called his
oldest  friend  in Toronto.   Poor  old
Hallowell, it may be he  is more to  be
pitied than blamed.
  Dr. C. Yes, and I sincerely hope for
the sake of his family that his strange
mismanagement of  this  inquest may
not lead to  the revocation of his com-
mission as Coroner.
  Mr. B.  If what I have heard be true,
I don't know but it may.  I had almost
forgotten  it, but I have been  told that
before Dr. Hallowell  handed  to  the
Telegraph the  evidence taken  at  the
inquest, he  underlined, so  as to give
them additional force, such passages in
the  evidence as he  fancied would tell
against you.*
  Dr. C. It is hard  to believe  that he
  * Sinee this conversation was held, the  origi-
nal  depositions taken  down  at the  inquest,
have  been examined in  the office of the County
Crown Attorney, and a certified copy of the whole
evidence procured.  It was there ascertained that
Mr. B. had been eorrectly informed, and that such
passages as could be made to bear most unfavor«
ably upon Dr. Campbell, had been underlined by
the Coroner I
  This, of itself, is evidence enough of the length
to which Dr. Hallowell  was  prepared to atretch
his brief authority, to forward the designs of his
fellow-conspirators. 
19
 would be capable of such malice, be-
 sides, it seems to me that it must have
 been  an illegal  act—you  know more
 about their business than I do ;  has  a
 Coroner a right  to tamper in any way
 with the written evidence as he had
 taken it down at an inquest ?
   Mr. B. Of  course  he  has  not.  But
 possibly  he  may  have made  these
 underliningsatthe inquest, as he wrote
 down the  evidence.  Should  this be
 the case, it  only makes the  matter
 worse, as  shewing  that  while in  a
 quasi  judicial  capacity,  he  had gone
 out of his way  to favor the foregone
 conclusion of bringing you,and through
 you, Homoeopathy,  into  public con-
 tempt, and, what is a far more serious
 impropriety,  actually  prejudged  the
 case that he was sitting to investigate.
   Dr. C.  But Dr. Hallowell was the last
 man I should have thought would have
joined in  a combination to  injure  my
 professional or private character.
   Mr. B. Combination, do you call it?
You draw it rather mild Doctor ! Give
 it  at once its  right name and  call it a
 " conspiracy." Cannot you see clearly,
 we outsiders do  at all events,  that if
you had  not  been  President  of the
Homoeopathic Medical  Board,  there
would have been none of this fuss.
   Dr. C.  You may be right, but I  am
unwilling to think that  members of a
learned profession would,  from mere
hostility to a  system of the.-apeutics,
differing little from their own, as theirs
has lately been  modified, and  against
their  clear convictions, unjustly and
insidiously assail  a member  of that
profession, when they knew  that they
agreed with him on the  main points of
the case.
   Mr. B. There  yov, are  quite mis-
taken.  The}' do not look upon you as
belonging any longer to the  same pro-
fession.   Have you forgotten how they
treated  you  at  the meeting of the
Medical Council  two years ago?  They
are all the more bitter  against  you
because you  held  so   prominent  a
position among them before  you de-
 serted their  camp.  They think that
 you are fair game, and  that  anything
 they can do  to  injure you and your
 school is quite lawful.  The mere men-
 tion of " Homoeopathy "  seems to  act
 upon them much in the same way that
 a red rag does  upon a  bull, it puts
 them in a frenzy of rage at once.
   Dr. C. They surely admit  that  my
 medical education has been  quite  as
 complete as theirs.
   Mr. B. Of course, they cannot deny
 that, so they say nothing about it.
   Dr. C.  My experience too, is probab-
 ly as extensive as that of any one  of
 them.
   Mr. B. There  again you are out. Dr.
 Workman says that he has cut up more
 dead bodies of men and women "than
 any medical practitioner in the  city."
   Dr. C. That is quite possible ; though
 one would  hardly have expected that
 Dr.  Workman would have boasted of
 the  frequency  of the  opportunities
 which the fatal results of his treatment
 afforded him, of inspecting his patients
 in his  "Mortuary."
   Mr. B. Talking of this " mortuary,"
 Dr. Workman lets out in  his letter a
 very remarkable fact of which I see  he
 made  no mention when  giving  his
 evidence,nor did the other medical men
 when giving theirs.  It appears that he
 with three others, all professional oppo-
 nents of yours, (for Dr. Hallowell could
 have been present only in his private ca-
 pacity  as a medical man,his  coroner's
 court not being yet organised,) made a
 "careful and close examination of the exter-
 nal sexual parts of the deceased"  Was any
 intimation given to you (employed as
 you were and paid by the  public  for
 your professional  opinion) that such
 examination had taken place ?
  Dr. C. None whatever.  I knew  no-
 thing of this most unusual secret ex-
 amination until Dr. Workman's  letter
 divulged it.
  Mr. B.  Then I must say that it was
a most unauthorised, illegal and ini-
quitous proceeding!  Who ever  heard 
1>« 1
before of such a tampering with a body
that was to be the subject of an inquest.
You must now see that I was right in
my use  of the word  " conspiracy."
Here was the initiatory step of the pro-
cess by which they hoped to disgrace
the President  of the  Honueopathic
Medical Board and through him, bring
all bis  school into public contempt.
  Dr. C. 1 was quite  shocked to iearn
that any respectable medical man could
have lent  his countenance to such ini-
quity.
  Mr. B.  Dr. Workman  asks  you  to
account for  the  disappearance of the
signs   of  virginity  in   the  body  of
Mary  Boyd  when  inspected  at  this
"caucus"  meeting  of the conspira-
tor-.
  Dr. C. It is no business of mine to do
so.   I  own  that I am quite at a loss
to account for this disappearance, and
such  disappearance   there  certainly
was. or to be quite correct, there was a
very marked diminution of distinctness of
the signs  by which virginity^ is usually
recognized when I saw the body at the
lega!pos£ mortem on the second day of the
inquest, compared to that which  they
had presented during life.   This I dis-
tinct lyT told the jury.  Xot that in my
opinion, it had the least bearing on the
case ; but I was anxious to vindicate the
good  name of  a modest and estim-
able young woman,  whom I considered
to be wrongfullyr accused of looseness
of conduct.
  Mr. B.  You told the jury and repeat-
ed in 3rour letter that you believed that
this young woman lived and died  per-
fectly pure.
  Dr. C. I did.  I most firmly believe
that I  was justified  in doing so.   I
speak on this  point  with  as  great a
degree of confidence as anyT man  who
values  his  reputation  as  a  medical
jurist can venture to do.
  Mr. B.  And why did not the medi-
cal men,  who  made the post mortem
examination, confirm your opinion ?
  Dr. C. The  medical witnesses  said
they found the hymen " almost oblitera-
ted." They even goon to state that they
do not think  this obliteration an  in-
variable  mark of the absence of vir-
ginity; yet the}'  wanted to give the
jury  the idea that somehow or other
something  very wrong must have been
done to the girl, I suppose because she
had  not  been under the care of one of
their school.
  Mr. B. Yes, there's the trouble.
  Dr. C.  But if the opinion they  gave
as to her virginity was based  on the
appearance which the parts presented
on the second day of the inquest, when
the legal post  mortem  was made, I can-
not IjIante them for not speaking more
decidedly.  The majority'  of medical
men  would  probably have  agreed  with
them.   But  these medical witnesses
took good care not to let the jury know
that  theyT  had ever  made any other
examination of the organs in question.
  Mr. B.  How do you account for the
change that must  have taken place in
the parts, from the time you made the
examination during life, until you saw
the body in the " mortuary ?" It surely
cannot be possible that any of the Asy-
lum  people,however willing they might
be to aid a conspiracy against you, could
be so diabolically  wicked as to do so by
tampering with the  dead body ?
  Dr. C. The "evidences" in question
are only too easily destroyed in the liv-
ing ; but they are still more readily ef-
faced in the  dead.   The curiosity of
the  attendants, and the " careful and
close," but most irregular, or I should
call  it clandestine examination of the
more educated investigators,  doubtless
rendered these " evidences " much less
perceptible.
  Mr.B. I dare say such repeated finger-
ings may have worn the signs away,
or, at  all events,  rendered them less
distinct ?
  Dr. C.  Something  had most certain-
ly been done ; I can't exactly say what.
It is not for me to account for all that
is done  in the Asylum  " mortuary."
There were two peculiarities that par-
ticularly struck me. 
21
  Mr. B.  What were these?
  Dr. C.  The external opening, no
matter  how large it may be, or how
greatly or frequently it may have been
dilated at any previous time, is closed
in the living ; and it remains closed in
the untouched dead, from the natural
elasticity which the parts had during
life   But here, instead of  the  usual
approximated labia presenting a closed,
or, at all events, a  long-elliptical ap-
pearance, the orifice was perfectly cir-
cular.  This condition could  only have
arisen from  the parts having been di-
lated to  that  shape  after  death  had
destroyed the elasticity and  resiliency
which the tissues always have during
life.  Besides this,there was a small abra-
sion of the epidermis of the external
parts, which  could not, from its ap-
pearance, have been done during life ;
but  showTed that  the  parts had under-
gone some pretty rough handling after
death.  It  is  for Dr.  Workman,  and
not forme, to explain  how these  condi-
tions were brought about. I remarked
to the medical men at the p>ost mortem,
and subsequently to  the jury, that I
had never  before  seen  those organs
present  the  appearance which  they
did.
  Mr. B. I suppose  then,  that  you
are quite prepared to gratify Dr. Work-
man's curiosity as to where  the  disap-
pearance of these signs took place ?
   Dr. C. I am.    I clearly and  dis-
tinctly assert that the signs of virginity
in the body of Mary Boyd were greatly
damaged, or, as the medical witnesses
said, " almost obliterated," in the Pro-
vincial Lunatic Asylum.  I  hope that
Dr. Workman  will  speedily  ascertain
how it was done.
  Mi-. B.  But the  question,  after all,
is not whether she retained her vir-
ginity, but whether she was pregnant
at the time of her  death, as some of
tho nurses report her to have said ; or
whether a miscarriage might not have
taken place, as surmised from the re-
port of others of the nurses as to  her
ravings ?
  Dr. C.  The  question of her  preg-
nancy at the  time of her death was at
once and for ever put to rest by the
examination  of the womb  at the post
mortem.
  Mr. B.  How ?
  Dr. C. There was neither foetus nor
ovum in it;  but,  on the other hand, a
dysmenorrhoeal membrane.
  Mr. B.  I do not understand all this.
I suppose by foetus or ovum, yTou mean
that there was no child,nor even the be-
ginning of a  child ; but what is a dys-
menorrhoeal membrane ?
  Dr. C.   It is a shred  or  skin of
plastic lymph formed in the womb of
women who,  at their menstrual period,
suffer from difficult or painful menstru-
ation, which we call dysmenorrhcea,and
which is alwaj's accompanied by in-
flammation   more   or   less  acute.
It  is considered  by Dewees,  Meigs,
Dcnman, Churchill,  Byan, and indeed
by all obstetrical writers, to be  an al-
most invariable  indication of absolute
sterility; so  that it is not  only impos-
sible that deceased could, at her death,
have been  pregnant,  but  extremely
improbable that  even if she  had sur-
vived, she could ever have  become so.
  Mr. B.  And how was it evident that
she  had not been pregnant before ?
  Dr. C   There is no  means of abso-
lutely   proving  this,  with   refer-
ence to any very remote period, but as
to any  comparatively  recent  period,
such as a month or  two, we have  an
almost  absolute certainty.   Even if we
should  differ from  nearly  all obstetri-
cal writers in looking on the presence
of the  dysmenorrhoeal  membrane as
conclusive  evidence  of  absolute and
permanent sterility in  the individual
in whom it is formed, it is at least de-
cisive proof of the impossibility of preg-
nancy having existed for  at least two
months previously and that is the very
longest time alleged in this case.
  Mr. B.  How  does this  membrane
establish the impossibility of pregnan-
cy having existed within two months ?
  Dr. C.  By showing that her last 
22
 period  must have been attended with
 dysmenorrhoeal suffering,  with which
 either  pregnancy or a recent  miscar-
 riage is, as  I told you, entirely incom-
 patible.
   Mr. B. Did the medical men explain
 all this to the jury ?
   Dr. C. Not in my hearing.
   Mr. B. Why then, did you not get
 the Coroner to set this point  at rest
 at once, by  asking them the necessary
 questions?
   Dr. C. Because, at the time that these
 witnesses were examined, nothing had
 come up with reference to pregnancy,
 but the  Coroner  allowed  them  to
 wander out of their way, to  read  a
 homily  to  the jury on  the  impro-
 priety of using galvanism as an emmen-
 agogue.
   Mr. B. What is an emmenagogue ?
 That is  rather a "jaw-breaker."
   Dr. C. It  is a medicine supposed to
 have the effect of aiding menstruation.
 I say, "supposed" for feAv experienced
 physicians  of any  school  have much
 belief in the efficacy of such medicines.
 The uterus  not being an eliminating
 organ,  like the liver, skin, kidneys,
 &c, it  is not easy to direct  the action
 of any  drug to it.   It is usually by
 irritating the adjacent bowel by drastic
 purgatives such as Aloes, that medical
 men have tried to bring on  the natural
 discharge from the womb.
   Mr. B. But, what about  the  use  of
 galvanism, which was censured as  so
 improper?
  Dr. C. Used as explained to Dr. Work-
 man by me, it is by far the most effec-
 tual emmenagogue that has yd been
 discovered, besides being quite harm-
 iess,and not racking the system like the
 drastic drugs I told you were employed
 by the old school for  the same purpose,
 and can do no possible injur}-.
   Mr. B. But does  it not give the ner-
 vous system a considerable shock ?
  Dr. C It  is attended with no shock
 whatever, when properly used.  It is
rather a continuous gentle current,the
action of which is scarcely, if at  all per-
ceptible, the slight sensation felt being
rather  agreeable than  otherwise.  1
may add, that  it is  now extensively
used in both Europe  and the  United
States  by most distinguished  medical
men  of the  same   school as  those
who censured  its use,but who only dis-
played  their ignorance and prejudice
by so doing.
  Mr. B.  But  perhaps  they  did  not
mean that it was improper in general,
but only in this special  instance ; for
the question, as 1 understand it, seems
to turn upon the point of whether you
were dealing with a case of " suppres-
sion," or one of "difficult menstruation."
Perhaps a doubt  is  intimated as to
whether you knew  the  difference be-
tween the two ?
  Dr. C.  I certainly ought  by this
time to be able to distinguish between
two conditions so very different.
  Mr. B.  Not  a doubt of it.    I sup-
pose that the i nost strenuous opponent of
Homoeopathy would  not hesitate  to
allow that you  are competent to dis-
tinguish between a case ofamenorrhcea
and one of dysmenorrhea, and  would
probably be inclined to attach  quite
as much weight to  your  diagnosis of
any disease as to Dr. Workman's ?
  Dr. C. Possibly he might.
  Mr. B.  You have  been, I think you
once told me nearly forty years unin-
teruptedly  engaged  in active  prac-
tice, while I know that Dr.  Workman
diverted his attention from the legiti-
mate exercise  of his profession, while
he was working himself into  his pre-
sent position, by writing political squibs
in defence  of Mr.  Hincks ;  and when
engaged in the  philosophical  occupa-
tion of selling tenpenny nails.
  Dr. C.  I have always  looked upon
Dr.  Workman as a man of great ability,
and I dont think it  right to  bring his
former  occupations  against him.   So
come back to what  we were speaking
about.
  Mr. B. It was about the amenorrhoea
or dysmenorrhoea question.
  Dr. C.   Dr.  Workman says  that I 
23
made no objection to his evidence after
I had read it at the inquest.  The rea-
son why I did not,is plain.  I considered
it quite irrelevant to the  matter at is-
sue, which was the cause of the girl's
death, to enter  into any disquisition
as to her female ailments.  But I told
Dr. Workman, before I brought  the
patient to the Asylum, that " she had
suffered from menstrual  difficulty at
her last period : and that I considered it
very important for him to look out for
her  next, as it  would  in  all pro-
bability be attended by an aggravation
of her mental troubles."  I may say at
the same time that Dr. Workman heard
and made no objection to my evidence,
in which I stated to the jury, as shown
in the  printed report, that the men-
strual discharge had  come  on  before I
used  the galvanism,  and  that  conse-
quently it could not be a case of amen-
orrhoea.
  Mr.  B.   Dr. Workman  must have
wilfully kept this out of view to dam-
age you, when he made the supposition
as to the possibility of pregnancy ex-
isting at the  time ?
  Dr. C.  It  is not  very likely that if
I had used the galvanism for an im-
proper  purpose,  that I should have
described to him  the  way in which I
had used it, as he acknowledged I did,
and have strongly recommended him to
try it at her next period, as I considered
it had done her good at the one she had
just got over.   I  never for a moment
imagined that it  was  from ignorance
that Dr. Workman refrained from ex-
pressing his diagnosis  of the case.
  Mr. B.  Yes; I see  that Dr. Work-
man, with his usual craftiness, declines
to <; identify himself with the views of
either  party."   This actually  means
that he had not made  up his mind as
to what really was the matter with
the girl and that I don't at all  believe.
  Dr. C.   He  again  alleges  that at
the Inquest, I looked upon the  case as
one of amenorrhoea, and I have only
to point to my sworn testimony, even as
reported by  the  Telegraph, to prove
that I did not.
  Mr. B.  But I see that Dr. Workman
says that both  Drs.  Kichardson and
Berryman, who  appear to agree with
you in  thinking this  to  have been  a
case of  dysmenorrhcea,  nevertheless
condemn the  use of galvanism in such
a ease as improper ?
  Dr. C.  TheyT call  its use improper
on  two grounds : first, that it was in-
decent ; next, that it was injudicious.
  Mr. B.  What  as to its being inde-
cent ?
  Dr. C.  It  is surely far less so as a
mode of  cure  for dysmenorrhcea,  as
involving less exposure, than  that by
bougies recommended  by the celebrated
Dr. Mcintosh, and very generally used
by physicians of the  school to which
those  gentlemen belong.  Something
must be done to relieve those who suf-
fer from this most distressing condition.
They cannot  be allowed to go on suffer-
ing as they  generally do, from Neu-
ralgia, Hypochondriasis,or other forms
of severe nervous trouble  and ultima-
tely ran the risk  of drifting   into  in-
sanity    as   this  poor   girl   did.
Until  a  sufficient number  of com-
petent  female physicians  can be  ob-
tained, ladies will be obliged to seek
relief  from  medical  men, even if it
should  involve some  little sacrifice of
their feelings.  And we should always
bear in  mind that " to  the   pure all
things are pure."
  Mr.  B.   What about its injudicious-
ness ?
  Dr. C.  I must be content to remain
of a different opinion  from the medical
witnesses as to the efficacy of galvan-
ism in dysmenorrhcea.   They have
never  tried  it, and  a priori  think  it
likely  to  be  both injurious and inef-
fectual.  I, who have  used it often, am
highly  satisfied with its  effects.  Be-
sides,  there is the fact, which cannot
be got over,  that  its  use in  this case
■was followed by benefit,   You will un-
derstand  that  the application which
throughout this case has,for convenience 
24
been called galvanism, is now more pro-
perly known as Faradization, so called
after the distinguished philosopher who
first suggested this modification of ordin-
ary galvanism. The popular idea, which
the medical witnesses seemed to share,
is, that galvanism is always  an excit-
ant;  whereas,  when  judiciously ap-
plied, it is equally effectual  as  a seda-
tive. No more speedy remedy has yet
been found in Hyperresthesia.Myalgia,
and  other forms  of Neuralgia,  all of
which  are  attended with redundant
nerve action.
  Mr. B.   They don't, in fact, seem to
know anything at all about this form of
galvanism, which,  nevertheless, they
were so ready to  condemn ?
  Dr. C.   So it appears; but, for my
part, I  shall continue to use  this form
of galvanism  or  rather Faradization
as a remedy  both in amenorrhoea and
in dysmenorrhcea.  The mode of using
it in these two conditions is of course
quite different, but I am  satisfied that
it is equally effectual  in  both, and
I don't think that I shall be driven to
adopt the suggestion  kindly made to
me  at the inquest  by  Dr. Berryman,
that I  should treat my next  case of
dysmenorrhcea by bleeding at the arm!
   Mr.  B.  Now  let  us  come  to Dr.
Workman's " if."    He says, " if " there
was " a shadow of suspicion of pregnancy "
when you used this galvanism, that you are
a  criminal abortionist, and  ought  to be
with Notman and other  destroyers  of life.
   Dr. C   That is just where I  meet him;
There was not, as  I have  repeatedly said ;
and he perfectly  well knew when he made
the  insinuation,  that  there was not, and
could not have been the slightest shadow of
such suspicion in Mary Boyd's case when I
used the galvanism.
   Mr. B.   I, who know Dr.  Workman,
can  believe that  well  enough.  He takes
care not to say that there was such " sha-
dow of  suspicion," the contingency being
rather obscurely and indistinctly expressed,
while the inference intended to be drawn
stands conspicuous to all, that Dr. Campbell,
according to Dr. Workman, ought to be in
the Penitentiary.   You could easily retort
upon him his  own peculiar mode of argu-
ment, and say, "if" Dr. Workman should
assert, which, however, he does not venture
directly to do, that there was or could have
been the shadow of suspicion of pregnancy
when  you used the galvanism,   then  Dr.
Workman asserts an infamous lie; or, still
better,  suppose you   were  to   say—and
even this supposition has far better and more
probable grounds  to  stand  upon  than his
against you—that "if" Dr. Workman having
joined in a conspiracy to injure  Homoeopa-
thy by  defaming  you,  tampered with the
dead body of Mary Boyd to give a coloring
to the vile  plot,  then :  instead of being in
charge of the Provincial Lunatic Asylum
as Superintendent, Dr. Joseph Work-
man SHOULD BE HIMSELF TAKEX CHARGE
or in  the Provincial  Penitentiary
AS A FELON.
   Taking care that the last part of the  sen-
tence  should be far enough from the " if,"
to allow the effect of that little word to be-
come imperceptible.
   Dr.  C. He certainly lays  himself open to
some such retort,but I would be very sorry
to adopt his style of controversy.
   Mr.  B.   What about the microscopie
examination that   was  subsequently made
by Dr.  Workman, at which Dr. Bovell and
others were present ?
   Dr.   C.   This,  the  third post mortem
that was held on the remains of this unfor-
tunate girl, was almost as informal and ille-
gal as the first secret one.
   Mr.  B.   No;  I can't admit  that; no-
thing  that  has ever  been heard of, even
connected with coroners' inquests, and that
is saying a  good deal, can approach in ille-
gality that most iniquitous " caucus" meet-
ing of  these conspirators against Homoeo-
pathy ?
   Dr.  C.   Your indignation  is  natural
enough, but try to keep calm.   I certainly
think it was Dr. Workman's duty to have no-
tified me of this examination, knowing what
charges he was about to try to found on it
against me.  I might then  have personally
 seen what he  alleges was there discovered.
 It is  fortunate  that a gentleman of Dr.
 Bovell's well-known integrity was present, 
25
 so  that  we  may  believe that  something
 like a fair report has been  given  of what
 was  seen.  The only remark I shall make
 is with reference  to  the statement of Dr.
 Workman,  that  the  uterus was  twice  as
 large as it should  have been.   This, unless
 that organ had like the external parts, been
 tampered with, is incorrect;  Dr.  Richard-
 son,  who is  quite as competent an  anato-
 mist as  Dr. Workman,  testified  at the
 inquest that the  uterus was of the normal
 size and  Bhape;  I  myself saw it at the
 post mortem, and I am  of the same opinion.
   Mr. B. But what after all was found out
 at this third post mortem ?
   Dr.C. Nothing but what I most fully ex-
 pected would have been found ;  and that is,
 that the uterus and its  appendages were in a
 state of sub-acute inflammation.   The Dys-
 menorrhoeal view of the case, which I have
 held from the very first, was thus only more
 fully  confirmed.  The  correctness  of my
 opinion  had been already proved  to the
 other medical men by the regular,  or  I
 should can it, the legal post-mortem.
   M. B. This   microscopic  examination,
 then after all, threw  little, if any, additional
 light on the case.
   Dr. C. It nevertheless helped to demon-
 strate the local cause of the excitement of
 the sexual feeling that led to the strange delu-
 sion that got possession of the poor  girl's
 imagination.
   Mr. B. What in the world is this " cor-
pus  luteum " that Dr. Workman  so mys-
 teriously announces the discovery of?
   Dr. C.  I am afraid you will  say, when I
explain this, that  it  is  a fresh  instance ol
machiavellian duplicity  for which you seem
too  ready to give Dr.  Workman  credit.
He made no such discovery.   The corpus
luteum had  been seen   by all  the  medical
witnesses  in  the mortuary,  and was  fully
examined  and commented  on before they
gave  their evidence.   Surely if it could
have  been made  to  have  the slightest
bearing on the points   at issue, or if any
deduction unfavourable  to me  could  have
been drawn  from  it, these witnesses would
have made as much out  of it  as they could ?
  Mr. B.  No doubt  they would, they  do
 not  seem to have  shewn  you any  special
 favor.
   Dr.  C.  No indeed!   But  they  well
 knew  that  the presence  of this " corpus
 luteum " was an evidence  only  of " ovula-
 tion " which is merely  another  name  for
 menstruation.
   Mr. B.  Dr. Workman I suppose knew
 this   when  he penned  the  artful  allu-
 sion  to it  in  his  letter, leading  people to
 imagine that it was something of immense
 importance which had been freshly brought
 to light.
   Dr. C. I am afraid he did.
   Mr. B.  So  then  the thing,  after  all,
 is a  mare's nest of  Dr. Workman's,  or
 something worse.
   Dr. C. A corpus luteum really and truly
 amounts to nothing as a proof of any con-
 dition.  Any medical jurist or physiologist
 will now tell you so.  Nevertheless, it  has
 been the subject of keen controversies among
 these  same physiologists and medical jurists.
 They used to talk a great deal of nonsense
 about true and false  " corpora lutea,"  but
 more ample and scientific observations have
 shewn that these bodies are quite unreliable
 as indications of any thing.   It would be
 worth  your while  to look up Carpenter's
 Physiology on  this  point,
   Mr. B. But even  if this corpus  luteum
 amounted to nothing, what did it matter so
 long  as it gave  Dr.  Workman   an  oppor-
 tunity to  make a  damaging  insinuation.
   Dr. C. Well I suppose I  have  settled
 the " corpus luteum " question ; what next ?
   Mr. B. I want  you  to  tell  me a little
 more about the  galvanism, and how you came
 to use it in a case  which might  have been
 one of  suppression  of the menses ?
  Dr. C Even if it had it would still have
 been the proper remedy for  that  condition,
 but I told Dr. Workman,most distinctly, that
 the galvanism had not been used until after
 the menstruation had once begun, and had
 againstopped. I testified on oath distinctly to
 this fact before  the jury.   Now,  as I told
you before a case where  menstruation  has
once begun,  is certainly not one of Amenor-
rhoea  whatever  else  it may be,  and  when,
as in this case, the  interruption was  at-
tended with pain or straining, it  is usually 
26
called  Dysmenorrhcea,  that  is painful or
difficult menstruation, a condition,  which,
as I  have again and  again told you is total-
ly incompatible with pregnancy.
   Mr. B. But did not the  strange state-
ment that the girl  made to  Mrs. Campbell,
lead  you to think  that  there  might be, to
say the least, a shadow of, I will not  say
probability, but even of possibility of that
condition existing ?
   Dr. C.  Most certainly not, I never for
one  moment  believed  the  absurd  story,
that   my  son had  violated   her person as
she  alleged,  during  her sleep !   The fact
of her  allowing a  month  to  elapse before
she  told it, of itself  made it  very  improb-
able  ; and  her retraction of the charge, two
hours after she  made  it,  showed  that it
must have been a  delusion  from  the first.
   Mr. B. It is (he strangest  story I ever
heard;  you must have been puzzled how to
act ?
   Dr. C.  No, for she had told my wife that
it was the  non-appearance  of her monthly
illness when it was due, that had led  her to
think  that something had  happened to  her,
which its subsequent appearance in a couple
of hours  made her see  was  a mistake.
I then knew that the  delusion was  caused
by the mental disturbance that often attends
difficult menstruation.   Next morning when
the discharge stopped, the delusion return-
ed ;  she suffered very much and continued
to do so until the discharge once more came
on  after  the  application  of  the galvanic
or rather " Faradaip " current.
   Mr. B.  What other grounds than  the
retraction of  her  story, made  you think
it so absolutely incredible ?
   Dr. C. To put the strongest reason first—
I  don't believe in Parthenogenesis, (you
may look up the word at your leisure.)  It is
commonly  supposed  that to produce preg-
nancy, an interview, (pardon the euphuism)
with the opposite sex is required.   Before
the galvanism was used, I had ascertained be-
yond doubt that no such "interview"  had
ever  taken place. The examination which Dr
Workman wishes people to suppose  so un-
usual and  improper, made  this  point as
clear as possible; thehymen'wasintact, and
presented asharp.well defined margin,so that
the girl must have been, as I said, a perfect
maiden.   I told her so at the time, and re-
buked her pretty sharply for having trumped
up such a tale when she was well aware that
no man in the world had ever been near her.
  Mr.  B. What did she say to that ?
  Dr.  C. She said,  that  though she well
knew that no one had ever  been near her
when awake; still she had thought it  possi-
ble  that my son  might have come  to her
during her sleep as she had felt so strangely
at her last monthly illness.   That she  could
not get the boy out of her  head all day, and
was dreaming of him all night.
  Mr.  B.  That's  it exactly 1   I  always
thought that some vivid dream had been at
the hottom of the girl's delusion.
  Dr. C.  I have no doubt  whatever the
idea originated in that way.
  Dr.  C. The extreme improbability of her
having been attacked, as  she said she had
been,  in  her sleep,  without either  being
awakened  herself, or without the  servant
boy  who slept  close to  her  door   being
aroused, must be self-evident.
  Mr.  B. But apart from the story of the
violation, might she  not,  as  some  of the
nurses  report her to have said, have carried
on an illicit connexion with your son ?
  Dr.C. Is it at all likely that she would have
gone to my wife and told her that my son had
been to her room a  month before, and had
never been there since, if she was at the time,
conscious that she  was  carrying on any
illicit connexion with him ?   Again,   if, as
has been surmised by some, she  made the
communication to my wife under  the  pres-
sure of  remorse caused by  the  preaching
she had  heard, why did  she retract  it so
soon.  But setting aside all other grounds,
her character was  quite  above  suspicion.
  Mr.  B.  How old was she ?
  Dr.  C. Mary  Boyd was  nineteen  yeara
old.    The boy  whom she  alleged  had
violated her, was two years younger.
  Mr.  B. What kind of a girl was she ?
  Dr.  C. In  person  she  was  rather over
than under the  middle size, very pleasing
in appearance, simple and engaging in her
manner,  of rather  a sedate and  religious
turn of mind.  She  was especially remark-
able for her  modesty of demeanour and 
27
propriety of conduct;  she was an excellent
servant, and most  attentive to her duties.
My  family liked her  very much, and we
most sincerely regret her unhappy fate.
   Mr. B. Had you  any reason to suppose
that there was anything  wrong with her
mind when she made  the charge against
your son ?
   Dr. C. Not very  decidedly.  We  had
noticed for some little time  that she hod
become unsettled and restless in her man-
ner.  We  had  seen  nothing  to make us
consider her  actually insane, but, rather as
I  expressed  it to  the jury, she seemed
drifting into  insanity.  She talked strangely
upon religious subjects,particularly about the
burning up of the world.   This " burning"
seemed to be a very  fixed  idea, but it  was
not the only one she dwelt on.
   Mr. B.  What other matters  did  she
speak of ?
   Dr.  C.  She told  my wife on the day on
which  she brought the charge against my
son,  which was Thursday, 17th April, (Dr.
Workman is anxious for dates, and I wish to
gratify him), that she was  very fond of my
son ; then she asked my wife to " give  him
to her."  After this she daily importuned
both myself and my wife to let her have the
boy, saying" that she could not live without
him."   This,  curiously enough, she kept
harping on, not to  my son, but to all the
rest  of us, and if the nurses of  the Asylum
are  to be  believed, she continued to rave
about the lad up to the time of her death,say-
ing,  " 6he loved him  and would die for him."
   Mr.  B.  But did your son do anything to
encourage her in this ?
   Dr. C. I am quite sure that he did not;
all in the house know that he was quite in-
different to her, although the poor creature,
crazed  by  a mere  physical  trouble,  was
driven  into an absorbing passion for him.
The term " passion " however, hardly  cor-
rectly expresses the  idea, as it cannot pro-
perly be applied  to  any emotion the result
of insanity ; but I cannot find a better word
to express the condition.
   Mr. B. This is what you called in your
letter Erotomania,  which I understand to
be a kind of love-madness.
   Dr.  C. Precisely.  It is a  very sad though
 not uncommon form of insanity, and  the
 subjects are generally   persons of  some
 education and refinement.   It differs in  one
 remarkable respect from   Nymphomania,
 having always for its object one individual,
 and being compatible with perfect propriety
 of conduct, whereas Nymphomania is quite
 the opposite, being indiscriminate in its ob-
 jects, and frequently leading to great immo-
 desty of manner.    Shakespeare has  given
 an instance of this type  of madness  in
 Hamlet's Ophelia, and  (which is a curious
 coincidence),  he makes her select suicide
 by drowning,  as  a means of ending  her
 troubles, the very way in which Mary Boyd
 first  tried  to put  an end  to hers.   The
 strange  love that  both women and men
 have felt for statues has often been descri-
 bed by poets.   This curious aberration  of
 mind, of which authentic  records  exist, is
 probably a  variety  of  this same  type  of
 insanity.
   Mr. B. Tell me why you kept  the girl
 in your house after you  found her possessed
 in   this   curious  manner.   Above  all
 when  she   made  the   unfounded charge
 against your son, why  did you not  turn
 her off at once ?
   Dr. C.  It would have been  very  great
 cruelty  to  have done  so.    We  attached
 not the slightest belief to her strange story;
 her parents  lived at a great distance; she had
 no friends in the city, and she might if sent
 away in her wretched  mental  state, have
 easily  become  the victim  of some scoun-
 drel.   Moreover, I told you she was a most
 excellent servant and they  are not always
 easily replaced; and more than all,  we had
strong hopes that her health  would  soon  be
 re-established,  upon which,  of course,  all
 her  madness  and  delusions  would  have
 vanished.
   Mr. B. This being the true state  of  the
 case, how comes it that  so much stress has
 been laid on the subject of religious insanity
 in reference to it.
   Dr.  C. In the blank form, for the admis-
 sion of patients to  the Asylum,  I put down
 Mary Boyd's  case as one  of religious  in-
 sanity,  because it was necessary to give
 some  name  to the type of insanity which
 she manifested, and religious ideas, though 
2fl
as I said before they were not the only topic
she dwelt upon, were nevertheless far more
constantly the subject of her ravings than
the other, especially after she had, to some
extent, improved in her female condition.
   Mr. B. Then you did not consider that
religious excitement was  the cause  of  her
insanity, though I see Dr.  Workman says
you did.
   Dr. C. I did not ; this is another point
on which Dr. Workman must have  misun-
derstood me.
   Mr.  B. Or, with  his economy of  truth,
more  likely misrepresented you, as  he  has
generally done.   What did you really  say
to him ?
   Dr. C. I told him that I considered  the
religious ravings, especially her dwelling so
much on what Mr. Caughey had said, as the
evidence of insanity, but  not the cause  of
it.  In fact I do not believe that religion
is ever the cause of insanity.
   Mr. B. You  surely  differ  there from
very  high authorities.
   Dr. C. You know that I am  rather   in
the habit of differing from  very high  au-
thorities upon a good many points connect-
ed with my profession, and I suppose  that I
must  be content to add  this  one  to  the
number.
   Mr. B. What explanation then do you
give of the so called cases of religious  in-
sanity which  are so frequently seen.
   Dr. C. Persons  suffering from certain
physical degeneration, either derived from
hereditary taint or otherwise induced,  are
generally at the  same time in  an unstable
mental condition.  In  this  precarious state
a very little matter fixes a predominating idea
in their minds.  But the dwelling on this
idea proves merely that the  insane tempera-
ment  pre-existed.   The train had been laid,
all that was  required was the spark  to  set
fire to it.
   Mr. B. I am glad you have   spoken  so
clearly on this point.  It will greatly com-
fort some very worthy  meu who  have  felt
hurt at the discussions  to  which  this case
has given rise.   They shudder at the bare
idea of religion ever  being  a cause  of  in-
sanity.
   Dr. C. I repeat that  I do not think it
ever is.  If a certain physical degeneration
does not exist,  all  the  preaching in  the
world will never  drive any  human  being
into a lunatic Asylum.
   Mr. B. Your Methodist friends will feel
more kindly  disposed to  you  for  having
made this explicit declaration.
   Dr. C. All the  Methodists of my  ac-
quaintance   already  know   how  I  have
always  spoken   on this  point.   Do  you
suppose that if I hadbelieved that the girl had
been driven  mad by the preaching of one
Methodist clergyman, that  I should  have
sent as  I did,   for  another  to  come  to
comfort her  ?
   Mr. B. Did you really do this ?
   Dr. C. Most certainly I did.  The Rev.
George Young,  a distinguished ornament of
that Church, who has lately  left  for  the
Red River Settlement, is  a   very old  and
highly esteemed friend of  mine, I  sent for
him, and, at very great  inconvenience  to
himself, for  he was then packing up to leave
the cjty, he came and sat with her for nearly
an hour, trying to soothe her troubled mind ;
but he told me  when he  came out of the
room, that he had utterly failed  to  make
any impression  on her.   Besides   I  think
you know that many of  my   warmest  aud
truest   friends  belong  to  the Methodist
body.
   Mr. B. There is but one  other point on
which I wish to question you.  Dr. Work-
man wants to know what medical men were
present  when you  made  the " personal "
examination of  Mary Boyd,  now, before
you answer I foresee that  it  will bring out
some  fresh   evidence  of   the  insidious
dexterity of this " Pecksniff."  He makes
no direct charge, but hints that something
improper must  have taken place at the ex-
amination.
   Dr. C. Dr. Workmin surely knows how
painful  it  must  always be  to a  modest
young woman,who finds her health deranged
and  her very life perhaps endangered,  to
have to submit  to local  treatment  as  her
only hope of cure; for this treatment previ-
ous examination is of course indispensable.
Does not Dr. Workman think that  it would
very  materially add to her  suffering and
confusion to be obliged  to  undergo this 
29
painful,  but  unavoidable   ordeal  in  the
presence of more than one medical man ?
   Mr. B. Of course he does, but then it
suited his purpose to make what he thought
a damaging insinuation.  But if that was
what was meant by Dr.HalloweU's euphuism
of " critical " examination, then I see  that
in his evidence, Dr.  Workman  gives  the
public to  believe that he never makes any
such  upon  women,  whom  he  says  he
" always  treats   as  he  would  his  own
daughters."
   Dr. C.  That  was  the  most  astounding
declaration  I  ever heard from a  medical
man.
   Mr. B. What was  there so very remark-
able about it ?
   Dr. C.  A physician  in charge of some
two or  three hundred female lunatics, very
many of whom by his own acknowledgment
are sad victims of " peculiar habits " which
in the majority of cases are the result of
mere local irritation,  arising possibly from
a  tumour, ulcer,  or  some other perfectly
removable cause, allows these poor creatures
to. be goaded into frenzy  by excitement,
and  ultimately as the result  of their en-
deavours to relieve it,  to  drift into utter
imbecility. All because he is too squeamish
to make a local examination.
   Mr.  B.  This  seems to be  sacrificing
health, reason  and and  even  life itself to
mock-modesty, and in that case  I should
say that Dr.  Workman  is totally unfit for
the situation he holds, and the sooner he is
superseded the better it  will be, at least for
the female inmates of the Asylum.
   Dr. C.  My  own strong  opinion is that
competent female physicians should, as soon
as they can be obtained,  be placed in charge
of all female lunatics suffering like those
we have spoken of, and  they  constitute a
large  proportion of the  whole.   I do not
mean anything like the  drivelling old ma-
trons we generally see  in  such institutions,
but graduates of Medical Colleges, well edu-
cated, experienced practitioners;  and many
such ladies are now to be found.
   Mr. B.  I think the  public will be entire-
ly of your opinion on that point; though it
is cot every medical man that would have
the liberality to acknowledge  the compe-
 tency of physicians of the opposite sex.
   Dr. C. I am happy to proclaim  that I
 have  met  with  several  most  highly ac-
 complished  lady  physicians,  whose know-
 ledge of anatomy, physiology, in fact of all
 the  sciences  bearing  upon  our profession
 was ample   and  thorough.  Yet  I  can
 hardly bring  myself to believe  that  Dr.
 Workman objects  to  such " critical" ex-
 amination in every case.
   Mr. B. Then he had no business to  lead
 the jury to believe that he did.   He wished
 them to get  the  impression that you  had
 done something unheard of, or, at all events
 most unusual and improper.  That he and
 the  other  doctors   succeeded in  so do-
 ing is evident from the ridiculous postscript
 which they had the impertinence to append
 to their idiotic verdict.
   Dr.  C. If ever  there was a case  where
 close .attention to the condition of  certain
 organs was necessary it was  surely the  pre-
 sent.  The microscopical examination com-
 pletely  established  that in  Mary  Boyd's
 case there  was going  on a  sub-acute or
 chronic inflammation  of all the  internal
 generative  organs.   This  was beyond all
 doubt  the cause of her  insanity,  as  was
 shown by the peculiarity of her delusion.
  Mr. B. Dr. Workman seems to be  par-
 ticularly anxious to know not only who was
 present  at, but also the precise date of, the
 examination which he  wanted the  jury to
 think so very unusual—can't you tell him ?
  Dr. C.  I  can  easily satisfy  Dr.  Work-
 man's   curiosity,  I  hope   he  will be
 equally  willing to  clear up  another  point.
 On the 20th of April  there were quite  suf-
 ficient evidences of virginity in Mary Boyd
 to enable any medical  jurist to  speak on
 that point with confidence.  From that  date
 the  girl  was  too  closely  looked  after
 until the 29 th April when  she was taken
 to the Asylum,  for  it  to be  possible for
 those signs to have  been removed without
 detection in  the  way  in  which  such evi-
 dences  are commonly made to disappear.
 The conclusion therefore must be that  they
 vanished, or at least very greatly diminished
in distinctness sometime between the period
of her entering the Asylum, and the 6th  May
when her dead body was legally  inspected 
30
in the " Mortuary."
  Mr.  B.  I hope this  will  satisfy  Dr.
Workman's  anxiety as to dates.   I don't
6ee  what he  wanted to make  out of it un-
less it was to get  another opportunity  of
making some vague insinuations of, I don't
know what,  against you ; and  of sneering
at your friend Dr. Adams, whom I know
to be a man of the most upright  and  un-
blemished character,  whose only crime  in
Dr. Workman's eyes must be that he  is a
Homceopathist.
  Dr. C.  That is quite crime enough.
  Mr. B.  But I  see  that  Dr.  Workman
has been censured in a  silly  letter  in  the
Telegraph,  for  having  allowed  Homoeo-
pathic medicines to be  administered in the
Asylum.
  Dr. C.  It is  true that he  allowed me  to
leave for the patient a little Bryonia,  but
the comment which he made in her pre-
sence upon its supposed inertness naturally
led  her to object to taking it.
  Mr. B.  Which  he tries to  turn  into a
proof that  the  girl  was afraid  to  take
anything from your hand.
  Dr.  C.  It must be  borne in mind  that
the wound in the throat made all swallowing
exceedingly  painful, and no wonder Bhe ob-
jected to going  through the  pain of  taking
any medicine, however tasteless, when she
had been  told  that no good was to be ob-
tained from  it.
  Mr. B.  From what I know of the efficacy
of  Homoeopathic remedies,  I  should have
expected some good to result from the admin-
istration of  Bryonia in such  a case ; which
had then,  I believe, become one of bronchial
and lung  inflammation.   To judge by re-
sults, it would  have done at least as much
good as the medicines  poured into her by
Dr. Workman.  I mean the Opium, Hyoscy-
amus and Digitalis, mentioned in his evi-
dence, all of which are virulent poisons, I
believe ;  which, even if they did no harm,
and of that  I am by no means certain, they,
at  all  events, do  not  seem  to have  done
much good.
   Dr. C.  I  am glad  that  upon this point
you are so thoroughly upon  my side.
  Mr. B. I hope you will  soon  have the
majority  of the public  as  thoroughly  on
your side.  You have always known me to
be a firm believer in  your system.   I have
far too often experienced its efficacy to have
any doubt on the subject.  I am happy to
see that you number among your adherents
a  very  large proportion  of  men of  high
station  and intelligence,  both in my own
profession and among the clergy, who are
the most competent  to judge on the ques-
tion as being perfectly unbiassed.
   Dr. C. I know that to  be the case, but I
am nevertheless  glad to have you admit it
to fully.
   Mr. B. How came it that Dr. Lizars was
not at the inquest?   I think you said that
he helped you to dress the girl's wound.
   Dr. C. A subpoena was issued  for him
for the first  day of the inquest,  but as  he
was out of town it was not served.   He re-
turned  the same evening, and should have
received an additional notice from the coro-
ner when,the inquest was  unexpectedly pro-
tracted, to be present  on  the second day at
the post mortem.  Having assisted me with
his well-known surgical skill at the dressing
of the wound, and being able to testify to
the girl's  mental condition  at •  the  time,
besides, as he has since informed  me, being
able to give important evidence as to some
other material points, bearing  upon the
subjects we have discussed, he had a better
right to be present and  make  the post mor-
tem examination than those who were  called
upon to do so.
   Mr. B.    But that  would have  led  to
a total', failure of the conspiracy, for though I
have always heard Dr Lizars speak strongly
against   Homoeopathy, I am sure  ho is
far too honorable a man to lend  himself to
any underhand scheme to put it down.
   Dr. C.  I am quite certain of that.
   Mr. B. I have always  heard Dr. Lizars
admit that in spite of  your  Homoeopathic
heresy you were a perfectly competent sur-
geon, as able a physiologist and pathologist
as any man of the  school you  have left;
that he would as soon, I don't know whether
he did not say sooner, take  your diagnosis
of any disease  than that of any medical
man in town.
   Dr. C. Such testimony, of course, is very
gratifying to me, but I am afraid that such 
31
liberality of opinion may bring Dr. Lizars
into discredit with  the  practitioners of his
own school.
   Mr. B.   By-the-bye, I had  almost for-
gotten to ask  you  to explain a rather im-
portant point, and that  is:  what  Mary
Boyd  could have meant, if she really said
what  one  of  the   nurses  avers  she did,
by saying that you and your son took her
into a room  and  gave  her something that
burned her  inside up ?
   Dr. C.   I  am totally at a loss to know;
but I  have  been given to understand that
this, coupled with Dr. Workman's  insinua-
tion as to the possibility of pregnancy hav-
ing at one time  existed,  has given rise in
the minds of some  people  to an idea that
something  may  have been  given,  with a
view to produce  abortion.   Now  it  has
over and over again been clearly proved that
pregnancy did not  exist, and could not pos-
sibly have existed,  or even been supposed to
have possibly existed; therefore,  nothing
could  have been given to her to put an end
to that condition.
   Mr. B.   Besides, your school are not in
the habit of giving  doses of anything likely
to " burn the inside."
   Dr  C. Andj even if we were,  it is known
to all educated physicians, in which class I
may venture without presumption  to rank
myself, that  though certain powerful med-
icines  injudiciously used may lead to mis-
carriage in  delicate females with  a strong
predisposition to  it; yet the impossibility
of bringing  it on  in a  healthy  woman  by
any drugs, whether  they  " burn the  inside
out"  or not,  is  clearly established, and I
dare say it is  known even to those wretches
who are  constantly disgusting the public
by their vile and  mysteriously-worded  ad-
vertisements,  of having such trash  for sale.
If I could have  supposed  pregnancy possi-
ble, which  it  has been proved  I could not,
it is not  very  likely  that  I  would  have
joined  with  my son in such a preposterous
method of putting an end to it; no medical
man of common sense or intelligence would
believe this for one moment.  The "burning"
that the patient talked of, and the word was
scarcely ever out of her mouth, was the burn-
ing up of the world;  the nurses mingled toge-
ther her ravings on the two subjects upper-
most in her mind.   But as I said before, she
never,in my hearing,or in that of any member
of my family joined the two subjects together.
  Mr. B. I have now  done with  my cross-
examination,  and must congratulate you on
the triumphant manner in which your cha-
racter as a man  and your  skill as a physi-
cian have come out of this most searching
ordeal.    You have shown in the manage-
ment of  the most perplexing  case that it
ever fell to the lot of any  one to deal  with,
both sound judgment and great kindness  of
feeling.   I am  sure that  the conspirators
who plotted your rUin, will find  that they
have only made you stand higher in general
esteem, and  this  painful  subject will pro-
bably be now dropped for  ever.
  Dr.  C.  I  hope  it will  be so, because
these public discussions are only  a hindrance
to  me, by taking up my  time,   and  to
my  family they  are a  source of very  great
annoyance.
  Mr. B.  What do you  think  of  putting
our conversation  down in  writing, in the
order  and as near as you can remember,
and in our very  words. If you can get the
Telegraph to publish  it,  you will need no
better vindication.    If  I should notice
any more  letters in the papers on this case,
I  will  drop in  and talk the matter over
with you, and you can  publish  our  con-
versation  as  an answer to them.
  Dr.  C.  I am much obliged to you for this
offer, as well as for all  the trouble you have
taken hitherto.  I will follow your advice as
to writing down  our talk.   I shall  have  to
leave out  a great many of the kind things
you have  said of myself; and I cannot ven-
ture to put down the strong terms in which
you have  spoken of Dr. Workman.
  Mr. B. Don't be so fastidious.  I have
thoroughly proved every thing I said of Dr.
Workman.  You seemed   shocked at first
at the language  I used, but  [  have estab-
lished all that I asserted.  I have shewn not
only  that Dr.  Workman's  insinuations
against you are all untrue, but that he well
knew their untruthfulness when  he was
sending them  for  publication.   You  must
therefore  be  ready to admit that I was
most fully justified in the opinion I expres- 
32
sed, and both you and the whole public will
probably  now agree that I have proved that
Dr.  Joseph Workman,  Superintendent  of
the Provincial Lunatic Asylum, still merits
the character, which as  Dr. Joseph  Work-
man, editor  of  the  Toronto   Mirror,  he
had earned, of  being the  most  unscrupu-
lous and reckless slanderer that ever han-
dled a pen.
         108 Bay St., Toronto, 27th April, 1868.
 Rev. Georgk Young, Bay-Street,
   My Dbar SiR,--Our servant girl is greatly trou-"
 bled in her mind, and I think shows decided marks
 of insanity.   She has expressed a desire to see a
 Clergyman,  and tells me  that she has always
 been in  the  habit  of  attending  the  Methodist
 Church.   I will feel grateful if you will  kindly
 come here as soon as you can, and try  to comfort
 her.  I feel unwilling to  trespass on your time, as
 I know you are in all the trouble of preparation to
 leave; but I am sure that in a case like this you
 will not object to come.
                Yours faithfully,
                      D.  CAMPBELL, M.D.

   In addition to the constant attendance  of Dr.
 Adams   from  the  very  commencement of Mary
 Boyd's illness;  Dr.  Campbell, when the case be-
 came more urgent,  wishing Dr. Hall to give her
 the benefit of his skill and  experience,  sent  him
 the following note.   Dr.  Hall, with  his usual
 promptitude, came at once.
                  108 Bay St., Toronto,
                     Monday noon, 27th April.
 Dr. John Hall, Riohmond St.
  My Dear Sir,— Our servant girl has, I fear, be-
 come quite insane,  and  it  may be necessary to
 send her  to the  Asylum.   I am unwilling to do
 this as long as there is  no  danger  to  be appre-
 hended of her doing mischief either to herself or to
 others j but she is talking now in such a manner as
 to make me very anxious about her.   I will  feel
 greatly  obliged if you will come and see her.
 Possibly you may be able  to prescribe something
for her that may render it unnecessary to send her
away.  She is a very good,  respectable  girl,  and
we are all very much concerned about her.
  Please  send word by bearer when  you  can
come.
               Yours faithfully,
                           D. CAMPBELL.
      108 Bay Street, Toronto, 28th April, 1868.

   Mr. Thomas Boyd, Woodville, Eldon, Ont.

  Dear Sir,—Your daughter Mary has been living
in my family since the New Year, and until a week
or two ago she has been  in  very good  health.
About ten days ago she  began  to complain of un-
   Our conversation  here  came  to  an
end.   I hope you will be able to  spare
me space enough in your paper for the
report of it I have given above.
                D  . CAMPBELL, M.D.

108 Bay  Street, 20th May, 1868.
 ea«y feelings, seemed to be unhappy without any
 apparent cause and talked very strangely. This
 condition has gradually become worse, when yester-
 day the poor girl made an attempt to drown herself
 in the well, but she was fortunately rescued with-
 out receiving any injury.  I have had the assist-
 ance of other Medical men in my efforts to benefit
 her, but they have as yet been unavailing, and for
 her own safety, as well as for that of my family, I
 find myself under the painful  necessity of  sending
her to tho Asylum.
  I have been very unwilling to do this, and have
postponed it  as long as it oan be done with safety.
I think that you should  come to  Toronto  without
delay to look after her.
              Yours very faithfully,
                     D.  CAMPBELL, M. D.
        108 Bay Street, Toronto, 1st May, 1868.
  To  the  Postmaster,  Woodville,  Township  of
Eldon, Ont.
  Dbar  Sir,—I wrote on the 28th inst., a letter to
Mr. Thomas Boyd of your township, informing him
of the sad condition  of his daughter Mary, who
had  been living  in my family for some months,
and had become insane.  Since I wrote to him, she
has, as you will see by the " Leader," (of which I
send  a  copy by this mail to you) made a second
attempt at self-destruotion, whioh I much fear will
be fatal.  She is in the Asylum.   I have seen
her this morning, and will see her again this even-
ing, but I greatly fear  that her recovery is hope-
less.  The wound in her throat is not doing  well,
and has caused inflammation of the lining mem-
brane of the lungs.  My object in writing to you is
that I know  that  farmers rarely  send to  their
Post Office more than once a week, and thinking
that Mr. Boyd might not receive my letter, I  now
write  to you to get a speoial messenger to take my
letter of the 28th to nim, and  he may  take this
one too, and to beg  of him if  he expects to see his
daughter Mary alive, to oome  to Toronto without
delay. He will not get this notioe in time to be in
Toronto before the  Grand Trunk train of Monday
arrives, and I greatly .fear that he  will then be
too late  to see his daughter  alive.   She has been
so good  and faithful a servant in my family, that
we feel the deepest  interest in her, and will do all
we can for her.
              Yours truly,
                      D. CAMPBELL, M.D. j
The  following  are  the  Letters  referred to  bearing  on this  interesting case.
           They are printed verbatim from Dr. Campbell's letter book: 
COMMENTS  OF  THE  PEESS.
  We have received advanced sheets of
a pamphlet relating  to  tho death  of
the girl Mary Boyd, formerly a servant
in the employ of Dr. Campbell, which
took place  recently  in  the Asylum.
The pamphlet contains a certified copy
of the evidence taken at the inquest;
all of what has  appeared in the papers
on the subject;  and a very interesting
conversation  between Mr. Blank and
Dr. C.  which  goes  over the whole
ground,   and meets   every  objection
which medical partisanship or personal
unfriendliness could broadly affirm  or
hurtfully insinuate.  When the verdict
was rendered in this ease we strongly
censured it, for  what seemed to us the
very good  reason, that a jury should
not have been  influenced by the prac-
titioners  of any one School of Medicine
to condemn the  practice of a doctor be-
longing  to  another  and   a   hostile
School.  The full statements  now be-
fore us, which wc  have carefully read,
confirm  our  first  impression.   Dr.
Campbell has been made the object of
very bitter  attack mainly because he
is a Homoeopathic physician  and the
President of the Homoeopathic Board.
It has been very broadly insinuated
that the use of galvanism—or what Dr.
 Campbell calls " Faradayism"—in the
 case  of  this unfortunate girl had no
 pure  or  proper motive to serve.  The
 evidence  clearly shows  that the girl
 was not pregnant; that she was suffer-
 ing from a condition known  as dysmen-
 orrhcea; that she  labored under delu-
 sions  which finally led to  a  species of
 insanity—delusions which in her saner
 moments  she  freely acknowledged.
 The admission that the girl never was
 pregnant narrows the question down to
 one of treatment.   If Dr. Campbell's
 treatment is to be open to supervision,
 censorious  criticism and condemnation
 by every Allopathic  physician  who
 differs from him, the Legislature might
 as well step in at once and declare that
 Allopaths alone shall be  allowed to
 practice.  We have not quite come to
 that yet; and the more intelligent por-
 tions  of the public are already pretty
 well  convinced  that infallibility,  or
 anything near approaching to it, is not
 to be  found in any School, and that at
 best  medical  practice  is  uncertain
 enough to be properly called empirical
 The pamphlet places the whole  matter
 in its proper light, and ought to be
very  generally  read.—Toronto  Daily
Leader, June 4th, 1868. 
34
  The case of Mary Boyd, upon whose
remains  an inquest  was  held in the
Lunatic  Asylum some weeks ago, has
since been the subject of discussion in
an evening paper.  Dr. Campbell, whose
conduct was impugned by an ignorant
jury, acting under the prompting of a
ring of doctors of  a   rival school, has
defended himself with great spirit and
ability, so effectually  in fact,  that the
journal which admitted  the attacks
upon him,  was  afraid to publish his
closing and most crushing reply.   Dr.
Campbell, has, therefore, published the
documents,  evidence, editorials   and
letters, pro and con, in  a pamphlet
which he will send to all the medical
men in the Province,  and all the news-
papers, that they  may judge  of the
merits of the case, and which will also
be for  sale at the periodical shops for
a low price.  We  have been  favored
with an early  copy of this publication,
and it  confirms our formerly expressed
opinion that the charges  against Dr.
Campbell were trumped up against him
by medical rivals,and  would never have
been heard of had he not been a  prac-
titioner of a new School.   The case is
really  not fit for discussion in a news-
paper, and it  fortunately can be dis-
posed of in a very few sentences, so far
as we are concerned.
  A charge of abortion has been insin-
uated  rather than urged  against Dr.
Campbell by  his  more unscrupulous
opponents.  The medical men examin-
ed at the inquest proved that the con-
dition  of the girl  was  utterly incon-
sistent with the allegation that she was
   Note—No one in Canada requires to be told t
of the Dominion.  Of opposite political views, they
ability with which they are conducted.
 or had been  enceinte; and the supposi-
 tion that  an old  experienced physi-
 cian like Dr. Campbell had  attempted    ■'
 an act impossible of  performance, and
 for which  no cause existed, is too ab-
 surd for  belief.   Equally absurd is the
 supposition that a father, upon being
 informed by a servant in his house that
 she  had formed  improper  relations
 towards  a son of 17, two years younger
 than herself, would, if he believed her
 story true, and not a delusion resulting
 from  mania, have   kept  her  in his
 house.  He would unquestionably have
 turned her out and  made an end of the
 matter.  The girl was  insane ;  her al-
 legation  was a delusion, and Dr. Camp-.
 bell, with the kindness which forms a
 conspicuous part, of his  character, en-
 deavored to cure her, called in  two or
 three medical  men to  assist, sent for
 her  clergyman, did  everything,  in
 short, which  humanity could suggest
 towards a faithful servant, as he  sup-
 posed, temporarily  deprived of reason.
  As to the use  of the galvanic battery
 by  Dr.  Campbell, his accusing rivals
 thiek he was   wrong.   Dr.  Campbell
 backs  up  his  views  by  authorities.
 The  non-medical public  can  hardly
 form an opinion on the subject.   It is
 a matter for doctors entirely.  But he
 must be an extraordinary fool who de-
 cides  as  the  Coroner's Jury  did,  that
 because Dr. Richardson and Dr.  Berry-
man said galvanism ought not to have
 been  used, Dr.   Campbell's treatment
was wrong.  The odium theologicum is
mildness  itself  compared  with  the
spirit which  animates  some  of our
medicos when hunting down a rival.
  We trust that Provincial journalists
who came to a  hasty  conclusion on
this case  on the  garbled evidence  sup-
plied  by the Coroner, will  read  Dv.
Campbell's pamphlet and do him jus-
tice  in the premises.—Toronto Daily
 Globe, June 5th,  1868.
these comments are made by the two leading papers
alike distinguished for impartiality and the eminent 
 
 
 
<J
■*&<"'
>v