• "»V ■;•':-'**•■';'»'''■ *

.......„    «?    y^  v  i«..- 
WZ 100 L962t 1871
55821820R
NLM  052T5M05  d
    NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE
NLM052954052 
 
 
          THE TRIAL 10F



Doctor  Oscar  F.  Lund,
                      ***

            l'PON AN



      INDICTMENT


              FOR



  MANSLAUGHTER.
ven.i*
.i-,n-- "
KENNARD & HAY, STATIONERS AND PRINTERS,

          89 Liberty Street.
1871. 
UJZ
100 
THE  TBIAL
WAS HELD AT THE
$U!£i!50tt (fW^ lj&®wcb sf ^watHx «$&mBm9
BEFORE
Hon.  B.  F.  RANDOLPH, Presiding  Judge,

                    AND           *

   JOHN STURGES,  F. W. BOIIXSTEDT,
          JOHN BRINKERHOFF,
                         As Associate Judges.
A. Q.  GARRETSON, District Attorney.
J. DIXOX, Jk.,              W. E. ROGERS,
            ALBERT S. CLOKE,
                      Counsel  foe Defendant.
              f'S         '^o
              "/'V-v>  r.-V .
ALBKKT E. (1<K'lIKAN^;'^V^,l'7>/^y' /b/'  T)''frii(l'fnt. 
 
PREFACE.
  I offer to my friends and the public- these pages, which contain
the evidence elicited during my trial for manslaughter, held before
his Honor, Judge B. F. Randolph, at the Hudson  County Court
House, in Jersey City, New Jersey.  The trial  commenced Mon-
day, December 5th, 1870, and continued, without interruption, for
two weeks.
  I neither desire nor intend to comment upon the evidence ; it
speaks for itself.  I  wish, however, to thank all my friends who
stood so nobly by me in my time of great need ; and I would also
thank those gentlemen, who had never met or seen me before, but
who came forward, uninfluenced by any prejudiced feelings against
a system of medicine not regarded by themselves as orthodox, or
against me as an advocate of  that system—who gave their testi-
mony in most distinct and unbiased language—who concealed no
facts, thereby necessitating a  rigid cross-examination to tear the
truth from their reluctant lips—and who, finally, were not seeking
to secure a verdict  of  guilty, but were giving utterance only to
honest convictions, anxious to see nothing except justice itself
done.  I would, moreover, thank most  heartily all those  of my
friends, who,  although not actual witnesses  upon the stand, still
gave their busiest hours daily to  me, and  who were constantly
present in the Court-room during the progress of the case,  thus
testifying to  me, in  an unobtrusive manner, an offering of  much
sympathy and many  good wishes.
  Among so many friends, I would  offer a tribute of resj>ect to each
one individually if I could do so, but it  is impossible to mention
the names of all.   Tf  I  once commenced  I  should not  know
where to draw the line of demarcation, between my duties to one
and my obligations to another, which would show  me where  to
stop.
  I cannot, however, allow the present moment to  pass, without
alluding by name to one gentleman who has on many occasions
proved himself to me both a true friend and a kind  counselor.  I
appreciate him. as a careful, correct and able  physician.   I respect 
VI
PRKFA( K.
him, as a noble and good man.  I honor him, as one older in years
and wiser in experience, and as one upon whom I can always rely
for advice in time of need and assistance in time of distress.  I al-
lude to Dr. J. J. Youlin, of this city.  A friend in need is  a friend
indeed.
  I submit and dedicate this book to a discerning and to a discrim-
inating public. Let every man,  as he reads it, judge for himself.
Let him eliminate every assertion from the testimony which could
possibly have been  influenced, in any manner  or degree, by any
personal motives.   If,  while reading  the  following pages, the
testimony of any witness is found valuable  as-only making mani-
fest his own utter ignorance of even the first rudiments of physi-
ology, let the evidence  of that witness be cast  out, as of  one not
qualified to be called an expert.  If another witness seems to have
learned his story, in common  with others, by heart, and clings
to the text given him concerning the cause of  death, showing an
obstinate disposition to repeat it,  parrot-like,  hoping by its con-
tinual iteration, to secure conviction, let that evidence also be cast
out, as not worthy  of  credit.  If still  another, in an unguarded
moment of anger, forgets himself so far as to show the cloven
hoof, and to speak words really confessing that his only purpose
is to condemn the accused if possible, then let his testimony be
stricken out, as being too prejudiced and too far from  a candid and
impartial opinion.
  On  the contrary, let the words of those  gentlemen who have no
personal motives to  influence their thoughts and  mould their an-
swers ; who not only give their opinions,  but who also are able to
sustain them,  and who prove  themselves perfectly familiar with
every part of their profession, be accredited with all the confidence
they may justly deserve.
  After all this elimination is completed,  and every prejudice and
unworthy feeling thrown aside, let each man for himself place the
assertions of those who said  John D. Coates died  from morphine,
in one scale of the balance,  and the words of those who  declared
he could not have  so died, in the other, and" then, in conclusion,
judge for himself which scale preponderates.

Madison and Clinton Avks., Bergen, N. J.,
                January, 1871. 
TRIAL   OF  DOCTOR   LTJND.
   After seventeen  peremptory  challenges by the
 defense,  the   following  named   gentlemen  were
 impanneled as jurors :

            1.  Foreman, Mitchell Loder.
 2. Thomas Idell.            7. William C. Wood.
 3. William W.  Lavense.     8. John H. Bookstaver.
 4. Peter C. Earle.           '.*. Charles Dennison.
 5. Albert M. Hedges.      10. William C. Weir.
 6. Thomas Gardner.        11. George Klattenhoff.
                12. John I. Rollins."

   Mr. Dixon,  the senior counsel for the defendant,
 then  rose and  addressed the  Court,  respectfully re-
 questing that  an order be made excluding all wit-
 nesses from the room,  except wliile actually giving
 their  testimony upon the stand.
   As the District Attorney made no  objections, pro-
 viding the same  rule  was made applicable to the
 witnesses for the  defense, the Court gave the desired
 order, making  an exception,  however, in regard to
 the medical witnesses,  by not including them in the
 order.
   The trial then was opened by the State calling as
 its first witness—

               Mrs. Mary Coates.
  She being examined by Mr.  Garretson, testified as
follows:  I live in South Bergen, and was the wife of 
8              DOCTOR LUND'S  TRIAL.

the late John D. Coates;  he had lived in Bergen for
six years ; on the Sunday previous to the 20th of last
July, he was taken sick about eleven o'clock at night;
I  ciid all  I  could  for him, putting  on mustard and
bathing his  feet, but  as he  got worse, I sent for Dr.
'Wilkinson about three  o'clock in  the^ morning; he
came  and sent my brother, Jam.es Kelly, to the drug
store for some medicine; the medicine did him good,
so that  he got well after it;  the  next day he was
around,  seemed quite well, and went to the  ball
ground; he  did not, however, like the medicine, as it
tasted too much like  castor oil ; he did not go to his
work; he went  with  me  to the ball ground, about
half-past one, and staid until  four  o'clock, when he
saw  Dr. Wilkinson coming, and went home to meet
him;  our house was two blocks from the ball ground;
my husband  met the Doctor in the yard; he did not
give my husband any  more medicine then.
   Monday night my husband seemed pretty well, and
slept  all night; he did not take  any more of Dr.
Wilkinson's  medicine  after one o'clock, Monday ; on
Tuesday morning  when he rose, he did not feel  as
well, and  did not go out of the house ;  he seemed
dissatisfied with Dr. Wilkinson, and asked me if there
were any other doctors near by;  I told him there was
Drs. Lund and Lewis; he asked me to send my little
daughter for  Dr. Lund ; I did so, and he came between
two  and  three o'clock, Tuesday afternoon; he re-
quested, that I should send to  his office for the  medi-
cine ;  I sent  my  daughter, and  she brought back
some powders in  pink paper;  I  gave him three of
them, one every hour, commencing at three o'clock ;
they  made  him worse ; his face and  hands swelled
and he became sick at his stomach ;  after five o'clock
I  began again to put  on hot flannel cloths over his
stomach, but he still  grew  worse ;  at eleven o'clock
I  went  over after Dr. Lund again ;  I rang the bell ; 
DOCTOR LI XD s  TRIAL.
9
the Doctor himself came to the door, and I told him I
wanted him to come to my husband, that he was very
sick;  he said he would  be  there in fifteen minutes ;
I had  no further conversation with him  then, but
went home ;  I waited until ten minutes past twelve,
when I went  back  again for him,  my brother going
with me.
  Q. What did you do when you got there ?  A.I rang
the bell and the boy came and opened the door for me ;
I asked him if the Doctor was in ; he said yes, he was
in bed ; 1 told him to run up stairs  and tell him quick
that I wanted him right away.  Q. Did  you only say
/wanted him?
  Mr.  Dixon  interrupting:  O come, Mr. Garretson,
don't cross-examine your witness.
  Q. Tell the exact words you used  '. A. I told him to
go up and tell the Doctor I wanted him right away;
I told him to go up stairs  and  tell the Doctor  I
wanted him  right  away ;  I told him to  tell  the
Doctor Mr*.  Coates  wanted him.   (See Appendix <i.)
Q.  What did the boy say?  A. He  went up stairs.
Q. How long was he gone up stairs?  .V. lie was only
gone three or four minutes, if he was that.  Q. Did the
boy come down again ?  A. Yes, sir.  Q. What then?
A.  Well, Dr. Lund came down himself in two or three
minutes after that to his front door.  Q. Who spoke
first ?  A. I spoke to him.
  Q.  What did you say ? A. I asked him why he did
not come at eleven o'clock to see my husband ; I was in-
such a way to get him to come ; he told me not to get
in  such a "hurry, he knew what was the matter;  the
powders he had given in the afternoon were not strong
enough to take effect; he told me to  hold on for a
moment, and he went up stairs and brought me down
three powders;  he  reached them  into  my  hand; I
asked  him would he not come and see my husband,
and he told me, no, there was no necessity;  for to go 
10
DOCTOR LI'Nd's TRIAL.
home and do as he told me ; I asked him again would
he not come and see my husband as he was very bad ;
he asked me could I not mix up a powder ; I told him
yes I could, but I thought he was the properest per-
son to do so ; he told me to mix  it up in a tablespoon-
fu.1 of cold water, and to be sure that I gave it all to
him; I told him again I had rather he would come
along with  me; he told  me he would not;  that he
would not open the door that night to me again ; so I
told him I would not bother him anymore ; so I went
home and gave the powder as directed.
  Q.  How many powders did he give you? A.  Three.
Q. How many did you give your husband ?  A. One.
Q. What time did you give it ?  A. About half past
twelve ; he did not have it ten minutes before lie was
raving wild.   Q. How did  he  act ?  A.  He  acted
just as if he was in the greatest agony in the world;
his insides, he said, were burning;  and he threw him-
self down on a rocking chair, and in five  minutes he
was fast asleep;  he continued bad up to about three
o'clock; he  snored dreadfully, and my brother was
afraid that  something was the matter with  him.   Q.
What do you mean by continued bad ?  A. Well, he
must have been in great pain.   Q. What did he do i
A. He was just wild through the  house, with a pain
in his head and wringing his hands.
  By the Court:  When was  this.   A. Before he
sat down, and he continued to sleep from that out.
  Q. You said he "continued bad " until three o'clock—
What did you  mean by that ?  A. He never waked
up at all that I know of, for Lwas taken very sick  at
that time.  Q. What did you do  at three o'clock ?  A.
He did not wake up at  all (th is  is a mistake • he did
wake  vp, as will he seen), and I then  sent after Dr.
Wilkinson; he came  right away, and did not do any-
thing himself for  him, but had one or two doctors.
Q. Where was  your  husband all this time '.   A. In 
Doctor lund's trial.            11
the chair; they did  all they could for him, but could
not get any medicine down him.
  Q. What  other doctors were there ?   A. Drs.  For-
man  and Bock.   Q. What  time  did Dr. Forman
come?   A. About six o'clock.  Q. Who  was  with
your  husband  from  three o'clock  until  six?   A.
Mr.  Welch.   Q. Any doctors?   A.  No,  sir.   Q.
How long did Dr. Wilkinson stay after he  came?
A. All  the time  up to twelve o'clock.  Q. What
did  Dr. Wilkinson  do  when  he  came ?   A.   He
felt  his  pulse,  clapped  his hands,   and tried to
arouse him.   Q. What became of the  powders?  A.
I saw them  last with Coroner Burns at the Inquest.
Q. What was the difference between the first and last
powders?  A. The last were  much larger  than the
first; there was no difference in color that I noticed ;
the last ones were not put up as nice as the first;  both
were in pink paper.
   Q. How long did Drs. Forman and Bock stay ?  A.
Up until about twelve o'clock ; they gave my husband
up when they went away; they could do no more for
him ; he was dying; he'died at half past twelve. Q.
Was there  any change  in  him before he died ?  A.
He  became  quite  white just before  he  died.  Q.
When did you see Dr. Lund next? A. About  eight
o'clock  the morning he died; he came into the  room
as the  door was open and looked at my husband,
and  felt his pulse ;  I says, Dr. Lund,  is not this an
awful loss for me ; he looked at me and very abruptly
said, you have not lost him yet.  Q. Did he say any-
thing else.  A. No, sir; he went away without saying
or doing anything more.
   Q.  How old was your  husband.  A.  He was forty-
seven ;  he  was an  engineer on the Cnnard dock; he
worked up to twelve o'clock the Saturday night before
he died. 
12             DOCTOR  LTND's TRIAL.

Cross-examination by Col. Rogers :

  My husband had not been sick for twenty years be-
fore this last sickness, and had never taken medicine
I know of;  it was about three o'clock, Monday morn-
ing, that I  called Dr. Wilkinson; Monday afternoon
we walked to the ball ground, and were there about
two  hours ;  we had to  stand  wliile there;  it was  a  (
pretty warm  day ; my husband began to get worse
about eight o'clock, Tuesday morning, complaining of
a pain in his bowels ; he did not complain of his head
until he had taken the powders on Tuesday afternoon ;
he was  growing worse  all  day; half an hour after
taking the  medicine, he commenced  to  complain of
his  head, while his hands and  face swelled up; he
leaned his head upon his hands, and  said  his head
was awful; between this time and the time I  first
went  for Dr.  Lund, he was growing worse all  the
time with  the cramps in his  stomach, but  I do  not
know whether the  pain in his head continued ; when
I gave him one of the second  powders I got, he was
then complaining  of his head and the pain in his
bowels ; he said then, I will take the medicine, kill or
cure; after he took the powder he seemed in  great
agony, tore his hair, wrung his hands ;  said he was
burning up  in his insides ; he  could not any of the
time lie in bed on account of the pain, but  sat up in
the  rocking chair; he  was in great pain at the time
the powders were given ; after I gave him the powder
I remained with him until about two o'clock, when I
was taken very bad with the cramps and had to leave
the room ; I went  down stairs and laid down on the
lounge, leaving my brother and Mr. Wm. Welch with
my husband ; I laid there about two hours ; my hus-
band  was growing worse all the time between  my
first  and second call  for Dr. Lund, being in  great
agony; this agony lasted all the time from five o'clock 
DOCTOR LUXD's  TRIAL,
13
until twelve; it was in  the stomach, and ceased  in
about ten minutes after I gave the last powder.
  Q. Had your husband woke up  between the time
he went to sleep and the time you went to bed ?  A.
Not that  I know of.  Q. Were, you present  in the
room  all the time?   A. No, sir.   Q. Where  were
you ?   A. Down stairs on the  sofa.   Q. That was
after two o'clock ; wev^e  you down  stairs before that ?
A.  No, I  don't  think I was.  Q.  Don't  you know ?
A.  I don't think I can  tell.  Q.  Did you take any
medicine for the cramps that night ?  A. No, sir.  Q.
Did you take  anything else for  the  cramps ?  A.
No, sir.   (Appendix b.)
  Q. You  spoke about  your  husband's snoring  or
breathing hard;  was  that  before  you went  down
stairs?  A.  Yes, sir;   but  I  thought he was  only
asleep ; I  noticed it in about  ten  minutes after he
took the powder, and it continued  until I went down
stairs.   Q. What was  your husband's personal ap-
pearance?  A.  He was a stout man.  Q. Short neck?
A.  Rather,  not  particularly  so.   Q.  Did he use
tobacco ?  A.  He smoked, but  did not chew.  Q.
Was he in the habit of smoking  every day ?   A. I
suppose he was.  Q. Smoke in the morning ?   A. I
suppose so.  Q. In the  evening ?   A. Yes, sir.  Q.
Pipe or cigars ?  A. If he could not get a cigar, he
would  smoke a pipe.  Q. He smoked then every day ?
A.  Oh, he did certainly.  Q. Was  he smoking  every
evening through all  the  evening ?  A. Yes, he would
take a  pipe.
  Q.  Where  did  you  apply  the  poultices I   A.
On his stomach; I  kept them hot from half-past six
Tuesday evening until  eleven.   Q. Did you  apply
the poultices to the same place Sunday  night?  A.
Yes, sir.   Q. Any Monday ni^ht?  A.'No, sir.  Q.
What directions did Dr. Lund give you in regard to
giving  the last powders?  A. He told me to give one 
14
DOCTOR LUND S TRIAL.
every hour.  Q. Did he tell you if he was not better to
give another ?  A. No, he told me to give it to him every
hour.  Q. Whether he got well  or not?  A. Yes, he
made no statement about  that.  Q. Why did you not
give him another?  A. I could not, he was asleep. Q.
Did not Dr. Lund tell you not  to give another if it
relieved  him ?  A. No, he  told me to  go  home and
give one every hour.   Q. Do you  remember giving
your evidence about this particular point  before the
Coroner's Jury ?  A. Yes, I think I do, but my mind
has been greatly upset since then.  Q.  Did you hear
of his drinking anything that night ?  A. No, sir ; he
was a man who never drank.  Q. Did you have any
liquor  in the  house  that night ?   A.  No,  sir.  Q.
Any ale ?  A. No, sir.   Q. Did Mrs. Welch bring any
into the house ?  A.  No, sir.  Q. Did you send out for
any ?   A. No, sir.  (Appendix c.)
  By the Court :   When  Dr. Lund gave  you his
directions, was any one by you ?  A.  Yes,  sir, my
brother stood behind me on the stoop.

              Dr.  James Wilkinson,
Examined by Mr. Garretson, testified—
  Q.  Where do you live  ?  A. Jersey  City.  Q.
You are  a practicing   physician  ?   A.  Yes,  sir.
Q.  How long have you been in practice ? A.  Twelve
years.  Q. Did you know Mr. John D. Coates in his
life time i A.  I only saw  him about forty-eight hours
before  his death, on Sunday night,  never before.  Q.
At what time ?   A. I do not know; it was some time
in the night.   Q.  Where did you find him?  A.
Setting up in  a chair  in the front room.  Q. What
was the  matter with him?  A. He was complaining
of distress over the pit of his stomach ; he was rub-
bing his  stomach when I saw him.  Q.  Did you ex-
amine him ?  A.  Yes, sir ; I made up my mind there
was no serious  difficulty whatever; he was very much 
DOCTOR LUND'S TRIAL.
15
agitated when I saw him, but did not seem to be in
much pain.   O. What did you think was the trouble
with him ?  A.  Well a colicky trouble ; I thought it
was  a nervous difficulty, as these symptoms seemed
most prominent.
  Q.  What did you  do  for  him?  A.  I prescribed
ammonia and valerian.  Q. Anything else ?   A.  No,
sir.  Q.  Two mixtures?   A.  No, sir;  it  was  the
valerianate  of ammonia;  my directions were to  take
-it every hour, I think, until  relieved.  Q.  Was the
medicine procured before  you left ?   A.  I do  not
think it reached the house before I left, but I am not
positive.  Q.  How much  did  you direct to be taken ?
A.  A teaspoon ful; I should state here that this prep-
aration was not the valerianate itself, but the elixir
of the  valerianate of  ammonia.  Q. When did  you
reach home ?  A.  It was in the night.
   Q. Did  you  see him  afterwards?   A.  1 called
again the next day, some  time in the afternoon.   Q.
Where did vou find  him when  you called?   A. I
knocked at the door, but finding  no one at home was
on the point of leaving, when I saw him walking up
the  street towards the house.  Q. Did you speak to
him»   A. Yes, I  waited  in  the yard  until he came
in •  I asked him  how he  felt; he said very well; I
then recommended him to take as a preventative lor
these stomach difficulties, bromide of potassium.  Q.
Did you make any examination of him that  day ?  A.
Yes 'sir • I could  not find any disease about him; he
said' he 'felt verv  well; he said he had  never  been
 sick •  I think lie asked  me  if I was  going to call
 again, and I told him no, unless I heard frombm.
   Q  When did you see him next ?  A. A little alter
 five o'clock, Wednesday  morning, at his house    He
 was  sitting up in a chair,  with his head thrown  back.
 O  Who was with him ?   A. His wife, daughter  and a
 Air  Welch, who came after  me.   Q.  What time did 
16
DOCTOR LINdV TRIAL.
    he come after you (  A.  Five o'clock.   Q. I low soon
    did  you go?  A. Immediately.  Q. What were  his
    symptoms then ?   A. He was totally insensible.  The
    pupil  of the  eye was contracted as small as a pin's
    head;  the  surface of the skin was blue—livid ; large
    beads  of cold perspiration stood on him ; stertorous
    breathing—snoring; respiration about twelve to the
    minute ; pulse slow and laboring.
      Q. What did these symptoms indicate?   A. Poi-
    son by opium  or morphine.  (Exactly the same symp-
    toms o.re  found  in  many  different  diseases.)  Q.
    What  did  you do for him ?    A.  I began to apply
*   restoratives;  as  applications  of  mustard.   In  the
    meantime,  however, I had  sent  for  assistance.   I
    advised the  family to send  for  Dr. Lund.  They
    informed  me  that Dr. Lund  had prescribed these
    powders and  one had been given.   I advised them to
    send for him immediately.   This they refused to  do,
    as he had declined to come, so I sent for Drs. Forman
    and Bock.   Q. When did they get there (  A.  In the
    neighborhood of six or seven o'clock.   Together we pro-
    ceeded with the treatment.   We tried flaggellations—
    beat him, whipped him; tried to  excite vomiting by
    tickling his throat, and I injected belladonna under the
    skin, so as  to get its  antidotal effects; he could not
    swallow.   Belladonna  is considered  an antidote to
    opium.  (Appendix d.)  The peculiar effect of bella-
    donna was produced.  The pupil  of the eye became
    dilated, and the flush also peculiar  to belladonna came
    over the whole surface.  We also  tried cold effusions
    or pouring  cold water on him.  When the powers of
    life began to flag, we tried electricity, injected brandy
    or -whiskey into  the bowels,  artificial respiration was
    tried,  and we  were preparing  to make oxygen gas for
  ,  him to breathe,  when  he died. None of our efforts
    prevailed in the  slightest degree.   He  sank deeper
    and deeper. 
DOCTOR LUND S TRIAL
u
  Q.   Were you with him when he died (   A. No, sir,
I was not at that moment. Q. What time did yon leave
him (  A. I think  it  was a little after twelve.  Q.
Was any medicine  given him after you were called {
A. It "was impossible to give him medicine.  We tried
to give him strong coffee, but  he  could not swallow.
(Appendix e.)   In my  opinion  the stomach pump
was inadmissible, for two reasons. First,  his breath-
ing  was so difficult  that I think  the  pressure  of
the tube upon the glottis would have "killed him in
a moment. In the  second place,  he was  thoroughly
under its influence, as four hours had elapsed since he
had taken the narcotic.
  Q. Did you  know what he had taken '.  A.  Well,
Dr.  Forman and myself tasted one of the powders,
but  we could  tell pretty well from  the  symptoms,
without  seeing or tasting the  powder.  Q. Could you
tell from the taste what they were ?   A. Not positive-
ly.   Q. What   became  of the powders I   A. I took
one and  Dr. Forman  the other, or rather I gave him
one  and kept  the  other.  Q. What  did you do with
your powder?  A.  I had it weighed.  Q.   Was it in
your possession all the time until you had it weighed ?
A. Yes,  sir.  Q. Who weigh'ed it ?  A. I  first took it
to Mr. AVells.   I was passing the store one day, and he
put it on his scales, and the clerk said he thought there
was half a grain.
  By the Court: Did you see it weighed '.
  A. Yes sir.   Lie said he could not weigh so small a
quantity on his scales.   (Appendix f.)  Q. What  then ?
A. I think it was the next day I had it weighed by Mr.
Gardner, on Monticello Av. Q, Did you see it weighed ?
A. Yes,  sir.  The powder had previously been tasted,
to  the best of my knowledge, by Dr. Forman and my-
self, and certainly by Dr. Culver.'  Q. 11 ow much did it
weio-h?  A. It weighed a grain as near as possible to
weijyh it, There was the slightest possible particle want- 
18
DOCTOR LUNI)'s  TRIAL.
ing of a full grain, so slight as that it would be only ap-
preciated by weight.  Air. Gardner thought that about
one-sixteenth lacked, about as much, he said, as would
be inevitably lost in previously weighing it.  Q. What
did you do with  it after it was weighed.  A. After the
post-mortem  I gave it to the Coroner, during  the In-
quest, I think.  It never passed out of my possession.
Q.  When was it weighed ?  A.  It was weighed after
the post-mortem, but I am not sure about Air. Wells.
  Q.  Was there a  post-mortem  examination?   A.
There  was.  Q.  By whom made?   A. By  myself,
assisted by Drs. Forman and Bock, and in the presence
of Drs. Culver, Yeirs and Buck.  Q. What amount of
care was exercised in making the post-mortem ?
  Mr.  Dixon interrupting:  Never mind  about  that.
Let him tell  us what he did, and we will judge for
ourselves the  amount of care displayed.
  The Court: State what was done ?
  A.  Will you allow me to read the minutes that were
written on the spot ?
  Mr. Dixon: Were they written by yourself ?
  A.  No,  sir, they were not, as T made the post-mor-
tem.
  Mr. Dixon: I  object  to it.
  The Court: Were you acting together ?
  A. Yes, sir.  He wrote while I made the post-mor-
tem.
  The Court: State from memory what you can, but
you may refresh your memory  when necessary with
what was written ?
  A. The  post-mortem  was  made  on  the  21st of
July,  about  10|- a. m.   The  weather  was warm,
about (guess  work  commences here, as  there  toas
no thermometer in the  room,) 80°, and it was about
twenty-two and  a half  hours after  death.  The  rigor
mortis was well marked and the body well developed.
The face was  livid, and  there was a  florid congestion 
               DOCTOR LLND's TRIAL.             19

on the surface of  the body, especially on the more de-
pendant parts.  There was but  little flow of blood
on section of the scalp.  The dura mater was adher-
ent.  There was marked venous congestion of the dura
mater  and pia mater.  There were white fibrinous
lines accompanying the blood vessels.  The convolu-
tions of the brain were flattened.  The brain itself was
firm.   On section of  the  brain, the puncta-vasculosa
were  well marked, the arachnoid  fluids slight, but
clear.  The right  ventricle of the brain was empty, the
left ventricle contained about an ounce of serum.  (The
Doctor's post-mortem report  before the  Coroner, read,
bloody serum.  It is an important omission, as its
pn-sence would show that the m,an might have died of
apoplexy,  and not of  morphine.)   The choroid plexus
was congested.  There was- no bloody effusion in any
part of the brain.  (To settle the question that there was
bloody serum in the left ventricle, see the Doctor's first
report before the  Coroner's Jxiry, corroborated by Drs.
Forman and Bock, and also afterwards by Dr. Pal-
mer and Dr. Lewis.  It cannot then be true that there
was no bloody effusion in the brain.)  The cerebellum
was about healthy, except congestion. On opening the
chest there was about an inch and a half of adipose
tissue.  The pleura was adherent on both sides, and
on the left side was firmly adherent to the diaphragm.
The right lung wag adherent to the upper part of the
chest.  The heart was about normal  in size, the valves
healthy with clots on  the right side.   The lungs were
healthy except the congestion.  The liver was large,
extending to  the left mammary line.   It was_ con-
gested. There were  venous  congestions of the intes-
tines,  particularly of the  colon.  The  kidneys  were
slightly congested, but otherwise healthy.  The  ex-
ternal'surface  of the stomach was  reddish and _ con-
gested.  The  spleen  was large,  but not  excessively
&       i
congested. 
•20
DOCTOR LI'.Xd's TKTAL.
  Mr. Dixon:  Do  we understand when you  use  the
word congested in  the other places, you mean exces-
sively congested ?
  A." Yes," sir ; the  gall bladder was filled  with a
dirty milk colored  liquid, the last flow from  it being
yellowish. The cystic duct was impervious to a probe.
( Which  means, in  the words of the  other physicians,
entirely closed)   The colon'was loaded  with  faecal
matter.  I believe that is all.
  Q. What appearances were there in this body which
would not be found  in  a healthy body?   A.  The
excessive congestion, the contents of the gall bladder,
and the  closure of the cystic duct.   Q.  The adhesions
of the pleura ;  was that healthy or otherwise ? A. It
was evidence of previous inflammation, perhaps a year
old, perhaps twenty.   Q.  The  question  extends to
perfectly healthy persons?   A. In  perfectly  healthy-
persons  it will not  adhere, but it will not shorten life
under  ordinary  circumstances;  it showed  he  had
had inflammation  at some time or  other.  Q. Could
you tell how long previously ?  A. No, sir; they were
old adhesions  though, as they were so hard to break
down.   Q.  Then the appearances found here, which
would  not be found  in a healthy person, were  the
congestion, the  contents of the gall  bladder,  the
stricture of the cystic duct, and  the adhesions of the
lungs?  A. A man may be perfectly healthy  and  yet
have the adhesions.  Q.  Was  there anything else?
A. Not that  I remember; I would mention  that the
stomach and  its contents were put into a jar, sealed,
and handed to the  Coroner.  (Ap>pendix g.)
  Q, From the post-mortem examination, what do  you
conclude was the cause of death ?   A. Poisoning' by
morphine.  (Appendix h.)   Q.  What were the post-
mortem evidences  of poisoning by morphine ?  A. The
excessive congestion.  Q.  What  effect had the  contents
of the gall bladder in producing the congestion (  A. I 
DOCTOR LUiNJ) S TRIAL.
21
do not think they had any.   Q. What symptoms before
death, or appearances after death, were caused by those
contents ?  A. None that I know of.   Q. What effect
would  the adhesions of the lungs  have ?   A. They
would  make a  man short breathed upon  exertion.
Q.  Produce congestion?  A. No, sir.
  Q. How much matter did tiie gall bladder contain {
A.  It was  not  measured, but I should judge about
three ounces.   Q.  Did  the congestion of the brain or
lun^s depend  upon  the  absorption  of  that matter ?
A.  No, sir.  Q. What effect could it have?  A. I do
not think  that the  matter in a closed sack  would be
likely  to  cause any particular difficulty.  Q. How
long might it remain there and produce  no effect ?  A.
It might remain there altogether;  it would ultimately
be  disposed of; cases have been known where there
has been matter in  the gall bladder that way, and it
has been absorbed, and  the gall bladder has dried up.
   Q. What is the cystic duct?   A. A duct  by which
the bile  enters the gall bladder from the liver.   Q.
Is  there any other openings from  the gall  bladder ?
A. No, sir;'but there  is an opening from the liver
by which the bile  can still pass from the liver to the
bowels.  Q. Suppose the  cystic  duct  Avas entirely
closed, how could the bile get out of the gall bladder?
A. It could not get out, but would  have eventually
to  be  absorbed.   Q. What is the difference between
the symptoms  of  a person dying from  apoplexy and
from morphine poisoning ?   A.  As a rule, the pupil is
dilated in  apoplexy; in this case it was contracted;
in apoplexy we do not have the excessive congestion
of the  skin that we do in poisoning by opium.
   Q. How about the post-mortem?  A. In apoplexy
the rupture of  the blood vessel would be revealed by
a clot of blood on the  surface of the brain; in this
case there was no bloody effusion whatever.  ( What
then could the effusion  of bloody  serum  in the ven- 
22             .DOCTOR LUN d's TR!AL.

triele In' railed?)   Q. AVhat  is  the  usual dose  of
morphine (   A.  From one-sixth  to  a quarter of a
grain.
  Q. What  is the smallest  amount that is known to
have proved fatal ?  A. A case is quoted in which—
  Mr. Dixon interrupting : If you are going to quote,
suppose you produce  the books; we  then can read
them for ourselves ?
  A. From  my  own  personal observation, I cannot
state how small an amount of morphine will cause
death.
  Q. Where is the case quoted  you were speaking
of?   A. In Beck's  Medical Jurisprudence.
  Mr. Dixon objected to the question, on the ground
that  it covered  not only the personal observation of
the witness, but the reading of books and the state-
ments of other parties.
  Objection overruled.  Mr. Dixon excepted.
  Witness: Dr. Beck, to  the best of my knowledge,"
quotes two-fifths of a grain, and Dr.  Guy,  in  his
Medical Jurisprudence, quotes one quarter  of a grain
as having proved fatal.
  Mr. Dixon :  I ask the Court to overrule that answer
also,  for the reason  I have given.
  Refused and exception taken.
  Q. How many drops of laudanum are equivalent to-
a grain of morphine ?  A. I shall  have again to quote
authority.
  Mr. Dixon objected, and took the exception.
  A. According to the United States Dispensatory,
twenty-five drops of laudanum is equal to one grain of
opium.
  Mr. Dixon : The Court will please understand that
the answer is also objected to.
  Answer admitted ; exception taken.
  By the Court:  Q.  Are  the books quoted, o-ood
authority '■ 
doctor lixd's trial.
2H
  A.  x es, sir, first  rate; the Dispensatory also states
that one  grain of morphine is equal to six grains of
opium ; hence one grain of morphine is equal to one
hundred  and fifty drops of laudanum; Beck states the
same.
  Mr. Dixon : That is all under objection.
  Q.  In  what cases  do  you prescribe a  grain  of
morphine?  A. I  do  not very often do it, unless  a
person is used to it.   Q. How do you discover that %
A.  By personal experience and  knowledge.   Q. Do
you ever do it when  you are away from the patient ?
A.  No, sir.   Q. What kind of practice would it be to
prescribe a  grain of morphine, in the absence of the
patient ?
  Air. Dixon :  I object to  that as  incompetent,
coming out of the proper field of  questions for an
expert.
  Mr. Garretson: I say it is an expert question.
  Mr. Dixon: Yes, I  know it is  an expert question.
but not  a question for an expert; I object to it, be-
cause  it  is not *a complete statement of the present
case. . It  may make a difference  whether the  patient
has been seen within a short time previously.
  Question  allowed; Mr, Dixon excepted.
  A.  Highly dangerous, I should think, sir.
  Q.  Did you see Dr. Lund  at Mr. Coates' house at
any time ?   .A. Yes,  sir.  Q. When ?   A.  I think
about seven  o'clock, Wednesday.  Q. How long was
he  there ?   A. A  few  minutes.   Q. Did  you  have
any conversation with  him ?  A.  I merely said  good
morning.  Q. Did he  say anything ?  A. I think he
returned  the salutation.  Q. What did he do while he
was there?  A. Nothing.  Q. Did he  examine Mr.
Coates?  A. He looked at him.   Q. Did he say any-
thing  about  him?  A. No. sir, except  in  answer  to
Mrs. Coates' remark. 
21
DOCTOR LTND S  TRIAL.
  Cross-examination by Air. Dixon :

  Q. What sort of a patient was it, that  Dr.  Beck
said was poisoned by two-fifths of a grain of morphine ?
  A. I don't know, sir.
  0. Was it a child, or an adult ?
  A. An adult.
  Q. Male or female ?
  A. / don't know.
  Q. Age*
  A. I don't know.
  Q. Physical condition ?
  A. I don't know.
  Q. Habits of life?
  A. / don't know.
  Q. Do you know  any particulars  about the case
mentioned'  by Dr.  Guy?  A. To  the  best of  my
knowledge, it was a female and delicate.   Q. Do you
remember anything else  of her  condition ?  A. No,
sir.   Q. Whether she was an adult or not?  A. She
was adult.  Q. What is  the largest amount of. mor-
phine  that, in your  knowledge  and  experience, any
one has taken ?   A.  That I have prescribed myself?
Q. I did not  ask that question;  I asked the largest
amount that  within  your experience any  one had
taken ?   A.I have no  experience  in  the matter,
except  what I have  given  myself;  I can tell you
upon hearsay what parties have taken.   Q. Did you
ever see a person that  you understood  had taken a
large amount  at  that time?  A. That I understood
had been taken ?  Q. Yes, at the time you saw  them,
you understood had  been taken ; did you ever see a
person  suffering, as you supposed from the effects of
morphine ?   A. Oh, yes.  Q. How large an amount ?
A, I cannot state; I  only know what they told me.
  Q.   What is the largest amount you ever prescribed
yourself*  A.  I think I gave two grains in one case, 
DOCTOR LUND S TRIAL.
25
where the man was an  opium eater; it had no effect
and  he  said he could take ten grains with impunity.
Q. Outside of that, what is  the largest amount you
ever prescribed ?   A.  I  have seldom prescribed over
one-third of a grain.   Q.  Will you be kind enough to
give me a direct answer  to my question '.  A.  Repeat
it, if y<>u please.  Q.  Outside of that case, what is the
largest dose you ever prescribed?  A. I  think one
grain to a person of  the same habits.   Q.  What was
its effect ?  A.  Well,  no  particular bad effect; it had
the desired effect; it annulled the pain.
  Q. Have you ever  seen a person suffering from the
effects  of morphine,  where you  understood  he had
taken  over  a  grain '.   A.  Only the  two  I  pre-
scribed for, myself. Q.  Before seeing Mr. Coates did you
ever see a person whom  you supposed had  died of
morphine'.  A.  From laudanum, sir.   Q.  Have you
ever seen more than one that had died from laudanum *
A.. I do not think I have.   Q.  Was that a man, woman
or child*  A.  A  child,  not  over two years  old;  it
was dying when I saw  it.  Q.  How much laudanum
had  it taken *   A.  The  mother said two drops, but as
she was  intoxicated, it is doubtful.  Q. Did  you ex-
amine it post-mortem?  A. Xo, sir.   Q.  What were
its symptoms *   A. Contraction of the pupil, clammy
perspiration, stertorous breathing, low respiration, slow
and laboring pulse.  Q. How many drops of laudanum
are there in an ounce *   A. / don't know.   Q.  Do you
know how many in a tea-sp<>onful *  A. About sixty (the
hooks say one hundred and twenty;  see Appendix i).
and eight tea-spoonfuls to the ounce.  Q. Why do you
give more morphine  to  a person used to it *   A. Be-
cause it takes more to  produce any effect.  Q. The use
of anv  other narcotic would  have the  same effect, in
necessitating a larger dose *  A. Yes, sir.  Q. The con-
siderable use of tobacco would tend that same way ?
A.  Yes, sir.
       2 
26
DOC1 TOR Ll'Xn's TRIAL.
  Q.  Does morphine  ever  cause  pain*  A.  No, sir.
0.  Pain in  the system is resistant to  its ctlivls, is  it
not*  A. Yes, sir"  Q. A person  suffering great pain
could take more without danger than one not suffering
pain  at  all*  A. Yes, sir.  "Q. How  does morphine
act  as poison *  A.  In  producing  congestion of the
vital organs, and  paralyzing the nervous centres.  Q.
What  do you  mean by  congestion *   A.  An undue
collection of blood  in the veins.  0.  Which is pro-
duced  first, the paralyzing  of the nervous centres, or
the stagnation of  the fluid *   A. The  stagnation first.
(Appendi.rj.)  Q.  What is the first effect of morphine *
A.  Excitement.
  Q.  Well, excites what  *  A.  The brain.   Q. Flow
does it reach the brain*  A.  Through the absorbents
and stomach,  being carried  into the blood and so
reaches the brain.   Q. If it reaches  the blood through
the absorbents, is it absorbed directly from the stomach,
or does it pass into the bowels, and then become ab-
sorbed *  A. No,  sir, it is taken up from the stomach.
Q. Directly *  A.  Yes, sir.   Q. What do you call the
absorbents by which it is taken up from the stomach *
A.  They are  called absorbents.    Q. That  is  their
ordinary name*  A.  Yes.   Q. Is  it   by  them that
the  nutriment is  carried into the system *  A.  To a
certain  extent.  Q. To any  very large extent*  A.
Xo, sir, not directly.
  Q.  The absorption  of nutriment  commences  at the
stomach by  these absorbents, does it *  A. Yes, sir.
Q. Before getting into the bowels *  A. Yes, sir.  Q.
Is morphine  more  rapidly absorbed  than food *  A.
Yes, sir.   Q. So  rapidly that you  think none would
pass into the bowels *   A. Oh, no, sir.  The  rapidity
of the absorption  depends a  great  deal whether the
stomach is full or empty.  Q.  After being taken up by
these  absorbents,  where  is  it carried  *  A.  Into the
bloou.   Q.  How do these absorbents leach the blood * 
DOCTOR LUND S TRIAL.
27
A. The absorbents are little minute tubes leading to
it.  Q. Leading to what?  A. To the blood vessels.
Q. Which blood vessels ?   A.  The blood vessels that
are near the coating of the stomach.
  Q. Which blood vessels, venous or arterial ?    A.
Arterial.   (The witness is rusty in his physiology.
The absorbents empty into the venous and not into the
arterial  system.)   Q.  It passes into  the  arteries
then*  A.  Yes, sir.  Q.  Then where*  A.  It is circu-
lated through the system.  Q. How does it get through
the system *  A. The heart throws it through the sys-
tem.  Q. How does  it get to the heart ?   A. Through
the veins to begin with.  Q. How does  it get to the
veins ?  A.  It is absorbed in the first place, and passes
through the arteries into the veins.
  Q. You had it first in the stomach, then in the ab-
sorbents, then in the arteries, and now where ?   A. It
permeates  through  the  body  from the capillaries.
Q. And from these arteries around the  stomach it per-
meates the  body ?  A. No, sir, it  is carried by the
whole circulation up to the heart.  Q.  You have not
got it into the heart yet; you have it in the arteries
round the stomach *  A. It finally goes into the capil-
laries, and  from the capillaries  back into  the heart.
Q. Do you  mean  to say that  the morphine, which is
carried by  these absorbents into the arteries, is trans-
ferred by them to the venous  blood*  A. Yes,  sir.
Q. Must it not be  first deposited *  A.  It is deposited,
and the absorbents take it  up and circulate it in the
blood.
  Q. The second class of absorbents take it up *   A.
Xo, sir.  Q. How is it transferred from the arteries to
the veins *   A.  Through the capillaries.  Q. Without
being deposited ?   A.  Yes,  sir.  Q.  Now in what
stage of its progress through the system, would it be-
<rin to operate by congestion ?   A. As  soon as the first
stage, that of excitement, had  passed off.  Q. How is 
2S
DOCTOR LUND S 'TRIAL.
the excitement produced *   A. / don't know, *u\  <..
AYell, what is the  next  effect*  A. It is  the  corres-
ponding depressing effect; the brain being po ^oried is
unable'to perform its functions properly.  Q.  Which
functions are  you referring to *  A. All the functions.
Q. What next*   A. After this has continued  11 while
the blood becomes more  and more poisoned, as long as
there is anv material for it to feed upon, and if there
be poison enough to poison the blood up to a certain
extent, death  ensues, the brain being overcome.
  Q.  fs the depressing effect produced by the presence
of a  poison in the blood directly, or by the numbing
of the brain*  A. The latter.  Q. Explain then how
you  get  to the  congestion*   A. The congestion is
produced by the brain being poisoned.   (Appendix k.)
Q. Benumbed * A.  Yes, sir.   Q. How docs that pro-
duce  the  congestion*   A. It  partially paralyzes the
heart so that it is unable  to throw  its  blood  with
sufficient force to the extremities.  Q. How  does it
paralyze the heart *   A. By its poisonous  effect upon
the nervous centre of the brain.  Q. How are the heart
and brain connected *  A. By nerves.
   Q.  AVhich  nerves*  A.  The  pneumogastrie, if  I
recollect.  Q. With  what part of the  brain do  they
communicate*  A.  The back part of the  cerebellum.
(The  witness now  makes  a  mistake in his anatomy •
the nerve in  question does not arise from the  cerebel-
lum, but from the medulla,  oblongata.)  Q. What is
there in the morphine  that  produces  the poisonous
effect*   A. I don't know, sir.  Q. What  is the chem-
ical composition of morphine *  A. I don't know.  Q.
Is there carbon  in it *  A. Yes, sir.   Q.  Much*   A.
r don't know, sir.  Q. Nitrogen*  A. / don "t know.  Q,
Do you know any of the other component  parts except
carbon?  A.  Xo, sir.  0. Would not  carbonic acid
gas  inhaled produce  the same symptoms *  A.  To a
great extent, yes. sir. 
DOCTOR LLXD S TRIAL.
29
  Q. Operate substantially the same way *  A. Except
to affect the pupil.  Q.  To what do you attribute the
effect upon  the pupil *   A.  To morphine.   Q. How
does it  reach the pupil*  A.  I don't know, sir.  Q.
The presence of any substance where the carbon is ex-
cessive would have pretty much the same effect upon
the system *  A.  Except the state  of  the pupils.  Q.
Or anything which benumbs the  cerebellum would
have precisely the same effect*   A. If carried far
enough, yes, sir.   Q. A  blow upon  the  head  then
might occasion it?  A. Occasion what, sir?  Q.  This
same course of symptoms, paralysis of the cerebellum,
weakening of the heart, corruption of the blood, and
congestion, would it not *   A. Yes,  to a certain extent,
but not the condition of the pupil.
   Q. Do you think that the contraction of the pupil is
peculiar to  poisoning by morphine *   A. In a great
majority of cases ; I never saw a patient under the in-
fluence  of opium  where the pupil was not contracted.
Q.  I want to know whether there are any of the class
of cases where the brain is benumbed, circulation cor-
rupted, blood congested, where we have not also con-
traction of the pupils *   A. Yes, uraemia is sometimes
accompanied by contraction of the pupil.   Q. None
of  these symptoms are  uniform *   A. As  far  as  I
know it is uniform in opium.   Q. Do you mean to say
that books also say it is uniform * A. No, sir. Q. They
sav it is not uniform,  do they not*  A.  Yes, sir.
   Q. And you would not by any means conclude that
because you saw dilation of  the pupil, that it was not
opium poisoning *   A.  No, not positively, no, sir, that
is according to the books ; I never  saw it myself.  Q.
What  is uraemia *   A.  Poisoning of blood through
disease of the kidneys.  Q. Did you examine the kid-
neys in this case *  * A.  Yes, sir."   Q.  And the other
urinary organs?   A.  I  don't remember whether the
bladder was examined, I think not; it is possible.  Q. 
30
DOCTOR LUND'S TRTAL.
 Could not uraemia arise from disease  of the bladder ?
 A. No, sir.  Q.  It  is nothing more than the injection
 of urea into the blood *  A.  No, sir.    Q. Could not
 that take  place from the bladder*   A. Xo, sir.
   Q. Might not a diseased condition of the bladder
 produce a  diseased condition  of the  blood?   A. I
 don't believe it; uraemia arises from a disease of the
 kidneys;  the bladder  is a mere  receptacle, a closed
 sack, that is  evacuated as soon  as filled.  Q. Why
 could it not be absorbed from the bladder as well as
 from the kidneys ?   A. It could not without ulceration.
 Q.  Yes, but might there not be ulceration ?  A. We
 have ulceration sometimes.   Q. Can  you see any
 physical reason why we could not have uraemia from a
 disease of the bladder *  A. I don't believe it would
 be absorbed from  the glands.  Q.  Why could it not
 through ulceration *   A.  If  we  had ulceration  the
 urine would irritate it, and it would be voided as soon
 as formed.
  Q. Now, pyaemia, what is that?  A.  It is absorp-
 tion  of pus or  matter into the blood.   Q. Could not
 that  produce the same effect substantially *  A. No,
 sir.  Q. Why not *  A. Because pyaemia  takes several
 days to poison the system; the symptoms in this case
 are not those of pyaemia.  Q.  I am  not talking about
 this  case; I am asking you  generally whether pyae-
 mia might not be attended with the same symptoms you
found in this case?  A.  No, sir.
  Q.  You have told us that pyaemia  is  absorption of
pus  into the blood;  after that absorption it would
operate in the same way by benumbing the brain
 would  it  not?  A. To some extent.  Q. And after
the brain  was benumbed  the heart would be weak-
ened, the blood would  not be propelled with its usual
force, and congestion would be the  result ?  A. Yes
 sir.  Q. The same  route would  be pursued  bv  the
poison pus after it got into the blood, as by the poison 
DOCTOR LUND'S TRIAL.
31
 morphine*  A. To a certain extent.  Q. You say to
 a "certain extent," what difference is  there in  the
 route ?  A. The difference in the route is  this, that
 after   the  brain   becomes  poisoned  by   pyaemia,
 we  have  a certain set of symptoms which tell  un-
 mistakably the source of the poison.
   Q. Suppose pus in the stomach were absorbed by
 the absorbents, it would  pass through the same  route
 as you  described for the morphine, would it  not ?  A.
 It would not  be absorbed.   Q.  I  have put it into the
 absorbents already ?  A.  Well, I suppose  it would.
 Q. ATould not this effect be produced  in  the  same
 way?  A. The poison would be carried in the same
 way.   Q.  AArould  not its effect upon the system be
 substantially the same?   A. It would develop symp-
 toms which are well-known to  be indications of
 poisoning  by pus.   Q. And  if the absorption should
 take place from some other part  of the system than
 the  stomach, it would pursue substantially  the  same
 course,  would  it not?  A.  Yes,  sir.   Q.  Its effect
 substantially the same ?  A. Yes, sir.
   Q. How do the  symptoms of poisoning by pus
 differ from those of morphine *   A. In  pyaemia, the
 first symptom is  a  continuous chill, and  excessive
 sweats  day after day,  and night  after night, and as
 the  system becomes more  poisoned, the matter is
 deposited in different parts of the body,  especially in
 the liver;  in  post-mortem,  from  pyaemia, you  have
 the  liver  usually  diseased.   Q. Is that invariable?
 A. Not  invariable,  no, sir.  Q.  Are the  cold sweats
 invariable * A. I  think they are, sir.   Q.  Through
 how many days and nights?   A. From four to twelve
 days.
   Q. Have you ever known a case that  proved  fatal
in less  than four days *   A.  No, sir.   (}. Have you
ever known a  case  at all ?  A. Yes, sir.   Q. How
many*  A. A  great many,  / don't know how many. 
32
DOCTOR 1.1XD s TRIAL.
Q. Where was the original seat of the pus  in these
cases*  A.  In the womb.  0.  Have you known  any
cases where the pus was produced elsewhere  than the
womb *   A. At the present moment I do not  recollect
any other case in my own  practice.   Q.  Would not
the duration of the disease depend upon the virulence
of the  pus?  A.  To some extent,  yes, sir.   Q. Any
other symptoms in pyaemia*  A. None than those I
have mentioned ;  the brain  is  not usually  much
affected.  Q.  Why  should  the brain be not  much
affected?  A.  I don't know, sir.   Q. Your expertness
does not extend to that *  A. No, sir.
  Q. Do you know  the chemical composition of pus ?
A. I don't recollect, sir.  Q. Do  you know whether
it is constant, always the same ?   A. Yes, as far  as I
know.   Q.  Is there carbon in it?  A. I don't know,
sir.  Q.  Are you familiar with the office of the gall
bladder?  A. Yes,  sir.  Q.  What is its office?   A.
It is a receptacle for  bile.   Q.  Does it communicate
with the liver?  A.  Yes,  through  the  cystic duct,
which joining the hepatic duct from the  liver, forms
the common  duct that empties into  the  bowels.   Q.
Are  there any absorbents about these ducts ?   A. 7
don't know that  there are.    Q. Do you know  that
there are not ?  A. No, sir.
  Q. Your expertness does not reach to that;  how is
it about  the  gall bladder;  are  there any absorbents
about  that?   A.  /  don't  know  that there  are.
(Appendix I.)   Q.  Do  you  know that there  are
not ?  A. Xo, sir.  Q. Are there any about the liver?
A. Yes. sir.  * Q. If there are absorbents about the gall
bladder, is  there  anything  to  prevent the absorption
of the pus you found there ?  A. Yes, sir, lack of ulcer-
ation.   Q.  There could not be  absorption without
ulceration ?   A.  I think not.
   Q. How then could there he absorption  from  the
stomach  without  ulceration?  A.  Because  there  are 
DOCTOR LUND S TRIAL.
33
absorbents  there.   Q.  Yes; but  we  are  supposing
that there are also absorbents in the gall bladder * A.
They would not absorb pus as suclr  Q. How then
would they absorb  it ?  A. It is changed  in character.
Q.  Changed  to  what?,  A. I don't know, sir.  Q.
How then  do you know it is  changed *   A. Simply
from reading.   Q. How is  it  absorbed;  what does it
become?  A. I don't know, sir.  Q. What is pus, not
as chemically, but as  physically composed ; is it  a
fluid ?   A.  It  is globules floating around in serum.
Q.  Is not  the  serum  of pus  absorbed *  A. Some-
times, yes.   Q. Has  not that  malignant  properties ?
A.  No,  sir ; I think not.
  Q. When you have pyaemia from pus in the womb,
what is  absorbed  *  A. Pus.   Q.  But  pus is  not
absorbed as such*  A.  As pus,  no  sir.   Q.  Well,
what is absorbed ?   A. I don't know, sir. Q. Supposing
that there are absorbents about the gall bladder, is
there anything to  prevent  that change coming over
that pus, and it be absorbed the same as if it were in
the womb ?   A.  I don't know that it  is absorbed.
Q.  Yes, but there is  nothing  to prevent  that  pus
causing  pyaemia if it is absorbed ?  A. /don't know
of anything.   Q.  The  burning and intense  pain in
Mr. Coates* stomach, could  not have been caused by
the morphine, could it * A.  No, sir, I do not think
it could.
  The Court here adjourned until Tuesday, December
(?th, at 10 o'clock a. m.

  On the second day of the trial, the Court was opened
in usual form, at ten o'clock, with  Dr. Wilkinson still
upon the stand.  The cross-examination was resumed
by Mr. Dixon.
  Mr. Dixon:  Have you found  out yet the  chemical
composition of morphine *
  Dr. AYilkinson :  No,  sir. 
34
DOCTOR LUND S 'TRIAL.
  Q. Or of pus*   A. XTo,  sir.  Q.  Or of bile?  A.
Xo, sir.  Q. Have you any correction to make in your
testimony in reference to the course  of the contents of
the stomach  through the system *   A.  No, sir.  Q.
Do you  know what the thoracic duct is?   A.  Yes,
sir, it is a duct for the reception of the chyle ; it passes
up  along the spine and terminates in  the  left sub-
clavian vein.  Q. Has that anything to do with the
route of the contents of the stomach?  A.  Xot di-
rectly.   Q. Has it indirectly *   A.  That is to say the
chyme, food, being reduced to chyle, passes  into  the
bowels, when the absorbents  take it up,  and  carry it
into  the circulation.  Q. Do you mean  none of the
contents of the stomach pass into the thoracic duct until
after entering the  bowels ?  A. I do not think they
do.
  Q. Then the contents of the stomach, when absorbed
directly  from  the  stomach,  pass from  the absorb-
ents into the capillaries ?  A. Yes, sir, what is absorbed
does.   Q. That portion of the  food taking  a  dif-
ferent  route from the other ?  A.  Yes, sir.   Q. Have
you  ascertained yet whether there are any absorbents
about  the gall bladder  *  A. I have not looked the
matter up.  Q. Are you familiar with  Sharpey  and
Quains work on anatomy?  A.  I have  seen it;  lam
not  familiar with it.  Q.  Is it standard?  A. Yes,
sir.  Q.  These absorbents are  sometimes called lym-
phatics, are they not *   A.  Yes, sir.  Q. From  their
contents ?  A. Yes, sir.
   A page of the -work on anatomy was here turned to,
which  states that the lymphatics, or absorbents, of the
gall bladder are very numerous.
   Q. Have you ascertained whether the serum of the
pus is  poisonous or not?  A. I have not looked at it
since yesterday, sir; I hold to  the  opinion  it is not.
Q. On what is your opinion based  *  A. Because se-
rum is innocent.  Q.  On what is your opinion based • 
DOCTOR LUND'S TRIAL.
35
have  you ever tried it *   A. No, sir.  Q. If it were
innocent could it produce pyaemia ?  A.  No, sir.   Q.
Are you familiar with Jones  and Sieveken's Patho-
logical Anatomy?   A.  No, sir. Q.  Have you-seen it?
A.  Yes, sir.   Q. Do you know anj'thing of it as an
authority ?  A. No, sir.  Q. Is it American or Euro-
pean ?  A. I do not know anything about it.
  Q.  Suppose you should find in that book,  page 146,
these words:   wi Pyaemia  may take  place  from  the
absorption of the serum of pus alone.  Lebert found
-by experiment, that the injection of the serum of  pus
into the blood of animals, killed as  quickly as the  in-
jection of pus itself."   Would you not  then believe,
that the author of that book, did not think the scrum
of pus  to  be  innocent*  A. I should think so.   Q.
If it  be possible for pyaemia to take place from serum
alone, can  it be innocent ?  A. Grant that  is proved,
it may not be.  Q. Suppose the  books to say, " Be-
cause it  is clear this may easily take place, wherever
capillary vessels are in  contact with puriform exuda-
tions " ?'  A. That is not very  definite.
  Q. If it be true  that pyaemia occurs, wherever the
capillaries  are in contact with puriform exudations?
A.  What is a  puriform exudation ?  Q. I am not  on
the witness stand, if you please, sir.   A.  You tell  me,
and I will answer.  Q.  Do you not know what a puri-
form  exudation is; do  you not know;  yes or no; if
you  do  not know, then  I will tell you *  A.  Yes, sir,
I know.   Q. What is it?  A. It is an exudation  like
pus.  Q. What is exudation?  A. It is a flowing out.
Q.  If the capillary vessels be in contact with these
exudations, and pyaemia may take place  from contact
alone, is it not clear that serum is not innocent ?   A.
I am not -prepared to answer that.   Q. Why not*   A.
I do not understand the sentence.
  O. (Handing book to witness.)  Read what he says,
and' then say  if he does not mean that serum may be 
3b'
DOCTOR' LUND'S TRIAL.
malignant *  A.  (After reading the place  alluded to.)
Yes, I should juduje so from what he says, that he con-
siders it such.  Q.  There can be no doubt about that *
A. No,  sir.  Q.  Your  idea  was, that the poisonous
matter of pus was  in the globules *  A. Yes, sir.   Q.
Is there anything to prevent the lymphatics or ab-
sorbents  around the gall  bladder taking  up these
globules*   A.  As pus*  Q. Is there anything to pre-
vent  the  lymphatics or absorbents around the gaN
bladder absorbing  the globules ?   A.  The globules of
what ?
  Q.  Of the pus?  A. Yes, sir.   Q. Why not?  A.7
don't know.  Q.  Why do you say they cannot doit?
A. I do not know, sir;  the  authorities are  not plain
on that.   Q. What part of the pus is it that the ab-
sorbents dp take up when they produce pyaemia ? A. I
do not know.   Q. Pus consists of globules and serum *
A. Yes, sir.  Q. Your idea is that serum is innocent *
A. Yes, sir.  Q. How  does pyaemia arise?   A. I do
not know ; I only  know it does.   Q. It is not known
whether from the'absorption of the serum or globules?
A. It is  not from  the absorption of the globules.   Q.
How of the contents of the globules *  A. I don't know,
sir.
  Q. Could there be  absorption of the contents of the
globules, without an  absorption of the globules ?   A.
I don't know.  Q.  Do  you mean to  say that experts
generally  are not somewhat familiar with the process
by which pyaemia is produced *  A.  I believe it is
not  known positively how it is  produced, any more
than how arsenic or  morphine is poisonous.  Q. Is it
not  pretty well  known how morphine is poisonous ?
A. We know its effects.  Q. Don't we know the route
it takes ?   A.  Yes, sir, but we do not know how it
kills.  Q. Is it not equally possible to know how pus
produces  its effect?  A. We do not know how : no,
sir.  Q. We know it does poison * A. Yes, but  we 
doctor lund's trial.
3Y
do not know the ultimate process.  Q.  Your idea is
that  you are quite sure, the absorbents do not take in
the globules?  A.  Yes, sir.  Q. And the globules are
the only poisonous part of the pus?  A. That is my
idea.
  Q.  How do you reconcile this conflict of ideas. You
think pus may produce the disease ?  A. Oh, yes.  Q.
If there be absorbents around the gall bladder, then
pyaemia may as well be produced by  pus in that gall
bladder as anywhere else?  A. If there is ulceration.
Q. Could there be a formation of pus  without ulcera-
tion?  A.  Yes, sir.  Q.  Llow *  A.  By  being  shut
up, and undergoing changes.  Q. The bile might be-
come pus?  A. Yes,  sir.   Q. What  would prevent
the  lymphatics  taking it?  A. I do  not  think  they
would take it up without ulceration.   Q.  Why  not *
A. Because they are closed ; bile is not absorbed from
the gall bladder.  (Appendix m.)  Q. It is not accus-
tomed to  be  there without an  outlet* A. No, sir.
Q. If so, nature would  try  to  get  an outlet?  A.
 IGS  S1I*
   Q. Would  not  the  absorbents become  the outlet *
A. No, sir, it would dry up in toto.  Q. How can it
dry up without being absorbed ?  A. / don't know.
 Q. You know of cases where it has disappeared ?  A.
 I have read of a case where it disappeared.
   Q. Your testimony in reference to post-mortem ap-
 pearances of the hodv, was from notes taken at the
 time?  A. Ye^, sir.  ' Q.  You had these  notes  upon
 your examination  at the Inquest*  A. I read  them
 to the Coroner's Jury there.   Q. Your testimony then
 was  based on the same foundation as here ?   A.  A es,
 sir.   Q.  Where was the post-mortem held ?  A. At
 the house.  Q. Was  there any  thermometer in the
 house?   A. I don't know.  Q. You say the thermom-
 eter was  about 80° ;  what do you judge  by ?  A. I
 stated yesterday, the  report  was written  by Dr. for- 
3S             DOCTOR  LINd's  TK1AL.

man.   Q.  Your testimony was from the notes ?   A. 1
stated yesterday what I'read.  Q.  How was that to
be distinguished from recollection?   A. I said  what
I was about to read  was written by Dr. Forman.
Q. Then  you read  the  post-mortem?  A.  A  part
of it.
  Q. How much of what you read was from your recol-
lection ; do you recollect the thermometer was at 80° '{
A. I do not knov) how high it was.   Q. The tempera-
ture  of the room might vary  the post mortem appear-
ances of the body?  A.  I do not know that it would.
Q. Wliv then did you fix upon  the temperature ?  A.
I did not fix upon it.   Q. Why did Dr. Forman?  A.
I don't know.  Q.  The body had been upon ice ?  A.
I think it had*   Q.  How long?   A.  / don't knoio.
Q. How long before  the post-mortem was it removed
from  the ice?  A. Just before.  Q. Would not that
produce a variation in  the post-mortem appearances*
A. I don't know that it would.   Q.  You speak about
the  rigor mortis • could you distinguish between the
rigor mortis and the effects of the ice *  A. Yes, sir.
  Q.  What do you  mean by  the rigor mortis*  A.
The stiffness of the muscles. Q.  How would you distin-
guish between the effects of the ice, and the rigor mor-
tis *   A. The ice  would affect  the  outer surface, but
not  make  the muscles rigid.  Q.  It might *  A. I do
not  think  it would.  Q.  Don't you think it might *
A. I  don't  think it  would ; it might.  Q. Possibly
what you call rigor mortis, might have been the effects
of the ice upon the body * A. I think not.  (). Is it
not  possible*  A.  X"ot altogether; no, sir.  Q.  Why
not *  A.  Because I  do not  think the muscles would
be so rigid.  Q. Do you think ice would have any
effect on  the rigidity of the muscles*  A. Oh, yes
some.
  Q.  Where was this florid congestion *  A.I do not
recollect;  the  post-mortem being committed to paper, 
doctor lund's trial.
39
I did not commit it to memory at the time.  Q. Was
there any portion of the body where there was no florid
congestion ?   A. I do not recollect.   Q. How was that
produced ?   A. By the blood settling there, owing to
the belladonna which we gave before death, sending
the blood to the surface.  Q. Did the pupil of the eye
contract after that *   A.  It did not.  Q. Was the cra-
nium in this case large  or small?   A.  Bather large.
Q.  You say  on a section of the scalp  there was  no
flow of blood; was  that unusual ?   A. No, sir.   Q.
In what part of the body is the cerebellum ?  A. XTear
the inner surface of the skull.
  Q. What is the dura mater *  A. It is the inner lining
of  the bone.   Q. Where is the  arachnoid *  A. It is
a serous  membrane  between the dura mater and pia
mater.  Q. What is the pia mater *   A. A. branch of
blood vessels; a net work  of blood vessels.  Q. Are
there any blood vessels in the arachnoid *  A. Xo, sir.
Q.  Any in  the dura mater?  A.  Yes, sir.  Q. Did
you not  in your examination before the Coroner say
there was a  marked venous congestion of the vessels
of the arachnoid*  A.  I will correct my statement;
there are vessels in  the arachnoid.   Q. Was there
then that symptom, a marked venous congestion of the
arachnoid ?'   A. From recollection  I cannot say. _ Q.
A\There is that memorandum you had *   A.  I left it at
home.
   Mr. Dixon :  That is not fair for my client to use such
a paper upon your direct examination, and then leave it
at home, so as not to give us the benefit of it upon our
cross-examination.   (The witness here began to search
himself for the paper,  and finally found it   in  his
pocket.)   Q.  Tell us whether you  find in that paper
the statement, that  there was a venous congestion of
 the vessels of the arachnoid *
   The Court: Was the question in reference  to  the
 testimony before the Coroner's Jury or yesterday * 
40             doctor lindV  trial.
   Mr. Dixon : Ir is now in reference to the body at the
time of the death.
   A. Tdo not see any such statement here, sir.  Q. Did
you sign your deposition ?  A.  That was made before
the Coroner; yes, sir, I acknowledged it; I do not see
it  here, sir.  Q.  (Handing witness his deposition be-
fore the Coroner.) Look at that and see  if it is a part
of your deposition before the (-oroner *   A.  This is not
signed, sir.   Q.  Look further down, down towards the
end.  A. It says " being re-examined."
   The Court:  Look at it  and speak as to  your recol-
lection of what is there stated *
  Witness (discovering his name):  Oh, yes, I signed
it.
  The Court: Did you speak of the congestion *
   A. I do not remember whether I did or not. Q. This
is headed as being notes of the post-mortem examination
taken by you and your confreres ?  A. I do not know,
sir, whether it is or not.   Q.  Is any portion of that re-
port your hand-writing at all ?   A.  No, sir.  Q. You
now say from your notes  the congestion was in the
dura mater and the pia mater?  A. Yes, sir.
  ,Q. Could there be  a  venous  congestion  of the
arachnoid ?   A.  Not  very  apt to  be; no,  sir.  Q.
What do you suppose was the cause of the flattening
of the convolutions of the brain *  A. / do not know
sir.   Q   Is that normal ?    A.  They were  more
flattened than ordinary.   Q.  Can you give any hypo-
thesis as  to the cause ? A. My idea is, it was caused
by the excitement in the. first place ; during the state
of excitement  the blood  rushed to the head • it is a
matter of no importance.   Q. Do you think it was of
no importance at all in your diagnosis *  A.  Yes sir
Q. You say there was serous effusion alono- the veins •
whence did that  effusion come from *  A. From the
veins themselves.  Q. It was serum  from the blood
then, was it?   A. Yes, sir.   Q. How  did it escape 
doctor luxd's trial.             41
from the veins*  A.  From pressure on the veins.  Q.
Was a  rupture of the vessels  necessary ?  A. No,
sir.
  Q. How did you ascertain the brain was firm?  A.
By putting my hand on it.   Q. Any other experi-
ment ?   A. By taking it out  and handling it, and In-
cutting it.  Q.  How much did you cut the brain * A.
A good deal.   Q.  How  much ?   A.  Eight  down
through.  Q. Cut more than once?  A. Sliced right
through;  cut to the cerebellum from the cerebrum.
Q. How many pieces ?   A. Horizontally down to the
ventricle.  Q. Are  there two ventricles in the brain?
A.  Yes, sir.  Q. Did you cut into them?  A. I  think
so.   Q.  Are  you sure ?   A. I am not sure;  I do not
depend  upon memory in post-mortems.  _ Q.  Are you
sure vou  cut the cerebrum?  A. Yes, sir, I  do  recol-
lect that.   Q. Did you cut the cerebellum ?  A.I am
not sure about that; I think I did.
   Q. Did  you  find  any serum  in either  of the ven-
tricles of the  brain ?  A.  Yes, sir.  Q. Which  one ? A.
I think  the left.  Q. Did you measure it?   A. No,
sir.  Q.  How much did you  guess  there was?  A.
About half  an ounce,  we  thought, Q. Was  that
abnormal*  A.  More than  ordinary;  yes,  sir.  Q.
Could  that have had any tendency  to  cause death?
A. Of itself *   Q.  Yes.  ' A. I think not; it was part
and parcel of the  congestion.  Q. Do you know any
thing about serous apoplexy ?  A. Yes, sir.  Q.  What
is it ?  A. It is when we have a large  exudation  of
the serum from  the blood vessels of the brain.   Q.  Is
it necessary, for that to be large, to produce apoplexy *
A. Yes, sir'.  Q.  May not its location haYe very much to
do with its fatality ;  may not a much smaller quantity
be fatal in some parts of the brain than others?  A.  I
do not know, sir.  (The witness is now  rusty  in his
pathology.  A very small effusion in  some parts of the
brain would be quickly fatal.) 
42
DOCTOR LUND S TRIAL.
   Q.  Are you familiar with the disease called arach-
nitis ?   A/Yes, sir.   Q. What is  that?   A. Inflam-
mation  of the arachnoid.  Q. Do you know what men-
ingitis is *  A. That is part of arachnitis.   Q. Is that
the same disease?  A. Part of the same; yes. sir.  Q.
AArere there any symptoms of that ?  A. Before death *
Q.  Xo,  after death, upon post-mortem.  A.  No, sir.
Q.  The  presence of serum, was not that a symptom ?
A.  It is only one;  in  arachnitis  we  have  a large
amount; the arachnoid fluids  surround the arachnoid
itself.   Q. What  have  you  in  arachnitis that you
have not in this ?  A. The arachnoid was not inflamed.
Q.  Are  you sure ?  A. I am quite sure. '  Q. Did you
not say that you did not recollect?  A.  I am quite
sure now on  that point,
  Q. Did you not say there was no venous congestion
of the arachnoid ?  A. I do not recollect now.  Q. If
you do  not recollect whether there was venous con-
gestion of the arachnoid, how  do you know there was
no  inflammation there, as one is only a degree of the
other ?   A.  I simply recollect the latter.   Q. Was
your attention  called to it ?   A. My  attention was
called to every part.   Q.  In your examination before
the Coroner,  do you  remember that you stated any
thing, about the presence of  bloody serum, in any
portion  of the brain ?  A. Yes, sir,  I  said there was
none to  the best of my knowledge.  (The  witness is
now rusty in his memory.  The post-mortem, report
as read  by his own lips before the Coroner, stated that
the left ventricle contained about half an ounce of
BLOODY SERUM.)
  Q. The choroid  plexus, where is  that?   A. It is
situated by  the side  of both of the ventricles.  Q.
What was its condition ?   A. I  forget.   Q. Was
there any other notes  taken of the post-mortem besides
yours?  A. I did not take any;  I don't  know.  Q.
Did you gather anything from the fact  that the right 
DOCTOR' LUND'S TRIAL.
43
ventricle was empty, and  the  left contained  serum ?
A. X'othing special; no, sir.  0. The man was pretty
fleslry, was he not?  A. Yes,  sir, quite so.  Q. You
found  an  inch and  a half of  fat on the chest *  A.
Yes, sir.   Q. Was the  heart fatty *  A. I don't rec-
ollect.   Q.  Did  you examine with a  microscope  at
all?   A.  No, sir.   Q. Is not that necessary to ascer-
tain whether the  heart be fatty or not ?  A.  Well, if
the heart be fatty  we  can see it by natural obser-
vation.  Q. Can you, always?   A. X'o, sir.  Q. There
may be fat and the  eye not detect it ?  A. Yes, sir,
to a certain  extent.  Q. The  presence of fat in the
heart would diminish its force  *  A. Acs, sir.  Q.  It
tends to stagnation and venosity of the blood, and con-
gestion,  and  apoplexy?  A.  Yes, sir,  to a  certain
extent,
  Q. What  do you  gather from the enlargement  of
the liver?   A. It is simply a mark  of congestion.
Q. You think it was simply a swelling of the vessels?
A. Simply due, I thought, to the enlargement of the
blood vessels there.   Q.  Was the liver cut ?   A. Yes,
sir.  Q. Did you find  an unusual amount of blood
there *  A. Yes, sir.  Q. Was  the gall bladder itself
swollen?  A.  I do not  think  it  was.   Q. Did you
weigh  the heart?  A.  Xo, sir.   Q. Did you measure
it?   A. No, sir.  Q. AYas it larger than usual or not 1
A. I do not recollect  now, sir ; I do not think it was.
Q. Is it not important to notice the size of the  heart
when a matter of congestion is being considered;  is
it  not one of the  means  by which congestion is to be
determined as the cause of death ?  A. Yes, sir ; but
we depend on another cause ;  if we  do not find that
cause present, it is necessary to make further inquiry.
Q. May it  not be from  a number of causes working
together in the system *  A. Yes, sir, it may.
  (}. AATien you  are investigating the cause of death
where you see congestion is the proximate cause, should 
44
DOCTOR LI XD S  TRfAL.
you not pursue the line of investigation to each one ot
the remote causes* A.  Yes, sir, certainly.  0-  VYhy
should you not see whether the heart is large or small ?
A. In the first place it was not fatty.  Q. Yon say it
can be fatty, and not visible to the naked eye *  A.
Yes, sir, but not to a great extent,   Q. May it not be
to a certain  extent  sufficient to impede  circulation,
without being visible to the naked eye?   A.  I think-
not.   Q. Not to a degree ?  A. Yes, to a degree.  Q.
Is it  not  possible that the  presence of these  venous
clots in the heart were the cause of congestion, rather
than the result ?  A.  T think they were the result.  Q.
Is it not possible they were the cause *  A. Xo, sir. Q.
Might there not be a physical obstruction of the heart
which would  produce it ?  A There  was  not ?  Q.
Might there not be?  A. There was  not,  Q Might
there  not be ?  A. No,  sir.   Q.  No physical cause
was present *   A. There were not any signs.   Q.
(  ould  there possibly be any physical cause to prevent
the action of these functions of the heart ?   A.  No, sir.
Q. Suppose you should stop the circulation ?  A. That
would be mechanical cause enough.  Q.  To produce
that  effect *   A.  Yes, sir.  Q.  Suppose for some rea-
son the heart should be stopped with a clot of blood *
A. If a clot be produced in the heart?   Q. It might
stop the operation ?   A.  Yes, sir.  Q. In  your inves-
tigation of the heart you took it out and handled it
and cut it*  A. Yes, sir.
  Q. What is the pleura? A. It is the external lining
of the lungs.  Q. The adhesion of the pleura to the walls
of the lungs restricts the action of the lungs *  A. To
a certain  extent.  Q. Its tendency would be towards
congestion, would it not ?  A. No.  Q. When von re-
strict the operation of the  lungs  don't you, to some
extent, restrict the arteralization  of the  blood?  A.
Some.  Q. Would it produce venosity, and so  conges-
tion ?  A. A  little.  Q.  Does it not  tend that way >. 
DOCTOR LUXD's TRIAL.
45
A.  A little.  Q. Must it not from the nature of things
tend in that way *   A. Some.   Q. The adhesion here
was very considerable,  and very firm ?  A. Very firm.
Q. So that it produced physical distortion, flattening of
the chest*  A. No, sir.  Q. AYhat was the'cause of the
flattening*  A. I don't remember.  Q. Don't remem-
ber the chest was flattened?  A. No, sir.  Q. Inves-
tigate your notes on that point, will you. Doctor?  A.
I don't see it stated here, sir.
  Q.  Do you know Dr. Forman's hand-writing? A.  I
would not swear to it. Q. Do you know whether this is
it or not ?  A. I do not, sir.  Q. Would the size of the
liver interfere at all with  the respiration ?   A. No, sir.
Q.  AYhat  is the  office of the spleen ?   A.  I don't
know '  it is a safety valve, supposed to be.   Q.  The
closing of the cystic duct could not have been organic,
could it?   A. Not  very  well;  no,  sir.   Q.  And  the
collection  of the pus then, must have resulted from its
being closed for  a considerable length of time ?  A.
Yes, sir.  Q. The  absorption of any of that pus, that
mysterious pus, if it produced  pyaemia,  would have
some tendency towards congestion ?   A. Yes, sir.  Q.
The structure of this man's body tended towards con-
gestion, did it not?  A. I do not know  that  it did.
  Q.  Was he not such a subject as you generally find
apoplexy in*  A. If short in the neck he would  be.
Q.  He was short in  the neck and stout ?   A. Yes, sir.
Q.  Was there much of anything in the stomach *  A.
I do not recollect how much.   Q. Did you make an
effort  to detect the contents ?   A.  To detect; what do
you mean by that?  Q.  By smell  or otherwise?  A.
We cut into it; it was yellowish.   Q. Was there any
smell *  A. I do not recollect that I smelled of it.  Q.
AYhat was the condition  of  the blood in  the lungs at
the  time of the post-mortem *  A. The lower portion
of the left lung was the most congested, owing to  the
position of the body in dying.  Q. AYhen you took 
46
DOCTOR LUND'S  TRIAL.
the stomach out of the body what was done with it ?
A.  It was put into ajar.   Q.  You think it was taken
directly from the body and put into a jar ?   A. To the
best of my knowledge ; it is possible we may have taken
it out  and cut it,  after putting it in.  Q.  What was
done with the jar?  A. I think it was handed to the
Coroner sealed.  0. How sealed; with wax?   A.  I
think with wax ; I did not do it myself.  Q. Did you
see it done?   A. I think I did ; I am not positive.
  Q. This serous effusion you speak of in the brain,
was it between the arachnoid  and pia  mater,  or  one
side of the pia mater?   A  Both, I think.  Q. Did
you ever make a post-mortem  examination of one who
died of apoplexy?  A. Yes, sir.   Q. What is the
feature about this post-mortem examination that satis-
fies  you, that  death was the result of poison  by mor-
phine?   A.  From the post-mortem alone  I should
be  unwilling  to swear  he  died   from  morphine.
(Appendix n.)   Q.  What  other  disease   might
have produced the same  post-mortem appearances*
A. I do not know  of any disease, sir; only universal
congestion ?  Q. What might have produced universal
congestion *   A. / do not know, sir.   Q. Why would
you not have  concluded from the post-mortem alone
that this man did, or did not die from morphine?  A.
From the  ante-post-mortem  appearances?  Q. Why
would you not have been satisfied of the cause of death
from  morphine, from  the post-mortem alone?  A.
Because morphine leaves no visible  traces behind ex-
cept the congestion of the  vessels.
  Q. Can  any other cause produce the same effect?
A. I presume so.  Q. What else * A. I do not know '•
anything  that  would  produce  universal congestion
would  produce the same effects in  this  case.  Q
Would not apoplexy produce congestion?  A. l7es
but in that you have unmistakable evidence  of apo'
plexy in the brain.  Q.  Are you sure  vou must have 
DOCTOR LUND'S TRIAL.             4T
post-mortem evidence of apoplexy in the brain *  A.
Yes, sir.   Q. What are the evidences?  A. A large
amount of serum or blood.  Q. Is AAratson's Theory
and Practice of Physic a reliable authority ?  A. Y'es,
sir.  Q. Suppose you find this:
  Mr. Dixon here'read from the work alluded to, page
332, the following sentence : "In the second place the
apopletic  coma may terminate more or less  quickly in
death.   On examining the brain we may find  a large
quantity of extravasated blood spread over its surface or
lying within its broken substance; or second, a consid-
erable  effusion of serous fluid collected within its ven-
tricles; or we may detect no deviation whatever from the
healthy structure and natural appearances  of  the or-
gan.   Dr. Abercrombie has given to that form of apo-
plexy, which destroying life, leaves no traces behind,
the  name of simple apoplexy.  Where blood is found
the  name is  sanguineous apoplexy.  Where  serum
alone, it is serous apoplexy."
   Q. How does that strike you, Doctor?  A.   We do
not  term it apoplexy when there is no effusion.  Q.
This Dr. Abercrombie  is  a very good  author ; one
of the lights of the medical profession?  A. Yes, sir.
But it does not make me think so ;  a person under
those  circumstances might die of a shock  to the ner-
vous system ; that is my idea.
   Q. AYhat  is  the  author's  idea  when ne  caUs  it
 "simple  apoplexy"?  A. I do  not know.   Q. Can
you earlier from' this description the cause of  death *
A fU, sir; that he died of shock.   Q. By apoplexy
you mean what *  A. The rupture of a blood vessel.
 Q  Do you  mean  that always *  A. Y es, sir.  O-
 Whether there may be  no blood in the  bram, but
 simply serum?  A. Yes, one might die of  serous
 apoplexy without any  effusion of blood.   Q. Is not
 apoDlexV divided into simple, sanguineous  and serous
 apoplexy?  A. We  are not usually in the habit  of
 dointu; it. 
48
DOCTOR LUNO's TRIAL.
  The Court:  I would suggest you get from the wit-
ness good authorities on the subject.
  Mr Dixon :  Pereira's Elements of Materia  Medica
and Therapeutics ;  is that good ?
  A.  Good.
  Q.  Practice  of. Medicine, by  Tanner ?  A. Good,
yes,  sir.   Q. Gardner's Chemistry?  A.  I  am not
familiar with that?   Q. Wood's Therapeutics?  A.
Good. Q. Carpenter's Principles  of  Human Physi-
ology ?  A.  Good.   Q.  Do you think  they are as
reliable as Dr. Wilkinson on apoplexy?  A. It might
be so.
  Q.  Ordinarily, would  a grain of  morphine produce
death ?   A. / do  not  know,  sir.   Q.  Ordinarily,
would half  an  ounce  of  laudanum produce death.
A. I  should judge  it  would.  (Appendix o.)   Q.
Have you ever known  it to*   A.  Xo, sir;  I never
knew half an ounce to  produce death or be taken,
except by the opium  eater of  whom I spoke yester-
day, who  used to take it in larger quantities than that.
Q. To which school of medicine  do you belong*  A.
AY ell, I belong to what is ordinarily termed the Allo-
pathic.  Q. To which  does Dr. Lund  belong ?  A. I
believe the Homoeopathic.   Q.  The feeling between
these  two schools is not ordinarily an amicable one *
  Objected to; objection sustained.
  0.  I will  ask whether these  schools  are not  antago-
nistic schools of medicine*  A. In what respect *  Q.
In their  principles and method of practice.   A. I
believe they are.  Q. Dr. Lund's field  of practice was
about co-extensive with yours *   A. I  believe so.  Q.
Occasionally patients of  yours  have ceased to  employ
you,  and  have  employed  him *  A. I do not  know
whether  they have or  not.  Q. Do  you  know anv
case of that  kind *   A.  I do not recollect anv at the
present moment.  Q.  Have you  been in the habit of
meeting him in medical consultation {  A.  Xo, sir. 
DOCTOR LUND'S TRIAL.
49
Q. The Allopathic  School  does  not  consent to meet
the Homoeopathic  School in consultation ?  A. No,
sir.  Q. They scarcely recognize them as physicians ?
A. I do not knoiv how that is ?  Q. Y"ou do not ?  A.
I do not meet them in consultation.   Q. You decline
to meet them in consultation?  A. Yes, sir.   Q. On
what ground ?  A.  According to our rules in ethics.
Q. What  do you  mean  by " our  rules" ?  A.  The
Allopathic code of medical  ethics.  Q.  It is a part of
the Allopathic ethics not to meet them in consultation ?
A. Y"es. Q. What is your object in observing the rules *
A. Because  I promised  to  obey certain  rules.  Q.
Blind  obedience without any purpose*  A. It is a
rule  I agreed to follow, not to consult.   Q. Are you
in favor of the rule ?   A. Yes, sir.   Q. For  what
cause *  A.  Our  systems are different as far  as I
understand it; it would lead to nothing but conflict
of opinion.   Q. You think you would not be likely
to agree at all? A. No, sir.  Q.  You could not give
each other any light at all *   A. I do not know about
that.
  Q. You were present  at Mr. Coates' house, when
Dr.  Lund came there that morning?   A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you see him approach the house ?  A.   I can
not say now whether I did or not.   Q. Who was in
the room with you?  A. At the time?  Q. Yes, sir.
A. Dr. Forman,  Dr. Bock, and Mr. Welch, and I
think Haslett; that is all  I recollect.  Q. Do you rec
ollect saying anything to the physicians there assem-
bled, at Dr. Lund's  approach, in  reference to paying
no attention to him when he came in *  A. Xo,  sir, I
do not. Q.  Was  anything of that kind said?   A. I
do not remember   (Appendixp.)  Q.  Don't remem-
ber whether anything was said or not *   A. No, sir
   Q. Did you take possession of the two powders of
morphine which were left after Mr. Coates died?  A.
I  took possession  of one.  Q. Who took the other *
       3 
50
DOCTOR LUND S TRIAL.
A.  Dr. forman.  Q.  AYhat  did  you  do with  the
powders *   A.  Dr. Forman and I wet our fingers, and
put them  in and  tasted  of one.  Q.  Which  one did
you taste*  A.  To the best of my knowledge the one
I took.  Q. AYhat did  von do with  it after tasting ?
A. Put it in my  pocket-book.   Q.  AYhat then? _ A.
Took  it with me.   Q. How long did you keep it in
your pocket-book *  A. Several days ; I do not know.
(c). What  day did you get it from Air. Wells?  A. I
do not recollect.
  Q.  How many  days after  Coates' death, did Mr.
Cook  weigh it,  or Wells' clerk *  A, / do not know
how long it was.  Q.  Those scales  were the ordinary
scales in dispensing  drugs*  A. I  do not  know, but
believe they were.  Q.  Mr.  Wells is a druggist on
Monticello Avenue *  A.  Yes,  sir.   Q.  You  send
prescriptions there to him *   A. Yes, sir.   Q. When
you  came  in  and  asked  Air.  Cook to  weigh  the
powder, what did  you say *  A. I do not think 1 made
any remarks, none  that  I  remember.  Q.  Simply
asked him to weigh it *   A. To the  best of my knowl-
edge.   Q.  AYas it weighed *   A. Yes, sir.  Q. How
large  were those scales *   A.  They  were small scales.
Q. In a case by themselves ?   A. No, sir.   Q. A\rhere
were  they *  A. Outside of the counter, behind a
little  screen which he had.   Q. Did you go behind
the screen *  A.  I  went behind.   Q.  Y^ou were
desirous of ascertaining the exact weight  *  A.  Yes,
sir.  Q. You saw them weighed  at that time *  A.
Yes, sir.   Q. How much *  A. Cook  did not say how
much; he could not weigh so small a quantity.  Q.
AYas  it any weight  *  A. A weight was put on the
scales ; he did  not say how large a weight.  Q.  Was
it not put on the scale, and a balance put on the
opposite scale *  A.  I do not recollect.  Q. Was you
not looking*  A.  My opinion is it was.  Q. Do you
recollect what weight was put there*   A. I  do not. 
DOCTOR LUND'S TRIAL.
M
Q. AYhat  were  the  scales made  of*   A. Brass,  I
presume,  sir.   Q. They  were  ordinary  druggist's
scales *  A.  Yes, but they were not in perfect con-
dition.  Q.  How  do  you  know ?  A. Because  he
said they were not.  Q.  Did he say what they needed
to be put in perfect condition *   A. No, sir; I asked
him  how  he weighed morphine there ; he said four
grains at a time, and then divided  by the eye for the
quantity needed.  Q.  Is it common to divide mor-
phine by  the eye among druggists ?   A.  I  do not
think it is.  Q". Is  it  possible to divide it  pretty
accurately?   A.  YAra  cannot  divide  it accurately.
Q. How large  in bulk would four grains be?  A.
Pretty large, sir.   Q.  It would  cover what size coin *
A. I don't know, sir ; I never  measured it that way.
Q. Did you weigh the paper also on the scales?  A.
No, sir  Q.  The paper was emptied  on the scales*
A. 'Yes, sir.   Q. Then  the  powder was returned  to
you *  A. Yes, sir, put back into the same  paper.  Q.
What was done with it then *  A. I  put it  in my
pocket-book again.  Q.  How long after that  was it
weighed again ?   A. I cannot say, it was not the same
day.  Q.  Who weighed it the second time?   A. Mr.
Gardner.   Q. Where is  that?   A.  On  Monticello
Avenue.  Q. It lacked something of being a grain?
A. Yes, sir.  Q.  AAras  it  weighed with  the  paper
there *  A. No, sir.  Q. Did you see it weighed ?  A.
Yes,  sir.  Q. Were  the scales correct *   A.  So Mr.
Gardner said, sir.
   Q. Do  you think you could  tell a grain lorn half
a grain of morphine,  by looking at it ?  A. I think
I could ; morphine is exceedingly deceptive in appear-
ance, though.   Q. If you had half a grain  of mor-
phine, and a grain, along side of each other, could you
detect the difference in size*   A. I  think so.   Q.
O.uite easily *   A. I  think so.  Q. After you got it
weighed  at Mr.  Gardner's, did  you speak  to Mr. 
 52              doctor  lund's  trial.

 Cook  about his  weight*   A.  Yes,  sir  Q.  How
 soon?   A. I do not recollect; one evening I  was
 passing.  Q. What did you say *  A.  I do not recol-
 lect;  I recollect  telling Mr. AY ells.  Q.  Did you ask
 him whether he told any one about the weight of the
 powder*  A. No, sir.   Q. Did you tell  him not to
 tell?   A. Xo,  sir; I told him  to tell Mr. Wells.  Q.
 Did you tell him it would hurt  his drug store, if it got
 out that the powder weighed only half a grain there *
 A.  I do not recollect.  Q. What time  of night was it
 when  you were passing, and stepped  in  there ?  A.
 Quite late;  it must have been  ten or  eleven o'clock.
 Q.  Did you call the clerk outside*   A. Yes, sir.  Q.
 AVhy  did you*   A. To speak  with  him in  reference
 to  the matter; there was a number of people in the
 store.   Q.  Why did you think it important he should
 tell Air. Wells *  A. So he would have better scales.
 Q.  Did  you think they were not aware their scales
 were out of order *  A.  He did not know anything
 about it,  Q. Did he not tell you about it *  A.  Mr.
 Cook  told me at the time, he could not  weigh so small
 a quantity.   Q. What new light did  you get *   A.
 Simply I could not swear to the weight of this  pow-
 der ; if Mr. Cook had said it weighed  half a grain, I
 should  have been satisfied.   (Appendix q.)   Q. LJid
 you not know, when you left Air. Cook, you could not
 swear  to the weight of it *  A. Yes, sir ;  that is the
 reason I took it to Air.  Gardner's.  Q. AYhat  reason
 did you have for telling Cook to tell Air. Wells <   A.
 Xo particular reason, simply a matter of information.
  Q. Did you ever say to any one, that this transaction
served Dr. Lund just right,  and you hoped he would
get his deserts *   A. No,  sir.   Q. Anything to  that
effect *   A.  No, sir.  Q.  Did you advise Mrs. Coates
to commence an  action  against  Dr.  Lund?   A. No
sir.   Q.  Did you give her a  letter of introduction to
an attorney *  A. No, sir.  (Appendix  r.) 
               DOCTOR LUND'S TRIAL.             53

  Q. Did you ever tell any one, that there was enough
morphine given to Coates to kill a hundred men *   A.
Xo, sir.
  Q. Do you recollect whether you told Cook, at the
time the powder was weighed, that this was "' one of
the powders that killed Coates *"  A. I told him that
this was one of the powders that Dr. Lund had pre-
scribed.  0. At the  time the powder  was weighed *
A.  1 think he asked the question first,
  Q. After Mr. Gardner had weighed the  powder,
what then became of it *   A.  I put  it  in my pocket-
book again.  Q.  What then*  A.  I gave it to  the
(kroner.
  Q. Did you ever see Dr. Forman's powder after Mr.
Coates  died *  A.  No, sir. Q. You don't know what
became of that *   A.  Xro, sir.
  Q. Who weighed  the  powder at  Gardner's*  A.
Mr. Gardner himself.
  Q. Belladonna, you say, is an antidote for morphine ?
A.  It  is considered so.'  Q.  And the effects of the
morphine are to  produce the florid congestion of the
surface, and the contraction of the pupil of the eye *
A.  Yes.  Q.  I understand the effect of the morphine
was to  contract the  pupil of the eye, and produce a
livid condition of the surface ; that after you gave the
belladonna, the effect was seen in the dilation of the
pupil of the eye, and  the florid congestion  of the sur-
face; did not that indicate the belladonna had.  over-
come the effects of the morphine * A. No, sir ; it only
indicated it had overcome the  contraction of the pupil,
as far as that is concerned.   Q.  And the livid condi-
tion of the skin *   A. That only showed an increase
of the circulation of the blood."  Q. Was not that  in
opposition to the  effect of the morphine *   A. Yes, in
opposition.  Q. And  that opposition was  throughout
the system *  A.I suppose so.   Q.  It must have per-
meated the system *   A.  Yes, sir. Q. Showing, then, 
54
DOCTOR Ll'XD S TRIAL.
 the effect of the belladonna through the system had
 overcome the effect of the morphine *  A. Xo, sir.  Q.
 AYhy not *  A. We know it had not, by the continued
 stupor.   Q. That  is, if the continued  stupor was due
 to the morphine, you would know it;  but if  the stu-
 por  was due  to something else than  the morphine,
 then would it be any indication that the belladonna had
 overcome the force of the morphine ? A.  No,  sir.  Q.
 Certainly these effects were overcome by  the bella-
 donna *  A. That contraction of the pupil was over-
 come.   Q. So with the  lividity of the  skin*  A. For
 the time being.  Q.  That florid suffusion of the skin
 continued until death, and  dilation of  the pupil *  A.
 The dilation of the pupil did, but I do not recollect
 about the other.   Q. Is there any reason why  bella-
 donna should overcome  the effect in the pupil of the
 eye, and not the other effect * . A.  Oh! yes ;  that it
 may do.   Q. How *  A. / do not knovj.  Q. How
 do you know it can*   A.  From experience; if the
 belladonna completely counteracts the poisonous effects
 of the opium, the patient wakes up out of the stu-
 por, as  far as I understand it.   Q.  The  fact of the
 patient's waking up indicates what?   A.  That the
 poison has been neutralized.  Q.  That would  be true
 when the poison produced stupor *   A.  Certainly.  Q.
 But  if the stupor were  produced from other causes.
 would it not show  it *  A.  No, sir.
  Q.  Can you think of any sound reason why the bel-
 ladonna should overcome the force of the poison over
 the eye,  and  not  overcome the other effects ?  A. I
 cannot tell you anything about  its  action ; I do not
 know anything about it.  Q.  Is  that  contraction of
the pupil never the result of any other  cause of coma
than narcotic poison *  A.  / do not know of any other
that it is peculiar  to.  Q. No, I did not say peculiar
to ; is it  never the result of anything else *  A. It is
not usually.  Q. Is it not sometimesf  A.  I do not 
                DOCTOR LUND'S TRIAL.             55

 know.   (t).  Does not  morphine produce sometimes a
 dilation of the pupil *  A. I have read it so.
   Q. In your judgment what  single item of the ante-
 mortem  symptoms conclusively satisfies you that this
 trouble was the result of morphine *  A. In  the first
 place, the acknowledgment that morphine had been
 given ;  in the second place, the effects were all  those
 of morphine.
   Q. AY ere there any symptoms that exclusively be-
 long to  narcotic poison *   A. The contraction of the
 pupil.  Q. You think that belongs exclusively to nar-
 cotic poison *   A. Yes, sir.

   Re-direct examination by Mr. Garretson :
   Q. AYhat was  this fluid stuff in the gall bladder ?
 A. It was a dirty, milky fluid.   Q. In what did it re-
 semble pus *  A.  In its peculiar milkiness.  Q. Could
 you tell  whether it was  pus  or not *   A.  Not posi-
 tively, without putting it  under a microscope.
   Q. If  the cystic duct was closed and there  were no
 absorbents in the gall bladder, how could this fluid
 get out?  A. I do not know how it could get out. Q.
 If there were absorbents and the duct closed, how
 then  could  it get out *   A.  Be absorbed  there.  Q.
 What indication would there be in the gall bladder ?
 A.  No special  one; if it was all absorbed, the  gall
 bladder would  contract.   Q. If taken up  by the ab-
 sorbents, where would  it be found *  A. Throughout
 the circulation.
  Q.  Is there serum in the blood ?   A.  Yes,  sir.  Q.
 How does that differ from serum  in the pus  *  A.  I
 do not know.  Q. Is there a difference*  A. I do not
 know.
  Q.  If you had not seen this man before his death,
 and upon the examination of the contents of the stom-
ach had  found morphine, what would have been your
conclusion *  A.  That congestion was due to the mor-
phine probably. 
Mi
DOCTOR I.LXd's TRIAL.
  Q. AYhat symptoms of pyaemia did you see *   A. I
did not see any.   Q. Before his death *   A. I did not
see any.
  Q. You are acquainted with Christison on Poisons*
A.  I am.  Q. Is that a good work ?  A. Yes, sir

  Re-cross examination :
  Q. If yon  had  been called to see Mr. Coates,  and
had found him suffering from intense pain in the head,
would you not have thought morphine  a proper pre-
scription *  A. That  would depend upon his general
condition.  Q. On what in his general condition * A.
It would  depend upon how he was in other respects ;
if he was suffering from congestion, it would not be a
proper remedy, even  though  he had pain.   0.  Sup-
pose you  had seen no symptoms of congestion *   A.
And still suffering from pain in the bowels?   Q.  Pain
in the bowels and'head ?  A.  I do not think I should
have given morphine on account of pain  in the head;
without pain in the head, I should unhesitatingly have
given morphine.
  Q. You found trouble in the bowels; at the post-
mortem they were twisted *  A.  The colon was loaded
with thecal matter, more than is usual.
  Q. To what do you attribute  this pain in the head
from which Air. Coates suffered?   A. I do not know,
sir.  Q.  Your diagnosis did not extend  to that;  you
are unaware of any cause for that  intense pain in the
head *  A.I am not aware of any cause.  Q.  Are you
aware of  any cause for the swelling in the face and of
the hands ?  A. Except congestion ; no, sir.

                William  Burns,
Examined by Mr. Garretson, testified that he was one
of the Coroners of the  county, and  was called upon in
July last, by Dr. Lewis, to visit the house of the late
John D. Coates.   He reached tliere between nine and
ten o'clock, and found the man not dead. 
DOCTOR LUND'S TRIAL.
57
  Q. What  did you do then *  A.  The first  thing I
did was to inquire  about  the  medicine; the family
told me about the medicine, and I think Dr. Wilkin-
son offered  me one of  the powders, and Dr. Forman
the other.  Q, AYere they both there at that time *  A.
Y~es, sir.  Q. At ten o'clock *  A. Yes, sir ; I sent  for
them.  Q. Thev came when you sent?  A. Yes,  sir
  Q. AYhat  about the powders ?  A.  I told Dr. For-
man I  would keep his; I told Dr. AArilkinson to weigh
his, and see what it  was.  Q.  AYhat did you do with
yours *  A.  I had mine weighed by Joseph  A. Moore,
of Jersey City.   Q. Dr. Forman gave you  that pow-
der ?   A.  Yes,  sir.  Q.  You had it weighed at that
time?  A.  That same day.  Q. What did  it  weigh?
A.  A grain, strong.   Q. What was done with it after
weighing?   A.  I put it in my pocket.  Q.  How long
did you keep it there *   A. Until I got the other from
Dr. AATilkinson.   Q. AYhen did you get the other from
Dr. Wilkinson *  A. I cannot say; perhaps a day or
two.   Q. After you got the second one from Dr. AYil-
kinson. what did you  do with  them?  A.  The Coro-
ner's Jury recommended I should have a man examine
as to the contents of the stomach;  I took that over to
Professor Doremus, of New York.  Q. He was away
at that time?  A.  He was at that time.  Q.  AYhat
did vou do with the powders *  A.  I put the powders
in a'paper, and left the jar sealed, and left a note for
him to subject them to a chemical analysis, and let me
know when he could have them done. [Appendi.r si)
Q.  AYhen did you see Professor Doremus after that *
A.  It was over a month after that when he came over
and gave his evidence before the Coroner's Jury.  Q.
Did you see him from the time you left  the powders
until"he came over *  A. X^o, sir ; he wrote me a letter
when  he got the stomach,  and when he would have
them  done.  Q. lie wrote that  letter to  you?  A.
Yes, sir. 
58
DOCTOR UNO's  TRIAL.
  Q. AYhat was done with the body of Coates ?   A. I
ordered the doctors to make a post-mortem examina-
tion on the body, and find out the cause  of his death,
if possible.  Q.  A Yell, what was  done ?   A. They
made  a post-mortem—Dr. Wilkinson, Dr. Forman,
and I think Dr. Bock.  Q. When?  A.  The same
day ; I could not say the  same day  he  died, or the
next morning; I gave them the order on that day.
  Q. How soon, after you  took the powders over to
Dr. Doremus, did you  hear from  him *   A. The
second day,  I think.  Q.  By letter*  A. By letter
Q. Have you his letter *  A. I  think so, down at my
office.

  Cross-examination by Mr. Dixon :
  Q. Who weighed the one  powder which you  took
with you ?  A. The one powder was weighed by Jo-
seph A.  Moore,  a  druggist in  Jersey Avenue.   Q.
You-don't know the weight?   A.  Not  except  by
what he  told me.   Q. Did you know of your own
knowledge what the weight represented * A. Xro, sir ;
I did not see  its mark.  Q. You only know what he
said about it *  A. That is all.  Q.  That is the one
Dr. Forman had *  A. That  is  the one  Dr. Forman
gave me.   Q. AYhen you went there about ten o'clock ;
you say nine or ten *  A.  I think it was  not quite
ten.  Q. AYho was there at the time *   A. The family
were tliere,  and I think the daughter and  a  man
named Mr. Kelly; a gentleman  named Air. AYelch, I
think;  I  am not positive as to whether Mr. AYelch
was there  or not *  Q. Anybody else *  A.I cannot
now say whether the doctors were tliere at  this time
or not; however, they were there a short time after-
wards.   Q. A\rere they sent for *  A. The gentleman
who told  me, said they would be there at ten o'clock.
Q. AYhat doctors came there at ten o'clock *  A.  Dr.
Wilkinson and Dr.  Forman. 
Doctor lund's trial.
59
  Q. After the doctors came there what did they do *
A, I asked them if they  did all they could ;  they said
they did, of course; I asked how they gave the medi-
cine, and I said  perhaps it would not do any harm to
try again ; they took  him to  another room, got some
clothing on, and tried medicine in different ways.  Q.
They wrapped him  up  warm*   A.  Y^es, sir.   Q.
What medicine did they give him *   A. I forget now.
Q. Who gave the medicine?   A. Dr. Wilkinson.  Q.
Did you see how he gave the medicine  which he gave
while you were there ?
  The Court: Did you  say you saw him give medi-
cine ?  A. I saw him send out of the room.
  The Court : The question is  did you see him give
medicine *  A. No, sir,  I did not see him.
  Q. Did you see him do anything but wrap him up
warm*  A.  A.I did not.   Q. Then that is  all you
saw?   A. They might have done more.   Q, How
long did you stay there *  A.  I  did not stay in the
room very long, because the man was not  dead and 1
had no  authority there  except by permission of the
 doctors.  Q. Then you  thought they were rather in a
hurry to send  for you;  how long did you stay?   A.
 It might have been half an hour.  Q.  How soon after
 did the doctors go away ? A. I could not say whether
 they were there or  not.  Q. How long  after ten did
 they stay ?   A.  When I came  away they  were tliere.
 Q   Did they try any slapping while you were there *
 A   Xo,  sir, they did" not. Q. Or walking him about;
 A   They  walked—no,  they carried  him  into   the
 room.   Q. Simply carried  him  into  the room  and
 wrapped him up warm ;  did not drag him about *  A.
 No, sir, not that I saw.   Q. Did you notice how many
 blankets they put on to wrap him up warm *  AX o,
 sir, I did not notice.  Q. AYas  it a pretty  warm  day *
 A.  It was, sir, a very warm day.
    Q.  Are these the  notes of the Inquest? (Handing 
60
DOCTOR LUND's TRIAL.
 paper to witness.)   A. Yes, sir.   Q. Where did you
 get this statement *  (Alluding to the post-mortem re-
 port.)  A. It was fetched  into the Inquest by one of
 the doctors.  0.  Do  you recollect which  one*  A.
 No, sir.  Q. Do you know whose hand-writing it  is  *
 A. Tt looks to me like Dr. AYilkinson's hand-writing;
 I do not know who wrote it;  this was already written
 and read to the jury.  Q.  As the result of the post-
 mortem examination*  A. Y^es, sir.   Q. Do you rec-
 ollect  who  read  it *   A.  I  do  not.   Q. AY ere  the
 doctors there when  it was read?  A. Yes,  sir.   Q.
 AYhich doctors *   A. Dr. Forman was there and Dr.
 Wilkinson.   Q. Any other*   A. Dr. Bock; I could
 not say whether  he  was there at the time ; he was
 there before; I handed him the evidence, written  by
 one of the other physicians, and he looked over it and
 said he would  corroborate  it.  Q. Did either of the
 other physicians who were there object to the result of
 the post-mortem; did they assent to it, or  say it was
 wrong *  A. It was corroborated by them.

              Dr. Samuel  It. Forman,
 Examined by Mr. Garretson,  testified:
  I am a practicing physician in Jersey City,  and was
 called to see John I). Coates, in July last, early in the
 morning, I think about six  o'clock.   Q. AYhat was he
 suffering from?   A.  Shall  I  describe  his condition*
 Q.  Yes, sir.  A.  I found him sitting  in a high-back
 rocking chair, reclining in a comatose condition ; deep,
heavy sleep; unconscious ; labored breathing; respira-
 tion, I believe, about  twelve in  the  minute;  pulse
slow; skin cold, clammy and livid.   Q. AY ell *  A.
The pupil contracted.   Q.  Anything else *  A. These
were all the symptoms I can recollect that were present
at the time.
  Q. Who was there when you got there *   A. Dr
Wilkinson and the man, I think, AYelch, who came for 
               DOCTOR LUND'S TRIAL.             61

ine, and I think probably his wife; she was in and out
every minute or two.  Q. From your observations of
the symptoms what do you  suppose was the matter
with him ?  A. I inquired into the history of the case
a little, and was shown a powder such as he had taken
a short time before, which was represented to me to be
morphine; I tasted it.  Q. AYhat  did you conclude
from the taste *  A.I concluded from the symptoms
and the taste of the powder, that he was suffering from.
the effects of morphine.
  Q.  AYhat was done for him ?   A. His treatment
occupied continuously the whole forenoon ; a variety
of means were used  to arouse him; first, an attempt
was made to raise him up, but he could not walk nor
stand.  Q. Well ?   A. Then we attempted it by fric-
tion and mustard, by flagellation, and by exciting vom-
iting ; that is all I think of now; we tried to administer
medicine by the mouth, but he could not swallow  ; we
sent almost'immediately for some belladonna, which we
administered by injection under the skin ; we attempted
cold effusions.  Q. AYhat else*    A. Xone  of  these
having perceptible effect except the belladonna.  Q.
What effect did that have?   A.  In a short time  after
its administration the lividity disappeared, and a florid
congestion  was  observed  to come  over  the   face,
and  the  pupil dilated.  Q.  How long did you re-
main with him *  A.  With the exception of from nine
to ten, I was with him till he died, except about fifteen
minutes I believe,  when I went for an oxygen appara-
tus.   Q.  AAHiat time was that *   A. I think it was  a
little  after  twelve.  Q.  Did you  go back with the
apparatus?   A.  Yes, I  do  not think I went  into the
house, because the man was dead;  we also used  elec-
tricity in the latter part of it, as the respiration flagged.
   Q.  You  have  spoken of the powder you tasted;
what was done with the powder you tasted *   A.I do
not know what was done with the identical one;  there 
62
DOCTOR LUND's TRIAL.
were two powders there, of which I took one and Dr.
Wilkinson the other.  Q.  AAliat did you do with the
one you had *  A. When the Coroner came I handed
it to him.  Q.  AY ere you present at the post-mortem *
A.  I was.   Q. AYhen was  that made *  A. The next
morning.   Q.  AYhere *  A.  At the house.  Q. By
whom *   A.  By Dr.  Wilkinson and two or three
others.  Q. (Handing paper containing the post-mor-
tem report read before the Coroner's Jury.)  Look  at
these  notes;  whose hand-writing are they *   A. I
wrote them, sir.  Q. Are those the observations made
at  the post-mortem ?   A.  They are  taken from the
notes  I  made at the post-mortem, and from my recol-
lection together.
  Q. From your examination previous to the death  of
the man,  and from  the  post-mortem examination,
what  did you  conclude was the cause of his  death *
A.  From the symptoms on the post-mortem examina-
tion, and the history of the case, I concluded  he died
from an over dose of morphine. Q. How soon  after
the post-mortem examination  was  that written out *
A.  I think  the next day, sir;  very soon after, at  any
rate.
  Q.  A\rhat  is the  usual dose of morphine*  A.  It
depends upon the effect it produces upon  the patient.
Q.  AYhat is the largest dose you have known to be
given to produce good effects *  A.  Four  grains.   Q.
AYhat sort of a patient was  that *  A. It was a woman
wrho had just ruptured  her uterus in confinement.  Q.
AYhat was the effect of the dose *  A. Simply to allay
in  some degree her pain.   Q. Did  the woman live*
A.  No, sir.
  Q. AYhat  is the ordinary  dose—you  understand
what I mean—between the extremes *  A. From  one-
sixth  to one-quarter  of  a grain; sometimes  even
larger, if in violent pain; it depends somewhat on the
condition.   Q. In what case do you  give as large a 
DOCTOR LUND'S TRIAL.
63
dose as  a grain ?  A. It is  hard to state  in  what
cases ;  I can state the cases in  which I have given it.
Q. Is  it  the usual dose *   A. It is  not an  ordinary
close ; it is an exceptional dose ; it may be given.  Q.
Is it administered, or usually administered, without
seeing  the patient ?  A. A grain dose ?   Q. Yes, sir.
A. I think not.
  Q. What is the smallest amount of morphine that
has been  known  to have proved  fatal *   A. I  heard
the testimony yesterday ; I speak as much from my
recollection of  that  as from  any knowledge  of my
own ; I cannot  speak from my own  experience.  Q.
What  is  the smallest amount you have known *  A.
I do not  know the exact amount; I cannot state it, it
is so long since I have seen a case in which I knew the
exact amount that was given.
  Q. What kind of practice would it be to prescribe a
grain of morphine in the absence of the patient *
  Mr.  Dixon  here  objected  to  the question.  The
Court  overruled  the objection, but  gave Air.  Dixon
the exception.
  A. It  would have  to be under some very peculiar
circumstances  or extraordinary, under which any one
would  be justified in doing it.
  Q. A\rould the growing  together of the side of the
lungs,  spoken of  in the post-mortem, have  any effect
in producing  congestion  in  the head?   A.  None
whatever;  none that could be appreciated at all.  Q.
How long had that   growing together  probably ex-
isted *  A. It  is hard to say  the  exact time, but
certainly several  months ;  it  might  have been years.
  Q. What disease  was tliere about the lungs *  A.
Congestion*  Q. AYhat else?  A. No other disease.
  Q^ What quantity of fluid was  there in the gall-
bladder *   A.  I think about three or four ounces. Q.
What was this fluid ?  A.  It was a greenish-yellowish
fluid, milky in  appearance.   Q. In  what respect did 
64
DOCTOR LUND S TRIAL.
it resemble pus *   A. Some in appearance, and under
the microscope, exhibited globules.
  Q.  AYhat effect would the absorption of that matter
produce on the brain and lungs*  A. I should suppose
it would produce what  is termed multiple abscesses.
Q.  Anything  else *   A. Morbid irritation, I should
think, and great depression.
  Q.  What is pyaemia *  A. It is a disease resulting
from poisoning of  the blood by purulent matter.   Q.
AArhat are the symptoms of pyaemia *   A. Great  de-
pression, rigors, fever, profuse sweats, prostration.  Q.
What symptoms of pyaunia  did you observe in  the
case of Air.  Coates *  A.  Perhaps none, unless  I  ex-
cept that his  body was frequently covered with per-
spiration. Q.  That was the only symptom *  A. The
only one.
  Q.  Is it possible to guess at the weight of morphine
with any accuracy by pouring it out of a bottle ?   A.
No, sir ;  not accurately.
  The notes  of the post-mortem  examination  were
offered in evidence by the prosecution.

  Cross-examination by Mi-. Dixon :
  Q. Have you ever seen a case of pyaemia *  A. Yes,
sir.  Q. Where was the source of the pus in that case ?
A.  I have seen several cases; the last case I  saw,  the
source was in the leg.  (}. Where were the others *  A.
I have seen it  in the bowels, and I have seen  it in  the
head.   Q. What other cases.  A. A variety ;  Mounds,
injuries, ulcerations, erysipelas, carbuncles.  Q. Could
it not come from any  collection of pus in the system *
A.  If there  is ulceration.  Q. If absorbed?  A. Not
necessarily.  Q.  I say may it not*  A.  It might.  Q.
Are you sure  that ulceration is a necessary condition
of absorption *  A. I am not  sure about it.  Q. Have
you ever seen a case where tliere was a collection of
pus in the gall bladder, such  as there was in this case 
DOCTOR LUND'S  1RIAL.
65
of Air. C<jates *  A. Xo, sir.   Q. You are satisfied
there was pus globules in it *   A. Yes, sir.  Q. AA hat
part of the pus is poisonous in your estimation ?  A.
I do not know, sir.
  Q. Is it  the serum *  A. I do not know, sir.  Q.
Don't you  know that serum is innocent;  harmless*
A.  Pure serum is, yes, sir Q. But the serum of pus *
A. Xo, I don't know it.   Q. Your opinion of the cause
of this man's death was dependent, to some extent,
upon the history of the case ;  from whom did you
learn  the  history *  A. From  Mr. AYelch; I  think
the gentleman who came for  me, and those  other
persons that  were in the room.  Q. What did you
learn  of the history of the case *  A.  I learned that
he  was taken  suddenly with the symptoms that we
saw; that he had pains in the bowels—pretty severe
pains in  his  bowels—before he had taken a powder.
Q.  Any  other  symptoms ;  any other facts  of the
history'*   A. I do not recollect any at present.
  Q.  Did  you learn what the  progress of the coma
had been * ' A.  Yes, sir, I think so.  Q.  AYhat did
you hear about that *  A. It is hard for me to separate
what I heard prior from what  I heard  since.   I do
not know that I can testify whether  it was before I
formed an opinion, or whether I heard it afterwards.
Q.  AYell ?  A. I heard he had taken a powder sent
by  Dr. Lund, and he had woke up somewhat relieved
aiid then gone 'off  into  a comatose condition.  Q.
How long after he had taken the powder did he wake
up *  A. I do not know, sir, now; my impression is
merely that he had an hour or  two of sleep.   Q. He
had taken  the powder, had slept, woke up, and then
gone  into  coma*   A. That was his  last symptom of
sensibility.
   Q.  Did  you ever know of any case where a man
had passed under the power of morphine, had aroused
himself,  and then relapsed and died?  A. Yes, sir. 
1)6             DOCTOR UNd's TRTAL.

Q.  AYhat  case did you ever know of that kind i  A.
It is not a very uncommon thing, I believe ; it is not
an  universal  result,  but  I cannot put my finger on
the case.  Q.  How can you account for the awaken-
ing from unconsciousness*   A. I cannot account for
it;  sometimes  a man is aroused by  external means.
Q.  But that is not the case I am talking  about *   A.
I understood you to ask whether I  knew of  a  case
where they had been aroused.  Q. I did not say had
been aroused, but had aroused himself, had come out *
A.  I cannot swear to that, that I ever did  know of
a case.   Q. Can you account, in such a state of affairs,
upon the hypothesis  that the medicine—the poison—
which produced the first coma produced  the second *
A.  I do not know that there was  any first coma.   Q.
Well, we  will  have  to look  at  the  testimony again
if you  cannot  account for it?   A. I cannot account
for  it.  Q.  You have told us, Doctor, that you once
gave four grains of  morphine to a  woman who had
rupture of the  uterus, and she died ; did she die of the
morphine * A. I did  not say I had given it, I had seen
it given.   Q. Did she die  of the morphine *   A. Xo,
sir,  I think not.  Q.  Why was so much given to her*
A.  Because of the  necessarily  fatal nature of the
disease, less would not have produced the effect.   Q.
What was the  condition in which less would not have
produced the effect *  A.  The great extent of pain.
Q.  Then you would  to some extent regulate the dose
by the  extent of pain  *  A. Y^es, sir.
  Q. Suppose  you were called to a man suffering ex-
treme agony ;  would  take a dose whether it killed  or
cured ;  he was going about the house wildly ; squeez-
ing his intestines ; tearing his hair; holding his  head ;
pressing his bowels;  putting his hands on the table:
would you think a grain of morphine was  a dangerous
dose *  A. Aly first  visit  to him *   Q.  Yes.   A. I
would not give it.   Q. Would you think it likely to 
                DOCTOR LUND's  'TRIAL.             67

 prove fatal *   A.  Xo,  sir, I do not think it  would
 prove  fatal.   Q. Would  you  prescribe half a grain
 under those circumstances *   A. I might, yes, sir.  Q.
 Would you think that a dangerous dose *   A. No, sir,
 not if  he was in that condition.   Q.  If you had been
 called  to make this  post-mortem examination  of Mr.
 Coates, and had had no information of the history of
 the case, and been asked simply at the post-mortem as
 to the cause of death, what would your answer have
 been *  A. I  should say he died from venous conges-
 tion.   Q. Would you have given the cause of venous
 congestion *   A. No, sir.
   Q.  If  you  had  been called to prescribe for Mr.
 Coates during the afternoon and evening of Tuesday,
 wliile  he was suffering with intense  pain, I believe I
 understand you to say that you might have given him
 half a grain ; would you not probably have prescribed
 morphine to allay  the  pain ?   A. I  do not think  I
 would  have given him half a  grain.
   By the Court: Would you have given morphine *
 A. I might; yes, sir.
   Q.  And it was a fair matter  of judgment as  to the
 amount to be given, was it not, when the man was suffer-
 ing with extreme pain ?  A.  Yes, sir.  Q.  You think
 the effect would have been unusual  if death was the
 result from the half of a grain ?   A. Half a grain, yes,
 sir.  Q.  A\rould it be an unusual effect if the dose was
 a grain ?   A.  Well, I think it  is about on the bound-
 ary.   Q. Between what is usual and what is unusual?
 A. Yes, sir.   Q. It is scarcely fair to ask whether it is
 usual, but whether  it is occasional, for physicians  to
 discover  that  the medicine which they prescribe has
 an unusual effect?   A. Sometimes.   Q. And  some-
 times the unusual effect is even death ?  A. Yes, sir.
 Q. Have you not in your own practice had cases or a
 case where death might have been unusual?  A. No,
sir. 
6 Si             DOCTOR LI'Xd's  TRIAL.
  Q. Do you know Mrs. Baines *  A. I had a patient
who was  represented to  be the daughter  of Mrs.
Baines.   Q. AYere you  called to prescribe for her*
A.  Yes, sir.  Q. And you prescribed?  A.  Yes, sir.
Q.  Morphine?  A.  Xo',  sir.  Q.  What?  A. Opium,
which is the base of morphine.  Q. And the patient
died*  A.  Yes, sir.  Q. Died in coma?  A.  Yes, sir
Q.  Is it impossible  for that opium to have produced
death in that case*  A.  Xot impossible.   Q. You
made no post-mortem*  A. Xo, sir.  Q. You  exer-
cised your best judgment*  A.  Certainly, sir.   Q.
Usually how much morphine  would produce death
upon a man not in pain *  A. I cannot  state, sir.  0.
Cannot state *   A. Xo, sir.  Q. How much would be
usual if a man was suffering intense pain *  A.  How
much would I give*   Q. No,  how   much  usually
would be likely to cause death *  A. It would take
more to produce death if he was in pain.  0.  AYould
a grain  usually produce death *   A. I  do not know.
sir.   Q. Have not people recovered from the adminis-
tration of much larger doses *  A. Yes, sir.
  Q. What is the most you have known of  in your
experience, or read of in  the text  books to be given to
a person without  fatal  result*  A.  Or to  be taken*
Q.  Yes,  or  to be taken without fatal  result *  A. I
think I heard  a  case mentioned here yesterday of
twenty-four grains.  Q. Are there  not cases in the
books where thirty-nine  grains have been given *  A.
I should  think so.  Q. So there is a pretty wide
sphere for judgment as to the amount of morphine *
A.  I do not think that judgment would  lead to thirtv-
nine grains.  Q. Don't  you think there would be a
scope for judgment; you yourself  have given four
grains*   A. Yes, sir.  Q. Because of the pain *  A.
Yes, sir.  Q. The judgment may range  from one-sixth
of a grain to four *  A. Yes, sir.  Q.  But  are  there
not cases in which  the judgment  may justify more 
DOCTOR LUND S TRIAL.
69
than four grains*  A.  Xo, sir, I do not believe if you
do  not get an effect from  that you can expect any.
Q.  Nothing would produce stupor if that did not *   A.
I should not expect it if that did not.
  Q.  Do you think you could tell the  difference be-
tween the bulk of a grain and a half grain of mor-
phine, lying side by side *  A.  No, sir; I am sure
I could  not.  (Aj>]><:■/!di-.r  t.)  Q. If you saw them
lying along side of each other*   A. Not necessarily
then.
  Q.  I  want to ask you whether half a grain of mor-
phine is  not sufficient bulk  to be readily distinguished
from a grain *  A.  No, sir  ; I think not.
  Q.  You were present at  the time of the administer-
ing of that belladonna, were you*   A.  Yes, sir.   Q.
How much was given *   A. 1 am uncertain just now
as to the exact amount ;  I think now about  eight
grains in the morning.  Q. It is an antidote to mor-
phine *   A. It is so considered.   Q. That is not sure*
A.  X"o,  sir.   Q. Physicians  are  not  determined,  in
cases of morphine poisoning, whether it is an antidote *
A.  No, sir.  Q. They are not perfectly satisfied of it*
A.  Xo, sir.  Q. So that when you physicians admin-
istered belladonna to Mr. Coates, you were taking the
risk of its soundness ;  some physicians  might have
thought you were not taking the proper remedy *  A.
Some niight; they might  deny  the antidotal  prop-
erties.   Q. How do you  account for  its prevailing
over the  morphine, dilating the pupil, and not remov-
ing the coma *  A. I do not account for it. Q. AYould
you not  expect, after  prevailing  over one effect  of
morphine, it  would over them all?  A.  Yes, sir; I
would expect  it would.   Q. The  fact, then, that the
man continued in the coma,  you  think, was unusual
after  you saw the  dilation and  the effusion of the
blood Over the body *   A.  I cannot say about  that;
my  experience  has  not been large.  0.  It  was con- 
70
DOCTOR LUND'S TRIAL.
trary  to  your expectations *   A. Yes ; I expected,
when I saw the flush, that the other properties would
be brought out.   Q. Now, if the coma was owing to
something else, other than the morphine, you would
not have expected its removal by the antidotal effects,
would you ?   A. Not so far as that is an antidote ; no,
sir.
  Q. What was the object of wrapping him up warm *
A.  The circulation was  flagging, and  he was getting
cold.  Q. Do you not think that is,  on the whole, an-
tagonistical to the idea  that c6id effusions are more
proper*   A. No, sir; I do not think so ; we had tried
cold effusions ; they did  no good, and we tried some-
thing else.  Q.  Did  you ever hear that  it would be
proper, on a hot July day, to wrap a man up and put
him to bed;  is there not in that a tendency in the di-
rection of coma?  A. It was not done with that  sole
object.  0- I may ask whether it would not  tend in
that direction ; your object was, of course, to save the
man's life*   A. It was not merely to keep him warm.
Q.  But it had that effect *  A.  Yes, sir.   Q.  And in
itself, did not that tend to coma *  A.I did not think
so at that time.
  Q. Is it your idea that there can  never be pyaemia
without  ulceration *   A.  I would not say it can never
be, and yet I have never seen a case.
  Q. Can you account for the swelling of the face and
hands *   A.  I did not see any,  sir.   Q.  Did  you see
any cause which would account for it?  A. XTo, sir.
  Q.  Those circumstances are left out of your judg-
ment, when you say morphine caused death?  A. Yes,
sir, altogether.
  Q. AYould  pyaemia produce a swelling of  the  face
and hands *   A.I never saw such  a symptom.   Q.
AYould it produce  pain  in  the head *  A. I  think it
might; it might produce  delirium.   Q. Alight it  pro-
duce pain in the bowels*   A, It  might;  I do not 
               doctor lund's trial.             71

think it is likely it  would.  Q. Alight it not ?   A. I
do not know.
  Q.  Might not corrupt blood in the system produce
pains in any part of the system in which blood  went *
A.  I  do not know about that, sir
  Q.  The symptoms of the pain in any disease are
not uniform *  A. Not universal.  Q. I suppose there
are not two cases exactly alike, because there are not
two people exactly alike *   A. Xo,  sir.
  Q.  \Arould an over dose of belladonna produce con-
gestion *  A.  Yes, sir.  Q. And coma?  A. No, sir;
it would  not.  Q. Is  not  coma  the direct result of
congestion *   A.  Not  necessarily.  Q. How  would
the congestion produced by belladonna be different
from the congestion produced by morphine *  A.  I do
not know, sir;  the distinction is not made by conges-
tion.   Q. AYhy do you think the congestion of bella-
donna would  not  cause coma *  A. The congestion,
or the effect of belladonna, is  delirium rather than
coma.                        •
  0.  Delirium is one of the primary effects of mor-
phine *  A. Sometimes.  Q.Now step beyond  deli-
rium,  don't you produce coma?  A. You  may.  Q.
If there be a tendency to congestion in the system, is
not belladonna rather an imprudent remedy*   A. It
depends upon the cause of the congestion *  Q. If the
congestion is universal *  A. I  do not then consider
it an  imprudent remedy.
  Mr. Dixon here read from Beck's Medical  Juris-
prudence a case quoted, of death from belladonna.
  Q.  In  this case the patient died twelve hours after
eating the berry; this seems to be a case where death
was caused by eating belladonna  berry;  you  are not
now willing to say it does not produce coma, are you ?
A.  I do not know, sir, the effect of the berries of bella-
donna.  Q.  Is  not the same active principle  in  the
berries as in the extract*   A.  I don't know, sir.  Q. 
72
DOCTOR LUND S TRIAL.
 \\rhat  is your  extract from *   A. From the  leave*.
 Q.  How much  belladonna would  you  consider  a
 dangerous dose*  A. It would  depend upon circum-
 stances.  Q.  Well, take a patient who is healthy *  A.
 Well, sir, it  would depend  upon the  disease.   Q. It
 would  not be a healthy person if lie had disease *  A.
 I would  not give it  to a healthy patient.   Q.  I am
 not now  speaking of a prescription  but of a dose ; you
 are avoiding the question ;  how much could you give
 reasonably without danger from death resulting *  A.
 I do not know what a  poisonous  dose is; we do not
 usually give more than a grain.
  Q. Do you know the chemical composition of bella-
 donna  *  A. Xo,  sir.  Q. The  chemical composition
 of morphine *   A. No, sir.   They  are carboniferous *
 A.  Yes, sir.   Q. Is not carbon  poison*  A. I  never
 saw the statement.   Q.  Is not carbonic acid gas poi-
 sonous*  A.  I never saw it.  Q. If you carbonize the
 blood is it not poisonous *  A. Yes, sir.
  By the Court:  Ton had  one of  the powders*  A.
 Yes, sir.  Q.  Whom did you give it to ? A. Coroner
 Burns.

               Dr.  Emmanuel  Bock,
 Examined by Mr. Garretson, testified :
  I live in Jersey City, and  am a practicing physician ;
 I was called to see Mr. Coates the same day Drs. Wil-
 kinson  and Forman were there; I  got there  about six
 o'clock in the morning, and  remained very  near up to
 twelve o'clock.   Q.  AA7hen  you  first saw Air. Coates
 what was the matter with him *  A.  Lie was quite
 comatose; insensible;  he was  stertorous  breathing,
 snoring;  pulse very  slow ; he was leaning in a rocking
 chair, that is the way I found him.  Q.  What did you
 suppose was the trouble with him *   A. Well, I could
 not quite make up  my mind, but from the history of
the case I think he died from ■an over dose of morphine : 
DOCTOR LUND'S TRIAL.
To
there were  two powders left, and I tasted one, and I
made myself sure that the one I tasted was morphine.
Q. AYhat was done  for Mr. Coates*  A. I suggested
coffee, but there was no place to get it; we tickled his
throat, but he did  not  vomit; some cold  water we
threw over him, but it had no effect whatever; it was
no use ; tliere were  injections of belladonna, which
had a  little effect,  but  no  great deal; some of the
physicians  went  away;  I stopped there;.they came
back ; removed him to  bed; gave him  injections of
brandy, but it had no effect.
  Q.  Were  you  present  at  the post-mortem*  A.
Partly.  Q. What do  you mean *   A. I was called
away—note came—other physicians there—took  my
place—I went away.  Q. At what  portion of it did
you go away*  A.  At the opening of the cranium.
Q. AYhat  was the  cause of death *  A. Congestion.
Q. Produced by what *  A.  Over dose of morphine.
  Q.  How much morphine  do you usually  give?
A. I  have never given  over  one-quarter  of  a grain.
Q. AYhat  sort of a  dose would one grain be *  A. A
dangerous dose.

  Cross-examined by (Ail. Rogers:
  Q.  How long have you been practicing medicine*
A. Since  1S54.   Q. AYTiere  did you graduate*  A.
Here.   Q.  AYhen *   A. About  two  years ago.  Q.
Whereabout *  A.  At the University of Xew York.
Q. Did you  get a diploma *   A. Yes.   Q.  Did you
commence  practicing before  you got your diploma ?
A.  Y'es.   Q. AYhere did  you practice before you
graduated *   A.  In  Scotland and England.  Q.  How
long did you practice in  Scotland *  A. About two
years.   Q.  Did you keep a  cigar store  there*  A.
Xo, sir.  Q.  Not"in Glasgow?  A. No, sir.   Q. Was
not your  place of  business burned out in  Glasgow
under suspicious circumstances?
       4 
74             DOCTOR LLNd's  TRIAL.

  Mr. Garretson objected to the question.
  Col. Rogers stated to the Court, that his object was
to find out how  much Dr. Bock's previous medical ex-
perience qualified him for coming before the Court as
an expert.  He  claims to have been  in practice  since
1S54, although the only diploma he has is not yet two
years old.  The defense  would simply like to know
how much experience in the  practice of medicine, a
man can have who is at one time a block printer of
cheap handkerchiefs,  and engaged  in  various  other
occupations  at  various 'other times.  A man  under
these circumstances is  not  supposed to have  a very
exact knowledge of differential diagnosis.
  The Court admitted the question, as it  was perfectly
proper for the defense to ascertain the previous medi-
cal knowledge of the experts brought by the prosecu-
tion.                                           y
  A. Xo, sir, I was not.  Q. You had no connection
with the cigar business in Glasgow ?  A. I won't an-
swer.
  The Court: You must.
  A. I was  not.   Q. You were  practicing medicine
in  Glasgow*   A. I was.  Q.  How long*  A.  Two
years.    Q.   AA'here did  you  then  go?   A.  Liver-
pool.  Q. Did you practice medicine there *  A.  Yes.
0- Keep a  thread and  needle store?   A. X"o.  Q.
A\fhen did you  come to this country *  A. Four years
 ao-o.  Q. Was  medicine  the first business you went
into?  A. Y^es.  Q. Have you ever before this seen a
 case of poisoning by morphine?  A. Xo, sir,  but by
 opium.  Q.  Where*  A.  In Liverpool; it  was  a
 child about a year old.   Q.  Do you know the amount
 taken?  A.  No.   Q. AYas it  fatal*   A. XX>.   Q.
 Then  I suppose you never saw a post-mortem after
 opium poisoning?  A.  No.  Q.  All you know then
 is  by reading;  have  you frequently given opium or
 morphine?   A. Barely.  Q. What is the largest dose 
DOCTOR LUND'S TRIAL.
75
you know of being given without a fatal result ?  A.
In consultation of physicians I have given as much as
a grain.
  Q.  Upon what do you base your opinion that Mr.
Coates was poisoned by  morphine ?  A.  I was told
he  had  taken  a  powder  and had become very
much excited, and  then  coma  came.   Q. Did you
hear of his going to sleep  and waking up voluntarily?
A. No.  Q. Was then your opinion based on coma ?
A. No.  Q. Then it was because he-was excited and
then  coma  came *   A.  Yes.   Q. You  got  at  the
house about  six o'clock; when did you leave?  A.
About twelve.   Q.  You  were there  all  that time ?
A. Yes, sir.   Q. Are you sure  you was  in the house
all that time ?   A.  I think so.  Q. As sure  as you
are of any statement you have made ?  A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did the other physicians stay away an hour?  A.
No.   Q. Do you know  it  is one of the  common
effects of narcotic poisons for the mouth  to be open,
and the lower jaw to fall ?  A. No.   Q.  You don't ?
A. No.  Q. You have never read it *   A.  No.  Q.
What is your opinion ?   A. My opinion is that they
do not  open their  mouth.  Q. Why not ?  A. My
opinion is that the muscles get rigid, so that they can-
not open  their  mouth.  (Appendix  v.)  Q.  Before
death are the muscles  rigid ?  A. Yes.   Q.  Doctor,
what is  your religious belief?   A.  I think the Court
will not. oblige me to  answer that.   I do not know
what  that has to do with it.  I came  here to testify
that this man died of poison from morphine.  (A
beautiful example of ingenuousness.)
  Col. Rogers stated that his object in asking the ques-
tion was to find out how much reliance could be placed
upon  the  Doctor's testimony, as far as his oath was
concerned.   The defense  believed him to be a Jew,
and so  not qualified to swear upon the New Testa-
ment. 
76
DOCTOR LUND'S TRIAL.
   A. I believe niy oath to be as good upon the X'ew
as upon the Old Testament.
   By the Court: Do you consider the oath you have
taken binding upon your conscience before God *  A.
Yes, sir.
   Col. Rogers: That will do.   (As  the witness takes
his seat, he gives the  Counsel a polite invitation  to
come down to his house, and he will teach him about
his religion.)

                  Dr. W. Bccr,
Examined by Mr. Garretson, testified :
   I live on Communipaw Avenue, Jersey City, and
am a practicing physician.  I was present at the post-
mortem  examination  of Mr.  Coates.  Q. From  the
post-mortem examination, what did  you conclude was
the cause of death *  A.  I could form  no conclusion,
sir.  Q.  If you had been told that he had  taken a
grain  of morphine, what  then   would  you  have
thought *  A. I should have had a right to presume
that that had accelerated his death ;  it might not have
though;  I would not be positive.   I should have had
to have known the idiosyncracies of the person.  The
post-mortem appearances of all narcotic poisons  are
unreliable.   Q.  What  evidences  of  disease were
there in the body *  A.  The  adhesions of the lungs
were all I saw; I was called away before the stricture
of the cystic duct was found.   None of the  evidences
of disease I saw were sufficient to have  caused death ;
there was great congestion of the  brain.   Q. AAHiat
could have caused that congestion*  A.  It is  utterly
impossible  to  say from the appearances  alone what
caused it ;  it  may have been caused by a great
number of things ; I don't think it  could have been
caused by anything I saw.
  Q.  What did the gall bladder contain *   A.  A
yellowish milky  looking  substance, resembling  de- 
               DOCTOR LUND's TRIAL.             77

composed pus ;  there was  no evidence of ulceration
in the gall bladder that I saw. Pyaunia is absorption
of pus from any ulcerating surface.  Q.  Did you ever
know a case where pus was absorbed from the gall
bladder*  A. No, sir; but I could not say that it
might  not  occur;  I  do not  think that absorption of
this  matter could have produced the  congestion.  Q.
Is morphine ever prescribed for  pyaemia?   A. No,
sir:  it is given principally to allay pain, and I hardly
think that pain would  be a prominent symptom of
pyaemia.  Q. What  are  the symptoms of pyaemia *
A.  Great and alarming  prostration, chills, cold per-
spiration, rapid pulse, and delirium.
  Q. AAnat is an ordinary dose of morphine* A. An
eighth, a third, a quarter, perhaps a half grain, and in
extreme  cases the dose  may be  largely increased; I
don't think though  that I, myself, have ever  given
over a grain at one dose.   Q.  Have you ever pre-
scribed that when absent*   A. No.  Q. Why do you
not  prescribe  that  amount when away  from  the
patient *
  Air.  Dixon objected to this question, as in order to
answer it the witness must forsee every possible con-
catenation of symptoms that could ever possibly arise
under  any  possible  circumstances or  contingency.
Admitted.
   A. I should  simply say  that if I had a patient so
ill as to need a grain of morphine, I would regard it
as my duty to be beside him.  Q. Would it be safe to
give a dose of a grain of morphine without being with
the patient *  A. That is a  pretty hard question  to
answer;  if I had known the patient  previously, and
was familiar with his symptoms  and peculiarities, I
might  have done as Dr. Lund did under the circum-
stances, because I do not know the circumstances, nor
the condition the  man  was  in.   Q.  Y'ou would re-
quire considerable knowledge of the patient, would 
78
doctor und's trial.
you?   A. Oh, yes.   Q. Suppose you had never been
called to attend him  before the previous day ?
  Mr. Dixon objected  to  the question, as one out of
the range of the testimony of experts.
  Q. Suppose you had been called to prescribe for a
man at three o'clock  in the afternoon, and upon being
called upon again at eleven at night, would you con-
sider it safe to give him a grain of morphine, without
knowing more of him  than what you had  learned in
your first visit ?
  Mr. Dixon objected  to the question, because objec-
tionable  in the answer it sought, and because it sup-
posed a condition of  facts that were not in accordance
with the testimony in  the case.  Admitted, and ex-
ception  taken.
  A. I should call it heroic treatment,  which means
risky;  I would  not  call it dangerous, but say  a man
takes his own risk ; but if  I had seen the case at the
time, and the sufferings had been as great as I under-
stand  they were, I might not have  hesitated to have
given even more.

  Cross-examined by Mr.  Dixon :
  Q. The question of risk would be materially modi-
fied by the amount  of information  you  got at your
first visit ?  A. Yes, sir ;  very much.  Q.  And very
much by the knowledge that the patient was suffering
from very extreme intense pain, would  it not ?  A.
Yes, sir
  Q. How does pus,  in a case of pyaemia, get into the
circulation ?  A. It  is  absorbed  directly from  the ul-
cerated part into the  veins.
  Q. Are not absorbents present in  the gall bladder *
A.  Yes, sir.
  Q. To what do you attribute the presence of the pus
in the gall bladder ?  A. The cystic duct being  closed
and the bile retained there a long time,  it had  under- 
DOCTOR LUND'S TRIAL.
79
 gone alteration and become puriform.   Q. A sort of
 putrefaction *   A. Yes, sir ; I think that the interfer-
 ence of the  functions of the gall  bladder may have
 caused that terrible sickness ; I think that tlie man
 might  have died of colic,  without any morphine; a
 man may die of bilious colic.  Q. In what way.   A.
 There  is no  greater pain  in the world than bilious
 colic ; it is intolerable, and  shocks the nervous system,
 stays the circulation and causes death with  congestion.
 Q.  For colic, morphine is a proper remedy.  A. Yes.
 Q. And in large doses *  A. Yes, sir; but it is proper
 to divide the doses.
   Q. Can belladonna produce coma *  A.  Yes, sir.
   Q. Suppose you had been told that Mr.  Coates had
 had eight grains of belladonna infused into  his system,
 and then had made or seen, as you did, the post-mor-
 tem, may you  not  have thought it possible that the
 belladonna was the cause of death?  A. Well, I may
 have thought it possible, knowing no more  of the pre-
 vious history than that.
   Q. Belladonna is a narcotic poison ?   A.  Yes, sir.
   Q. AYhere is the foramen of Monro ?   A. I do not
 remember.
   Q. Is there not a little channel connecting the lat-
 eral ventricles with each  other?  A. I remember now ;
 I am not expert  on that point, as the brain is a diffi-
 cult thing to study and remember.  Q. But you carry
 a foramen of Monro about with you ?  A. Yes ; and I
 venture to say I know as little of it as  I do of yours.
 Q.  Would it not be likely to establish an equilibrium
 between the ventricles, so that when there was serum
 in one, the other would  not  be empty ?   A. Yes, sir ;
 I think so.
  Q. Did you see the stomach taken out of  the body *
 A.  I did.   Q.  Do you remembei; where it  was laid ?
 A.  I do not.   Q. Did you  see it sealed up? A. No,
sir.   Q. It must have been laid down  somewhere ? 
S<>             DOCTOR LUND's TRIAL.

A.  Yes, sir;  it could have been laid on the table.  Q.
Was any special care taken that no foreign substances
should trouble it *   A.  Xo special care, only ordinary
care.

  Re-direct examination :
  ().  AYhat would be the post-mortem appearances of
a man who  died  of colic ?  A. General congestion
about the parts affected.   Q. Would it produce con-
gestion of the brain *  A.  I think not.   Q. It would
not *   A. I think not.
  Q.  In  a  man dying from colic, would the pupil of
the eye be  affected ?  A. I think not from that alone.
Q.  Any perspiration *   A. There might  be.   Q.
AYould he  be sensible or  not*   A. Semi-conscious;
there are always, though, in those cases, towards death,
more or less congestion about the vital organs, as brain
and lungs; so there would  be a comatose state.  Q.
How long before death would that continue *   A. It
is hard to state ; perhaps several hours.

  Cross-examination continued :
  Q.  Simple apoplexy may occur  from congestion of
the brain alone ?   A. Yes, sir.
  Q.  What  do  you think was here the  cause of the
swelling  of the face and hands ?  A. I doubted, when
I heard it,  that there was any such symptom ; it may
have been an incorrect observation.
  Q. Could  there be an effusion of bloody  serum in
the lateral  ventricles without injury *  A. No, sir; it
would be apojdexy.  Q. Could it result from  mor-
phine *  A.  No, sir.
  Q. How many drops  of laudanum in an ounce? A.
One  hundred  and twenty in  a drachm and eight
drachms in the ounce.   Q. So  Dr. AArilkinson  was
wrong when he  said there was sixty drops  in  a
drachm * A.  Y^es,  sir. Q. As to the other proportions
he  named,  are they correct *  A.  A"es,  sir. 
DOCTOR LUND's TRIAL.
Si
                   Dr.  Culver,
Examined by Mr. Garretson, testified :
  I am a practicing physician in Jersey City, and was
present at the post-mortem examination of Mr. Coates,
by invitation ; did not see him before his death ; could
hardly form any opinion  as to the cause of death from
the appearance  of  the body before the  examination
was commenced ; the lividity of the skin might have
given a clue perhaps; it  would indicate  a congestion
of the superficial vessels,  but it would not indicate the
cause of the congestion.   I was a close observer dur-
ing the post-mortem  examination, although I did not
expect to be called upon to testify; I  first looked for
something  that  would cause the  ante-mortem symp-
toms, but saw nothing that could have  caused pain in
the head or thorax; in the abdomen the  gall bladder
was distended with a  liquid,  and could  not be emptied
by pressure upon it; the descending colon, more  par-
ticularly  at its  junction  with the rectum (the  lower
part of the  bowels), presented  a  striated  injected
appearance, as if of inflammation; this was sufficient
to account  for pain, not a mere ordinary colic, but the
pain of inflammation; moreover, the gall bladder was on
the stretch,  and the cystic duct  closed; upon the
principle that  the  distending  power  of liquids, in
cylindrical  tubes, is as the squares of their diameters,
if we consider the diameter of the gall bladder  n
thousand times the diameter of the vessels that emptied
into it, we would have  a distending  power, in this
case, a  thousand times  a thousand as  much  as the
force of the inflowing current.   The distension of the
gall bladder under such circumstances would cause in-
tense  pain ; it would tend to reopen the cystic duct,
and as the  distension of the cystic duct, in the passage
of gall stones, causes pain of ithe worst  kind,  the pain
here would be similar ; it is possible that within a few
hours of the man's death  there might have been  a 
82
DOCTOR LUND's TRIAL.
slight reopening of the cystic duct, enough for a drop
or two of pus to have passed  through into the small
intestine, and  produced  precisely the  condition  of
things observed;  also,  in this case, the  formation of
sulphurated and phosphorated hydrogen would have
produced pain.  As I understood the man had pain
before he died, I  looked for something to  account for
the pain, and the causes above alluded  to are, in my
opinion,'sufficient  to have caused pain ; I also formed
a conclusion as to the cause of death ; the inflammation
of the lower part of the bowels had not progressed to
an extent sufficient to have caused death.  Our con-
clusion in regard to the gall bladder would depend upon
the quality of its contents;  my impression then, from
mere  ocular inspection, was that tliere was pus there,
pus in a state of some degree of putrefaction ;  the
question  here might arise whether absorption from the
walls  of  the  gall  bladder, of  its contents, might not
have occurred, and contaminating the system, with the
septic  matter,  have  thus  caused  septicaemia.   In
answering this question we had to notice how tli£ con-
ditions found coincided with those that would be found
in death  from that cause.  Septic matter added to the
blood coagulates the  fibrin  at once; this  takes place
first where the blood moves the slowest, or in the capil-
lary  circulation.    Alatters  absorbed  from  the gall
bladder would ultimately reach the  blood in  the he-
patic vein, which  carries the blood from the liver to
the heart;  they might also  enter some of the smaller
vessels in the portal circulation; if this took place we
would have coagulation of the blood in the  liver,  a
blocking  up of the circulation,  and hence a congestion
of the liver and of the portal circulation; this conges-
tion existed, but not to a greater extent than  it did in
the other parts of the  system; if any of the septic
matter reached the lungs we would have  congestion
there, and during  life difficult breathing;  congestion 
Doctor lund*s trial.             83
there also  existed,  but to  no greater extent than in
other parts of  the  system.   I do not think that the
post-mortem appearances would leave any other indi-
cation  to guide us in determining whether septicaemia
had  existed, except perhaps  this: if septic matter is
absorbed the liver is always  easily broken;  on  lifting
it  up the fingers crush  into it;  this fragility  of the
liver did not exist.   Therefore, in regard to the  theory
of septicaemia, I would say that it is but a theory.  AYe
did  not observe where any  pus had escaped through
the cystic duct into the intestines, and yet it is  proper
to state that this might occur, and we  might not be
able to observe it afterward.   The general venosity of
the blood, and the obstruction to its circulation, would
account  for the congestion  of  the  brain; we have
these two causes where we have  anything paralyzing
the vital powers, and at the same time allowing life to
continue for awhile.   As the congestion was general
the  cause must have also been general, and this seems
to me to narrow the cause of death down to septica
mia, and  to poisoning  by morphine.  What  I have
stated is the result of my observation, and perhaps for
the  rest you had better question me.
   Q. How could you decide the question between the
two ?  A.  In deciding  the  question we have, first,
the  fragile liver wanting, for the theory of septicemia,
and also a too well marked  lividity of  the surface for
that disease.  The  differential diagnosis, as based upon
 the  post-mortem, would end  about there, and leave the
matter with a doubt.   To  go further we would have
to look  to the symptoms and history  before death.
 Q.  What  are the  symptoms of  septicaemia before
 death *  A. First, impairment  of  the  vital  powers
 and prostration; more or less perspiration;  there is no
 reaction, but steady progression ;  in this stage there is
 never coma, but often a little delirium.   When coma
 comes, the  patient has but a few  minutes to  live : 
^4
DOCTOR UNd's TRIAL.
there may be more or less  epigastric  pain, nausea,
vomiting,  and diarrhea.   Q. How  long could these
symptoms  be observed before  death *   A.  Several
days ; cases of puerperal fever are mostly septicemia
cases.  (>.  AVherein do  the symptoms of septicannia
resemble those of poisoning  by morphine *   A. The
post-mortem  appearances  of congestion would  be
similar, only there would be a  less degree of con-
gestion  of the surface  in the former.   The general
impairment of the contractility of the muscles would
be similar, but in septicaemia it would be slower than
in poisoning  by morphine.   I have observed -a case
where a patient  had taken an overdose of opium, had
become conscious  for  a little while, and  then soon
after died ; that  is, I depended upon the statement of
the  family, which  I  presume  to  have been  true.
The coma which comes on  from septicaemia, though
generally  not prolonged, may be present where there
is any effusion in the brain of blood or serum.
  Q. What symptoms are tliere  in poisoning by mor-
phine which  are not found  in septicaemia?  A. The
fragility of the liver would not  exist in poisoning by
morphine ; tliere would be a  general congestion of the
surface in the former, but  not in  the latter.   Q. AYhat
would be  the symptoms  in  poisoning  by morphine *
A.  First,  a comfortable fullness of the circulation,
perhaps giddiness or headache; constipation instead of
diarrhoea, as  in  septicemia ;  a gradual  increasing  im-
pairment of the  sensory functions, to an entire arrest
of the senses; the impairment  of  the  muscular con-
tractility would  arrest the power that  urges  on  the
circulation, causing thus congestion.
  Q. If you observed these symptoms : a  patient totally
insensible; pupil of eye contracted ; surface of body
blue and livid; large beads of cold perspiration all
over the body ; disturbed breathing; respiration about
twelve  to a minute;  pulse, slow and laboring ; what 
               Doctor  lund's  trial.             85

would these indicate *  A. If both pupils were equally
contracted,  I  should feel  almost sure that poisoning
by morphine, or by some of the preparations of opium,
was the cause  of them; the contraction  of the pupil
might occur from a  degree  of  congestion that would
follow apoplexy; as  there was  no apoplexy, my con-
clusion is that it was morphia.
  Q. As diarrhoea is one  of the symptoms of septi-
caemia, was there any indications of diarrhoea present ?
A. No,  sir, on  the  contrary, the colon was impacted
with fecal  matter.   Q. AYhat  is the difference be-
tween pyaemia and  septicaemia *  A. Pyaemia is  an
older  name used before it was  known that pus could
not be  absorbed  at all; the pus  corpuscles are  not
absorbed through  intact  tissues.  The liquor puris,
especially when the pus was rendered liquid by putre-
faction,  may readily be  absorbed,  and then  we have
septicaemia.  AAThen  pus gets into the blood  it gen-
erally produces small  abscesses wherever it  finds a
lodgment,  especially in the  liver.   We  found none
here.  Q. Would  morphine be given for septicaemia ?
A. Not for  the septicaemia itself, but might be given
to allay  "pain.   Q.  In that case in  what dose would it
be given *   A. It would depend upon the condition
of the patient, and upon the views of the prescriber.
Q. AYhat  do you consider the largest dose safe to be
given*  A. Aty habit is  to give it in  small  doses,
and repeat  if  necessary, giving  it, as it is called, ten-
tatively.
  By Mr. Dixon :  What do you call a large amount *
A. It is a very indefinite thing,  according to the case.
I have given  in the course of some four hours, to a
child  eight years  old,  an entire ounce of laudanum
(Appendix w), and he is living yet.
  Q. AYhat is the smallest dose of morphine that
would be liable to  prove fatal ?   A. The smallest dose
of morphine I have read of---- 
86
doctor Lund's trial.
  Mr. Dixon interrupting the witness : The Court will
understand that this is subject to the same objection as
already given in the case of the other witnesses.
  Witness  continues : The smallest dose I have read
of is in the foot note of Beck's Aledical Jurisprudence,
where it is  stated, I believe, that a quarter of a grain
caused that effect; the  better way for that testimony
would be to refer to the book itself.
  The Court:  It would not be testimony.
  Mr. Garretson : What kind of practice would it be
to prescribe a grain of morphine in' the absence of the
patient *  A. I should look upon it as careless practice.
Q.  Careless "under  all  circumstances?   A. To pre-
scribe without knowing the condition of the patient is
careless  under all circumstances; I believe a  good
many physicians do it.
  Q. Were the lungs healthy, excepting the adhesions %
A.  I think they were ;  I cannot say how long the ad-
hesion had lasted; I should say that the small size of
the lungs and the adhesions impaired the vital vigor,
and so made him an easier prey to any of the death pro-
ducing causes I have mentioned.  Q.  Should a smaller
dose of  morphine be given  to a  man  in that condi-
tion *  A.  It should.
  Q. What effect would a dose of morphine have on
a person suffering from congestion of the lungs *  A.
It might  produce a fatal effect;  it would retard the
circulation  where  we  ought to  give  stimulants  to
hasten it.
  Q.  How many cases of  septicaemia  have you
known ?  A. I cannot recollect;   it  is not  a common
disease.  Q. In the cases you have spoken of, where did
the poisonous matter originate ?  A.  In one case from
drinking water that contained a putrefying toad; in
another from a sloughing syphylitic sore; in another
from using  Passaic water, containing putrid matter. Q.
Which of these  proved fatal *  A. The one drinking 
DOCTOR LUND's TRIAL.
87
the water  containing  the toad recovered; the other
two  proved  fatal.  Q. Did  you  ever  know a case
where the poisonous  matter originated  in  the gall
bladder ?   A. No, sir, I have never known such a case;
some patients, however, have died  without my having
known the exact cause.
  Mr. Garretson here rested in his direct examination
of the witness.   As Mr. Dixon was preparing to cross-
examine, the witness desired to be excused.   The de-
fense allowed him to go home, with the understanding
that he was to return the next day.  His cross-exami-
nation therefore properly comes after that of James
Kelly, but  for convenience, is inserted here.
  By Mr. Dixon: Are you  familiar with  Magendie's
Solution  cf Morphine *  A. I am  familiar with it to
a certain extent, but am not in the habit of prescrib-
ing it.  Q. Do you know how much is an  ordinary
dose ?  A.  The  exact  dose I should  probably have to
figure up;  it is  about----   Q. (Interrupting.)  Do
you not know what  an  ordinary dose among physicians
is ?   A. Not until  I count it up.   Q. Then you do
not know ?   A. Not from mere recollection ; it is of
that strength that I dislike to use it.  Q. Physicians,
allopathic physicians,  quite frequently use it?  A.  I
am not an allopathic physician.  Q. Are you  not? A.
Nor homoeopathic.   Q. Indeed;  you then belong, I
suppose,  to the Culver school?  A.  No, sir, I am  a
graduate of the  College of Physicians of New York;
the term allopathic is  given  in derision to all other
schools by  homoeopathists ; my school is  to  practice
what we  can learn  both of diseases and the effects of
medicines upon them.   Q. For "we" I presume you
mean to substitute " I " ?  A.  No, sir, I said the school,
if you wish to distinguish it as a school.
  Q.  I did not exactly understand your theory about
the distending power of liquids ;  explain yourself; do
you mean the elasticity of liquids *  A.I mean  the 
 **             DOCTOR LUNI)\s TRIAL.

 bursting power which they exert on tubes containing
 them.   Q. Is it anything more than the weight of the
 liquid*  A.  It has scarcely  anything to  do with its
 weight;  it depends upon the pressure at the fountain
 head, as  the gas in the street  pipes depends upon  the
 pressure of the gasometer.  Q. AYell, is not the burst-
 ing power  of a gas largely due to its elasticity, to its
 tendency to expand  *   A.  Xot  at all;  because no
 matter how much elasticity the gas may have, the same
 pressure will be exerted upon the tubes throughout,
 proportionately to the squares of their diameters.  (,).
 That is true enough;  but that pressure which 3011 are
 to exert, must it not be exerted through the elasticity
 of the  body which is producing the pressure, or through
 wTeight *   A. No, not necessarily : it is from the power
 which  the particles have to move upon each other; all
 forces  are  opposed to other forces, and if the pressing
 power of  the  atmosphere upon  the earth were not
 arrested  by an equal  pressure of  the earth upon the
 atmosphere,  the earth would shrink to nothing; of
 course you understand me.   Q. I confess I do not un-
 derstand you ; the shrinking of matter to nothing, that is
 an annihilation which  I always supposed impossible. A.
 AAre  have no knowledge of matter, except the force it
 exerts  upon us.  Q. I)o you mean to say that matter
 and  force  are  identical*  A. I  do.   Q.  Then  you
 would  call motion, matter *  A. Alotion is a mode of the
 exertion  of force.   Q. Is it  not force?   A. It is the
 resultant of force.   Q. Is it not force itself *  A. It is
 not proper to confound the  two  terms.   Q. No, be-
 cause force is broader  than motion, but is not motion
 force *   A. Yes, it may be said  to be under certain
 circumstances.
  Q. Explain to us the distending power of liquids as
you meant  to apply it to the gall  bladder; we may,
perhaps, find out better what you mean, by the appli-
cation  of your idea.   A,  The'gall  bladder  was being 
               doctor  lund's trial.             89

distended by the secretion of a substance into it.   Q.
What was the last position of this substance before it
entered the gall  bladder?  A.  The metaphysics  we
have been on—   Q. Never mind metaphysics;  we
are on  the gall bladder now.  A. If I recollect right,
I was going to explain—  Q. The last position of the
secretion before it reaches the gall bladder.  A.  Tliere
is a thin tissue between the cavity of the gall bladder
and the blood, and the secretion is in a state of osmosis
through  that  intervening tissue.   Q. Well, go  on
with your explanation  of the " distending power ?"
A.  The secretion  passes through  this membrane, as
through  a filter, from the blood  into the gall  bladder,
which,  being distended  with  the incoming liquid,
would  be enlarged more and  more;  that enlarging
power  is identical with what I have called the distend-
ing power; as soon as the  fibres  are put upon the
stretch, they begin to exert a compressing power upon
the liquid, and the liquid to resist that power.
  Q. In regard now to the brain, may not there be a
congestion so general as to cause apoplexy * A.  True,
if at some point, at  the same time, the  tissues give
way.   Q. Can there not be  apoplexy without the  tis-
sue giving way *  A. That is said in the books, by the
later books  more especially *   Q. If that  existed,
would  not the contraction of both pupils be alike *  A.
It is an apoplexy impossible  of proof; we never find it
in post-mortem examinations ; if, however, tliere were
such an apoplexy, and the hyperemia  were  alike
throughout  the brain, we might have an equal con-
traction or equal dilation of the pupils.
  Q. The  books  talk  about simple apoplexy *   A.
They do.  Q. Talk about it as if it had an  existence ?
A.  They do ; I will not deny that; I only say I never
knew such a case.  Q. So we must, I suppose, con-
sider it so ; simply, it never came under your  observa-
tion *   A. If it did, I should consider myself careless
in that respect. 
!MI
DOCTOR LUNI)'s TRIAL.
   Q. Is fragility of the  liver existent, except where
 the septicemia has been considerable *   A.  Incases
 where septicemia kills, we always expect to find it.
   Q. You did not handle this liver, I believe *  A. I
 think I did not; I believe, however, I called for a
 towel to yipe my hands with, and so may have punched
 my fingers into it.
   Q. Does brandy accelerate or retard  the  action of
 morphine if  taken  upon an empty stomach ?  A.  It
 would intensify the fatal effects of the morphine most
 certainly.
   Q. AYas the inside coat of the gall bladder in the
 condition you would call intact?   A. I cannot say
 certainly, as it was not examined microscopically.
   Q. Do you know a young  lady named Miss Cope-
 land?   A. I  don't think I  know  her  Q.  Did you
 ever know a young lady by that name?   A. I have
 known a family by that name ; I am not sure whether
 they had  a daughter or  not.   Q. Did you not, some
 two or three years ago, attend a member of that fam-
 ily ?   A.  I could not tell that; I attended a Mrs.
 Copeland, who died in child-birth.   Q.  What did she
 die of?   A. I have not  a distinct recollection of the
 case; I think there was diarrhoea, a condition indicat-
 ing an absorption of pus, and some irritation of the
 intestinal canal  from improper food.  Q. You think,
 then, that septicemia was present there ?  A.I think
 there was.  Q. Did she die in a state of coma *  A. I
 think she did.  Q. Did you not administer morphine
 in that case ?  A.  I don't know whether I did or not;
 very likely morphine  was  given,  as the diarrhoea
 came on  with pain; an  opiate  in some shape may
 have been given.  Q. If  the diarrhoea and pain  had
 occurred from septicemia,  and  you had  known it
 w%uld  you have given an opiate *   A.  I might: we
 would, if there was extensive septicemia, as we would
not then expect a recovery, and it would only be a 
DOCTOR LUND'S TRIAL.
91
palliative.  ().  The coma which came on, was that the
result of the morph ine ?  A. I do not know but what
it may have been, from the general prostration of the
vital powers.

             Robert Ogden Doremus,
Examined by Mr. Garretson, testified :  I reside in the
city of New York,  and am Professor of Chemistry in
the College of  the city of New York, and also in the
Bellevue Hospital Medical College.
  Q.  Did you receive any communication from Coro-
ner Burns in July last ?  A. On the 25th of last July
I received a glass  jar from Coroner William Burns,
containing a stomach  which had been opened,  and
three  and  a quarter ounces of a brownish liquid ;  I
also received two white powders;  I was requested to
analyze the stomach and  powders ; the powders were
weighed, one weighing one grain and eight hundreths
and the  other six-tenths of a grain; they were then
submitted  to the proper tests, which proved  them to
be the sulphate of morphine; the stomach was then
analyzed, all of the experiments being performed in a
place  specially  provided  for such  investigations, and
with  newT  vessels purchased for  the purpose.  (The
Professor here gave the different steps of the analysis.)
The result of the analysis showed traces of morphine;
the quantity, however, was exceedingly small, only
enough to give clear indications, and not enough to be
weighed.

  Cross-examined by Mr. Dixon :
  Morphine was the only poison found in the stomach.
Pus consists principally of water and certain fatty sub-
stances, and salts; there is nothing in its formation that
would indicate its being poisonous, any more than there
is in morphine ; its effects upon the system has  nothing
to do  with the carbon in it. 
92
DOCTOR LUND S TRIAL.
  0.  How did you get  these powders  you weighed*
A. I received them from Coroner Burns.  0- Dh'eetly
from  him *   A.  Yes, sir, from  his  own  hands,  0.
He did not leave them at your place for you *  A. Xo.
sir, he  gave them to me out of  his. own  pocket.
(Appendix x.)   Q. The  morphine which you found
in the stomach had  produced  no injurious effect upon
the system,  had it*  A. Xo,  sir*  0.  How much
morphine is a dangerous dose  tor a man to take *  A.
Less than  a  grain  under some circumstances might
cause  death,  and  under  other circumstances very
much more might be taken.  In a person  of very
feeble constitution, a very little might blow the candle
out.   Q. If a man was healthy, but  was suffering
violent pain—intense  pain  m the  abdomen—would
you expect a grain to be fatal *  A. Morphine may
be  administered judiciously  for the relief of great
pain, in  dose- depending  upon the degree  of pain.
(■). Could you detect by the eye the difference in bulk
between a grain, and a half grain of morphine, lying
side l|,vside*  A.  Certainly,  one  would  be twice as
large  as  the  other.  Q.  [f they were both exhibited
at the same time, and  laid  side by  side upon the
mantel*    A. Certainly,  sir  Q.  You  think  you
would  not make  a mistake*  A. I think not.  Q.
And  that  would  not be because  of  any  peculiar
expertness*   A.  Xo, sir.

              Dr. Charles A. A'eirs,
Examined by Mr. Garretson, testified :
  I am a practicing physician living  in Jersey Citv.
and was present at the  post-mortem examination of
Air. Coates.   Q.  Did you form any opinion as to the
cause of death *  A. I came to the conclusion that it
was due to general congestion.  Q. Did you form any
conclusion as to the cause of the congestion *   A. X7>
sir.  Q.  Y"ou have heard the  testimony here as to the 
DOCTOR LUNDV TRIAL.
93
symptoms*   A. Yes, sir.  Q. Taking these  in  con-
nection with the post-mortem appearances,  what do
you think was the cause of death *   A. I think it was
due to morphine.  Q. What is the usual dose of mor-
phine*   A.  From an eighth to a quarter of a grain.
Q. A\That sort of practice is  it to prescribe morphine
without seeing the patient ?
  Objected to as before, and exception taken.
  A.  It  is careless.   Q. AYhat effect would  the ad-
hesions of the lungs have upon Mr.  Coates' health *
A. I think they would have no material effect.

Cross-examined by Mr. Dixon :
  Q.  Do yon know what Magendie's Solutionis* A.
Yes, sir.   Q. Do you ever give it *  A.  Yes, sir.  Q.
How much at a dose *   A. From ten to fifteen drops.
Q. What is  an  ordinary  dose?  A. From  five  to
fifteen drops.   Q.  Then sometimes fifteen drops is an
ordinary  dose?  A.  Yes, sir; perhaps it is rather
large  for an  ordinary dose  though.   Q. How much
then is an ordinary dose?  A. From five to ten drops.
Q. In what  cases have  you given fifteen drops?  A.
in a case of facial neuralgia.  Q. AYhat is neuralgia *
A. An affection of the nerve *  Q.  Is there  any pain
without  an affection of  the  nerve*   A. No, sir.  Q.
What then do you mean by neuralgia ;  you  say pain
is always due to some cause affecting the nerve ;  how
then do  you  distinguish the pain you speak of from
any other pain?  A.  It  is an acute local pain.  Q.
By local  pain,  you mean a pain having a habitation *
A  Yes,  sir.   Q. Did you ever know a pain that had
no habitation*  A. I have known  pains that would
change about.  Q.  They would only change their habi-
tation *   A.  Yes, sir; if a  person  complained of a
certain  portion  of  the  body, where tliere was an
affection  of the nerve, I should call  it neuralgia.  (A
How do  you  distinguish then between  the  different 
94
DOCTOR LUND'S TRIAL.
kinds of pain ; gout is  neuralgia, is it not *  A. \ on
may call it  so.'  Q. Toothache is *  A.  Yes, sir.   Q.
And stomachache also?   A. Yes,  sir.  Q.  Rheuma-
tism *  A. Yes, sir.  Q.  And earache *   A. Yes, sir.
Q.  And  headache?  A.  Yes, sir.  Q. AYhat then  is
neuralgia?   A. It is an  affection  acting  on the ner-
vous system.  Q.  Are not all pains  caused by some
influence acting on the nervous system *    A. Yes, sir.
Q.  What then was there about this  case, other than
the pain, for which you gave  the fifteen  drops *   A.
Nothing.  Q.  AYould  you not just  the  same  give
Mao-endie's Solution for pain, if it was located  in the
cystic duct *   A.  Yes,  if it was not contra-indicated.
Q. AYhat is the strength of Alagendie's Solution *   A.
Sixteen grains of morphine to the ounce of water.
  Q. How much  morphine  would there  be then in
ten drops of Magendie's  Solution ?  A.  In the neigh-
borhood  of  an eighth  of a grain.   Q.  How do  you
fiarire  that up *   A. By taking the number of drops
there is in a drachm, and then reducing it.  Q. How
many  drops are  there in  a  drachm ?  A.  About
seventy-two.   Q.  That is of  the distilled water con-
taining the  morphine*  A.   l"es,  sir.  Q. Well,  we
will see whether you are  right; are  you acquainted
with Ellis'  Medical Formulary (taking  a  book  from
his client's  hand) *  A.  Yes, sir.   Q.  A\rhat  should
you say if he  said there was  only forty fee drops of
distilled water in  a drachm *  A. AYell, 1 should think
it correct as far as Ellis is concerned ;  there are a good
many authors  besides  him, though he  is a  standard
author.  Q.  He is probably right, is he not ?  A. Yes,
sir.  Q. That reads u Ellis' Medical Formulary/' does
it not (exhibiting the back of the book  to the witness) *
A. Yes,  sir.  Q. And that  reads forty-five  drops
does it not  (opening the book and pointing out the
place to  the witness)*  A. Yes, sir.  Q. AArell, now
go on ; there are  forty-five drops instead  of seventy- 
DOCTOR LI ND's TRIAL.
95
 two to a drachm :  how many grains of morphine in a
 drachm*   A. Two.  Q.  That is two grains of mor-
 phine in forty-five drops of Magendie's Solution ; ten
 drops would then be almost one quarter of forty five
 drops, or of two grains of morphine, equal  to almost
 one-half grain *  A. Yes, sir.  Q. We  are now on
 mathematics, not medicine ;  then your dose of fifteen
 drops was over one-half a grain *  A. Yes, sir ;  but I
 have given more  than  that.  Q. How much *  A. I
 have given three grains at a time of morphine.  Q.
 How much of Magendie's Solution have you given ?
 A. I have taken a drachm myself (two grains).
   Q. Suppose  you  had  called upon a  patient and
 knew the trouble; you believed it to be one likely to
 cause pain ; in a few hours afterwards his wife should
 come and inform you that he was in very intense pain ;
 it Avas very late at night, you had been up before that
 night and for previous  nights; you were  sick, tired,
 wearied, and worn out—would you then consider it a
 very dangerous thing if you were to send ten or fifteen
 drops of Magendie's Solution ?  A. I don't know as I
 should do it under th6se circumstances.
   Q. Did you never prescribe morphine without stay-
 ing with the patient and watching its effects ?   A. I
 have ; yes,  sir.  Q. And if there were severe  pain,
 you would prescribe it  with less fear than  as if there
 were no pain *  A. Yes, sir.  Q. What, then, would
 be the reason that you should  fear to prescribe mor-
. phine without going to the bedside of the patient and
 watching its  effects *   A. I  would consider  it my
 place to go and see the patient, and see what was the
 matter with him.   Q.  Oh!  but we are supposing that
 you had seen the patient but a short time before, had
 formed your conclusions as  to what the trouble was,
 that it was likely to cause pain, and the messenger had
 told you that the intense pain had come—would it not
 be common among physicians, under these  circuin- 
9fi
DOCTOR LUXd's TRIAL.
stances,  to  send  a dose of morphine *  A.J  don't
know as it would  *  Q.  AYould it never be done *  A.
I think it would ;  yes, sir ;  but I don't think I should
do it myself.
  Q.  Is it at all unusual for physicians to err in judg-
ment as to the cause of  the symptoms *  A.  Xo.  Q.
It is so common, that if  you should be  held responsi-
ble  for  manslaughter every time  you erred in deter-
mining the cause  of the disease, while prescribing for
it, you would quit the profession, would you not?  A.
You bet I would.
  Q. How  long  have   you been  in' practice *   A.
About  three and a half years.   0.  And  so soon
learned that lesson *  A. Yes, sir.
  Q. AYas fragility of the liver spoken  of at the post-
mortem *  A. Xo, sir;  it  was not.   Q.  AYhat was
said about it *   A. That it was normally healthy.
  C>. Does morphine produce rigidity" or relaxation
of the muscles *   A. Relaxation.   Q. Does it produce
stiffness  of  the jaws, so that you cannot open  the
mouth*   A. I  never knew  that it did.  Q.  That
would not be a symptom  of morphine poisoning, would
it?  A. I think not; no, sir.
  Q. Does belladonna produce that effect *   A. Y^es,
sir.   Q. Relaxation?  A.  Yes, sir.
  Q. Was the heart weighed*  A. No, sir.  Q. Was
it measured  * A.  I think it was.  Q. How*  A.  By
holding it in the hand, so.-  (Illustrating with  his
hand.)   Q. Do  you mean to give us that as the way-
it was  measured- that is weighing,  not measurinc/*
A. Yes, sir
  Q. May apoplexy spring from any other cause than
the presence of a clot of  blood in the brain *  A. The
brain may be congested,  and so produce apoplexy.  Q.
Death might come from the presence of apoplexy of
that sort, without  the presence of a clot  of blood * ' A.
Yes, sir. 
                DOCTOR LUND's TRIAL.             97

   Q. Now, the congested condition of the brain mav
 l»e produced by anything that retards the circulation'*
 A. Yes,  sir   Q. Anything  that  would retard the
 arteriali/ution of  the  blood*  A.  Yes.  Q. Might it
 be caused by  the introduction of pus into the blood '.
 A. It might be.  <k>. And there might  be  such a con-
 dition of the system as that the purulent  matter, al-
 though not present in sufficient  quantities  to cause
 pyaunia, might yet retard the circulation enough  to
 produce stagnation, and congestion of the brain, and  so
 apoplexy, might there not *  A. I don't know whether
 it could be so or not.
   Q. AYell, just apply these things to your knowledge
 of the  system; a venous condition  of blood in the
 brain can produce apoplexy *  A.  Yes.  Q. Anything
 that retards the circulation, that carbonizes the blood.
 would produce  that venous condition *  A.  Yes.   Q.
 The introduction of purulent matter  into the  blood
 will produce that condition *  A. Yes.   Q. If the puru-
 lent matter be present in sufficient quantities it will
 produce pyaemia *  A. Yes.  Q. But suppose it is not
 present  in sufficient quantities to cause pyaunia, but
-sufficient to retard  the  circulation ;  the man is pre-
 disposed  to apoplexy, by his age  and condition,  and
 has a  trouble with the lungs, binding them down so
 that they cannot properly act. and arterialize the blood
 sufficiently;  may not  these  causes so  combine  as to
 cause that venosity of the brain which would produce
 apoplexy *  A.  Yes, sir.
   Q. All these  causes, that is the slight impurity  of
 the blood, not sufficient to produce the ordinary symp-
 toms of pyaemia, might  exist in the blood and not be
 noticed by the physician called upon to prescribe for
 the more patent  symptom of pain *  A. Yes, sir.  Q.
 The physician  would  not  be  careless  who  here
 prescribed  morphine *   A.  Xr6,  sir.  Q.  And  if
 such  circumstances  should  occur,  and  a post-mor-
5 
IKS
DOCTOR LLND's TRIAL.
 teni should reveal  death from congestion  and  apo-
 pletic conditions, and you happened to have been the
 doctor who prescribed  the morphine, would you then
 been willing  to  say that your conduct had been crim-
 inally  responsible?   A.  XO, sir, I would  not.  Q.
 Are you sure that some such thing has not happened
 to you in your  practice, but it was not  revealed for
 want of a post-mortem examination *  A. I think not,
 sir  Q.  Did you never have a patient die *  A. Yes,
 sir, several.   Q.  Could you  be always sure without a
 post-mortem  examination that your medicine had not
 accelerated  the  trouble*  A.  Well, no,  sir, I could
 not.  Q. If you gave the medicine with a pure inten-
 tion to check the disease, you would consider your re-
 sponsibility gone *   A. Yes, sir.

               Mr. Horace Bowen,
 Being  examined by Mr. Garretson, testified:
   I live in Jersey City, and have been  practicing
 medicine nineteen years; I  am now a homoeopathist.
 Q. What is  the ordinary dose of morphine in your
 practice *   A. Well, sir, the system of medicine has
 so changed that  a dose loses its relative quantity.  Q. -
 You give  morphine, don't  you*   A.  Yes, sir  Q.
 (live us some idea what the usual amount in an ordi-
 nary dose is *  A. We usually give it in dilutions : we
 take a'grain of morphine and  ten or  one hundred
 drops of alcohol, and that makes  the first  dilution, one
 drop of that to ten or a hundred  more of alcohol mak-
 ing the second, and so on, and of this we give two or
 three  drops  at a dose if we  wish. Q.  How  much
 morphine would that be equal to *  A. The thousandth
 part of a grain  probably; it is  considered a medium
 dose.   Q. Do you ever prescribe the morphine itself in
 powder *  A. No, sir,  not now I don't.   (The reason
for this is evident.   The witness has killed, accord in </
 to his  on-,, public  confession, .so many unsuspecting 
DOCTOR LUND'S TRIAL.             99
patients  in former times, by "blind, blundering, un-
scientific prescribing," that he now clings for very
safety to the highest dilutions he can get.)
  Q. What sort of practice would it be to prescribe a
grain of  morphine without seeing the patient*  A. I
would call  it  allopathic practice.   Q.  And to  be
governed by  the  opinion of allopathic physicians ?
A.  Yes,  sir.  Q.  Is it safe*  A. I do not consider it
very safe under any circumstances; it might be as  far
as life is  concerned.

   Cross-e.ramin ation:
   Q. Do you know Dr. Lund *   A. I met him once
and had some conversation with  him.   Q.  Do you
know whether he is educated allopathically or not ?  A.
 I do not know anything about it *  Q. The principles
upon which  homoeopathists practice is diametrically
opposite to those upon which allopathists practice, is it
not?  A. I believe so, sir.  Q. Have you ever seen
anv cases of  opium poisoning*  A. Yes, sir   Q.  Do
you know how much morphine the system of a healthy
male adult can bear without a fatal result ?  A. It  de-
pends upon  the  state  of the system ; one can take a
laro-e amount without danger, and another cannot take
a small  amount.   Q.   LIow large an amount can be
U'iven *  A.  The best  authority  upon that subject I
laiow of is Dr. Alonzo Clark, who  has  given  forty
grains of opium in a dose, equivalent to about eight
orains of morphine.   Q. The use of tobacco would
tend to  make the system tolerant of opium,  would it
 not*  A. It would.  Q. Would you anticipate a fatal
 result from a grain of morphine *   A.  Not in a strong,
 well man, I would not, sir.

                 Dr. J. J. Youlin,
 Examined by Mr. G-arretson, testified :
   I am a practicing  physician in  Jersey City, and
 am a homceopathist.   Q. What is an ordinary dose of 
100
DOCTOR LI ND S TRIAL.
   morphine according to that system *   A. There is no
   "ordinary"  dose.  Q. How much do  you give when
   you give morphine *  A.  Morphine is generally pre-
   scribed by homceopathists in what is called potencies or
   dilutions ;  morphine  as  a salt is always prepared by
   trituration with sugar of milk; opium,  on the other
   hand, is prepared in dilutions, in alcohol.  Q. How
   much do you give of the salt *   A.  I generally use
   the decimal trituration,  made by one  grain to ten of
   sugar of milk ; the dose of that varies  in  different
   persons, according to their condition.   1 cannot state
o  accurately how much morphine there would  be  in  a
   dose of the first decimal; perhaps the one-hundredth of
   a grain.  Q. Then the largest dose of  morphine given
   by a  homoeopathist is the first decimal *   A.  Yes,  sir:
   although, understand  me, the drug,  even morphine
   itself, may be given hoiineopathically as  a salt, Q. In
   what cases do  you give it homceopathically *  A.I
   would give it in a case of disease bearing and  present-
   ing a large group of symptoms, such as would appear
   in  a case of  poisoning by morphine.   Q.  Do  you
   mean to say that you would give a person  poisoned
   by morphine, more morphine*  A. X"o,  sir; I .said
  ' the symptoms of disease  resembling morphine poison-
   ing. '
     Q. How much  in  such cases would you give *  xV.
   Rarely higher than the fourth of  a grain, following
   the homoeopathic law.   Q. Would you give  as much
   as  a grain  in  any case *   A. X"ot  in  such a case, no,
   sir.  0. AArould  you in any case*    A.  Acs, sir;  I
   would  in some cases give* a grain or more.  Q. What
   kind  of a case *   A. In any case of severe suffering, as
   from  cancer, or biliary calculus.   0.  Have you ever
   given that much *  A. I have  given three grains in  a
   single  night, one hour  after another—a  grain at  a
   time—in a case of cancer of the breast. Q. AVere  von
   present when that was given*  A,  I  was not: Idid 
DoeToR Ll'XIi's TRIAL.
101
not see it given.  Q.  Would you think it safe to pre
M-ribe that amount of morphine without seeing the
patient *   A. Xot unless I had seen him very recently,
within a few hours; in a chronic, case the time  might
be longer  than in an acute case. (). How in a case of
colic,  if you  had not seen  the patient for five or six
hours *  A. I never give  it for colic, so I don't, think
I would prescribe it  under those  circumstances.  Q.
Would you consider  it safe *  A.  It might be under
some  circumstances, as for instance, in a case of bilious
colic.

   (Jross-i .rouiitied by Mr Dixon :
   Q.  The  reason you do not  give  it  in colic, is  be-
cause it  is not  consistent with  your homoeopathic
theory*   A. That is it;  I have other .remedies that
answer  my purpose  as well.   Q.  Some physicians in
their  practice combine the theories, do they not *  A.
Yes,  sir.    Q. Many homoeopathic physicians have
allopathic educations  and training*  A. Yes, sir.  Q.
Do you know whether that  is true of Dr. Lund *  A.
Dr. Lund  was educated  in  an allopathic college.  Q.
Where  he  could have   learned  allopathic theories
only *  A. Acs, sir.  Q.  Do you know what college
that was '.   A. AYhen he joined  the  State Medical
Society, he presented  a diploma from Harvard College
of Cambridge, Mass.   Also, he did the  same  in  the
Eastern District Medical  Society.  Q.  He is  a phy-
sician in  good standing  in  these societies * A. We
have  considered hiin excellent.   Q. Do you  know
how long  he has been practicing*  A. I cannot  say
exactly ;"some three  or  four years.  Q. Has he met
with fair  success in his  practice *  A.I think very
excellent success.
   0.  AYhat  is the largest  amount of  morphine you
have known a person  to take *   A. I have met  within
the vear  of a case  of intended  suicide, where  the 
h)-2
DOCTOR LI 'Mi's TRIAL.
patient must have taken about three ounces of lauda-
num (2,880  drops);  she recovered.   Q.  AN hat  was
her condition when you was called *  A.I found her
in a chair, sleeping heavily, and  apparently uncon-
scious, and her lower jaw fallen down;  it was three
or four hours since she had taken the laudanum.   If
What did you  do *  A. I  poured mustard and water
down her throat in large quantities.  Q. AVhich she
swallowed?  A. The  fluid went down,  whether she
swallowed or not; she began  to rally very soon, and
then by  flaggellation, walking, dashing  cold  water
upon her, we finally were able to  consider her safe,
and  to  leave  her.   Q. You  consider  keeping the
patient in constant physical motion as very important *
A. Yes, sir
  Q. Would you think of  administering belladonna *
A. I never would.  Q. AYould you  think it danger-
ous *  A. I would; I don't consider it an antidote of
morphine.  Q.  Do homoeopathic physicians generally
weigh their medicines ?  A. I think they never do;
but proportion them by their eye.  Q. How is it with
allopathic physicians, in the country for instance, who
carry their own  medicines with  them ?   A.  Their
habit, I believe, always is to measure medicines out
by the eye;  I  know my preceptor, who was an allo-
pathist,  always did.   Q. They measured  them with
considerable accuracy, did they not *    A.  I think
they did.  Q. Do you  think that tliere would be any
difficulty in distinguishing, by the eye, the difference
in bulk between two powders, taken from the  same
bottle, and lying side by side, one of which weighed
one  grain  and  the  other  one-half  a  grain *   A. I
don't think  that there would  be any difficulty what-
ever.   Q. Are you familiar with simple apoplexy *
   Mr.  Garretson objected  to  Mr.  Dixon examining
Dr. Youlin on matters not gone over in the direct
examination. 
DOCTOR LUXD's TRIAL.
103
   Question allowed by the Court.
   A. I am, sir; there may be  congestion alone with
 no effusion  and  no post-mortem  changes from  a
 healthy  appearance.  Q.  Would you conclude from
 the  contraction of the pupils  the  cause of the con
 gestion *  A.I  would not.   Q. You would look for it in
 congestion of any kind from any cause *   A. I would.
 Q. Are there any absorbents in the gall bladder *  A.
 There are, and they are numerous.  Q.  Is there any-
 thing to prevent the absorption of pus from the gall
 bladder  by these absorbents*   A. XTo, sir.   Q. And
 the absorptions of pus from that place might produce
 congestion'  of  the brain *  A.  Yes, sir.  Q. General
 congestion throughout the system * A. Yes, sir.  Q.
 You  have heard  the testimony of the witnesses, in
 regard to the symptoms before death *  A.I have, sir.
 Q. Did you detect anything in these symptoms that
 was,  in  your opinion, antagonistic to  the  idea that
 Mr.  Coates  had died from  apoplexy, produced by
 corruption of the blood through the pus *   A. I did
 not, sir.   Q. Were the  symptoms  such as you  would
 anticipate  from  such a  cause *   A.  To  a   great
 measure they were.   Q. You cannot always by ante-
 mortem examination of a patient, determine the cause
 of death *  A.  No,  sir  Q. Skillful and  most  ex-
 perienced physicians often make mistakes *   A. Yes,
 sir; I have known a consultation of six physicians to
 be mistaken, and not discover it until after death.
  Q.  Are you  familiar with bryonia alba*  A. Yes,
 sir.  Q. Could it produce pain in the head or bowels *
 A.  Xo, sir.   Q. It is a homoeopathic medicine *  A.
 Yes, sir.

  Re-direct examination  by Mr. Garretson :
  Q. You say Dr. Lund's  reputation was excellent;
do you mean  his homoeopathic or allopathic  repu-
tation *   A. Homoeopathic.  Q. How long after Dr. 
104
DOCTOR Lixn's TRIAL.
Lund came io Bergen did lie join your society *   A. J
cannot say : I was  acquainted with  him some time
before he presented himself,  if  I >o you know where
he got his homoeopathic education*    A. From his
preceptor in Boston.  Q. Do you administer morphine
as a salt by the eye *  A. Xo, I always weigh it.   Q.
AYere your cases of simple apoplexy fatal cases?  A.
Xo, sir.  Q. Have  you known  cases of pyaemia *  A.
Two  that. I remember.   Q. What was the source of
the pus *   A.  In one it was in the womb, and  in the
other from erysipelas and abscess of the face and nose.
Q. There was ulceration in both cases*   A. Yes, sir
Q. A"on have  heard the symptoms spoken of in this
case ; suppose  you further knew that  morphine had
been  given, do you find  anything in  those symptoms
inconsistent with morphine*   A. No,  sir, I should
not. if I did not have anything else to  govern me.

                  James Kelly,
Examined by Mr Garretson, testified:
   I used  to board with Mrs. Coates.  I am her brother.
I was living  at  Mr. Coates' housS at the time of his
death.  He was first taken sick the Sunday before he
died, and complained of his stomach.  On Monday morn-
ing he told me to go  down and  tell  his foreman that
he felt a little  sick,  and could  not come  to his work
that day.  I came home early in the  afternoon, and
saw  him  on  the ball ground.   AYhen I went home
Mr  Coates told me he did not like Dr. AYilkinson
very well.  Tuesday morning he felt  worse, complain-
ing  more of his insides.   1 went  away about eight
o'clock, and returned  about four o'clock, and he said
he was  still worse.  He said  he  had changed  his
doctor, and had Dr. Lund, and  said  he liked  him a
great deal more than Dr. AA'ilkinson.   Dr. Lund had
conversed freely with  him, and  had  prescribed some
powders; he did not  come down stairs that night to 
DOCTOR I.IXD S TRIAL.
105
supper.  Some neighbors came in during the evening.
About nine o'clock I laid down on the sofa, and went
to sleep.   At about eleven o'clock Mrs. Coates aMoke
me, and asked me to go up and stay with her husband
until the Doctor came, and  that he would be there in
a few minutes.  Mr.  Coates  seemed worse, and was
nervous and  impatient for  the  Doctor to come, and
finally as  he did not come, Mrs. Coates  and  myself
went  back for  him,  at  about twelve o'clock.  Airs.
Coates went  up to the front door and rang the bell;
some one came  to the door, but I could not see who it
was.  She asked  if the  I >octor was in, and the reply
was u \i^.''  She said "tell him I want him directly."
The reply was, "who shall I say wants him," and
she said '" Mrs. Coates.''  At  the same time a voice
from some one  I could not  see, from the inside, cried
out, " what is the matter now * "  She said " Doctor,
I thought  you were to be at my house in a quarter of
an hour, and  you have not been there yet."   At that
time I could see Dr. Lund,   lie said, " hold on for a
few minutes."  lie went away and then came back in
a short time,  and  said, " here  is three powders, give
him one as soon as you get home.''  She said "Doctor,
I want you to  come yourself and see my husband."
He said,' " can't you mix up  a powder; put it in a table
spoonful of water, and  see that he takes it all;  the
last  powders I gave  were  too  weak."  She said
again, "Doctor, 1 want you to come  and give them
yourself."  Three  times she asked him to come, and the
last time he said  he would  not; he  told her not to
come to the door again, nor ring the bell, for he would
not answer  her;  she  said she would not trouble him
again, and went home and gave the powder ;  when she
gave it to  him she said, the  Doctor says you must take
it all; he sat  quietly then from ten to fifteen minutes,
when he got up and looked very wild, walked round
the room  a few minutes and then went into the bed- 
 106           DOCTOR I.CXd's TRIAL.

 room and  threw himself upon  the bed;  he rolled
 round there  awhile, and then came out in the front
 room again.
   Mrs.  Coates said, "John, what is the matter ;" he
 waved her off with  his hand, and said, "go away, T
 am mad,  I am  crazy ;" he then walked round for a
 considerable time, quieting down all the time ;  finally
 he  said he would like a  little brandy ; I gave him a
 table-spoonful of brandy, the best I could get at the
 druggists ;  we fixed him in his chair very comfortably,
 and in  a  few moments he was  sound  asleep.
   Mrs.  Coates was  suddenly taken pretty bad with
 cramps in her stomach and legs, and I was left almost
 alone with him;  she had gone  down stairs and laid
 down on the sofa;  he slept very quiet, a natural and
 easy looking sleep, breathing as easy as any one would,
 for a while, I cannot say howr long, when he woke
 up again and asked me to give him a drink; as I went
 down stairs to get him a drink, his daughter came up ;
 I went  into the kitchen and filled a large sized coffee
 cup half full of tea ; he told me before  I went down
 stairs not to get  him anything  too cold or hot, as it
 " would cut his insides ; " I then filled the cup up with
 warm water, sweetened it, and carried it up stairs to
 him.
  His daughter was standing along side of him, and I
 heard him say, in  answer to some question of hers,
 " I am  in heaven beside what I was an hour ago ; "
 she told him her mother was very sick, and he motioned
 her off with  his hand, the same as to say, go; I gave
him the tea, and he drank it all down and said, " that is
 first rate;" he then sat a few moments without saving
 anything, when he said, " Jim, I  would like to see Mi-.
 Gross ; " Air. Gross was his boss on the Cunard Dock •
 I told him  I would go  down the first thing in the
morning and tell him so; he said I need not do it, as
he would be very busy on account of one ship that was 
DOCTOR LUND*S TRIAL.            101
to come in and another to go out; he then sat a few
moments without saying  anything, when he  looked
right at me, and said, " Jim, the grand crisis has come,
I am at the turning point."   That was, I believe, his
last words;  he sat there  then for a little while, his
eyes closed, and his head fell to the left;  I got up and
fixed the pillow under his head ; I then watched him for
about half an hour, when I noticed that he was breath-
ing with difficulty; I saw then that he  had changed
color, and I thought  his eyes had sunk a little ; with
every breath he would have a slight hiccough; I then
called his daughter, and told her to call Mr.  Welch,
while I would  go  down to Jersey City and try to get
either Dr. McDowell or Dr. Lutkins; it was a little be-
fore four o'clock when I started, and I got back about
seven; I could not get either of them; when I got
back, I went up stairs and looked at Mr. Coates  and
saw he was pretty, much as I left him;  I then went
down stairs, when I saw Dr. Lund there and ray niece;
I heard Dr. Lund say that the case was taken out of
his hands ; I went up to  him and  said it was not, I
went with my sister myself at twelve o'clock; he said, I
begin to see that there'was a mistake; the medicine Mr.
Coates took was  put  up for  a man by the name of
 Xoonan, with delirium  tremens; I don't know what
then became of Dr. Lund; I had seen Dr. Lund be-
fore  when he  had been calling the other side of the
street; Drs. AVilkinson, Forman and Bock were there ;
thev all left about nine o'clock, and came back after ten ;
the" undertaker, Mr. Hughes, then  came up and put
 the body on ice.
   Cross-examined by Mr. Dixon :
   I believe  it was the left  side of Mr. Coates that
 imim.d him  so much; I  have not known Mr Coates
 to be sick  for twenty years, but during that time 1
 have  been  away  much of the time, and so he may 
1 OS           DOCTOR LUXD S TRIAL.
have been sick; while Mrs. Coates was at the Doctor's
house the second time, 1 was standing at the bottom
step going up  to  his front door; I could not see who
opened the door, whether it was a man or a boy, white
or colored.
  Q.  At the Coroner's Inquest did you not swear that
a black boy opened the door *  A. I think not; I could
not swear that, because the door was only opened on a
crack, and I could not see any one there.
  Mr. Dixon gave  the witness  his deposition before
the Coroner.
  (t).  Is that your signature *  A. Yes, sir  Q. And
that  is your testimony before the Coroner?   A. Acs.
sir.
  Q.  I  see  here this expression :  " Mrs. Coates went
up the steps and rang the bell; a colored boy came to
the door ;"  I suppose you cannot testify to that now *
A. YYell, I must  have said it by hearsay,  because I
did not see him.
  U.  Did the  Doc!or  come down stairs  before  he
came  down  with the powders*   A.  I  did not see
him.
  iv>.  In your examination at the Inquest  I find this
expression : " She said, go and tell him I want him im-
mediately ; he  went up  stairs and the Doctor came
right down ;" is that true *  A.I cannot say whether
the person went up stairs or not.  Q.  And can you
tell whether the Doctor  came "right down *"   A. I
cannot.   (>.  You  did  not see anv one come  down *
A. I did not.
  Q.  AYhat  was said  after  she  said  she wanted the
Doctor immediately *  A. He asked her what name;
she said Mrs. Coates.  Q. Have you talked this mat-
ter over with Airs. Coates *  A.I have not.  Q. Your
recollection  of these things was as good  before the
Coroner  as  it  is now*   A. I don't know  about
that;  there were some things I know  I missed then. 
DOCTOR LUND'S  TRIAL.
lot)
   Q. Did  the Doctor  say  that the powders would
 quiet him down, and if one quieted him, she need not
 give him another one?  A. No. sir;  he said,  give
 another  in an hour after the first.  Q. AYas  she to
 give them after he got quiet *  A.I believe so ; I
 don't know.   Q.  You  did not  give him the second
 powder*  A.  XA>.  Q. Why*   A. Because he  was
 quiet enough before the hour was up.  Q. Then your
 understanding of the directions was, if he got quiet
 enough after you had given him the first powder,  that
 you need not give the second * A. I did not hear
 that mentioned.  Q. AA7as not  that your understand-
 ing of what was said *   A. It  was not,  Q. Did you
 not act upon that idea *  A.I did ; but was very near
 not doing it.
   Q.  How was Mr. Coates when you got home *  A.
 lie was still suffering from pain.
   Q. AYhen was it you  gave Air.. Coates the brandy?
 A. About  a  half hour, I think, after he  took  the
 medicine; I gave him two  table-spoonsful  of it;  I
 went for  it  after we got the powders, and got it at Air.
 AYells' drug store ; he said he would  take it, kill or
 cure; it  was  more than twenty minutes, after taking
 the powder,  before he  asked mo for the brandy ; he
 went  right to  sleep after he took the brandy.  Q.
 What became of  the  rest of the brandy ;  did Mrs.
 Coates cet it *   A. I cannot  say.
  Q. Mr. Coates  did not use tobacco,  did  he *  A.
 Oh yes,  he did ; he was a pretty heavy smoker; he
did not  chew that 1 knew  of; he might now  and
then ; he used the cut plug tobacco.
  Q. AYhat was the reason  that Dr. Lutkins would
not come with yon *  A. He sent down word he  was
otherwise engaged.
  Q. What was the trouble with Dr. McDowell *  A.
I cannot  say ; he would not or could not come.
  Q. Dr. Lutkins  is a physician in large practice, one 
110
DOCTOR LUND S  TRIAL.
of the leading men in his profession, is he not *  A.I
always understood so ?
  Q.' How is it with Dr. McDowell *   A.I cannot
say ;  I have never seen him in my life, to my knowl-
edge ; I believe he was  a Alason, and belonged to the
same lodge that Mr. Coates did.
  By Mr. Garretson : Did  Dr.  Lutkins or  Dr.  Mc-
Dowell send any powders *  A.  No, sir.

            Mrs. Elizabeth  Hassell,
Examined by Mr. Garretson, testified : I live in South
Bergen, and was a daughter of Mr. Coates, and was
living  there at the  time of his  death ; he was  first
taken sick  on  the  Sunday evening previous  to his
death, complaining of pain between his bowels and his
chest;  he sent for the  doctor between three and four
on Monday  morning;  Dr. AArilkinson came and pre-
scribed  for  him; Monday night he was pretty well;
Tuesday morning he complained again, and  sent for
Dr. Lund ;  my little  sister Grace went after him ; he
came, and told father  he thought he understood his
case ; he did not  have his medicines with him, and
wanted us to send to his house for  them ; we did so,
and  she  brought back  an envelop, containing  some
powders, and a small phial containing a liquid ; I don't
know whether they were given or not;  I think I saw
my mother  give the liquid ;  in the evening I sat with
him, during the time my mother had gone for Dr.
Lund ; when she returned she said  the Doctor would
be there in fifteen minutes ;  we waited awhile, and as
he did not come, she said she would go for him again,
and did so,  my uncle  going with her ;  when she came
back she said the Doctor would not come, but he had
sent powders, to be  taken every  hour until all were
taken ; she then gave him one  of the powders ; I then
retired; in  the night  I  was awakened by my mother
moaning down  stairs, and on the way down stairs I 
               DOCTOR LUXD's TRIAL.            Ill

asked my uncle how father was ; I did not stay down
stairs more  than ten minutes, when I came up to see
father ;  in going in I  passed my uncle  coming out;
my father was sitting in the same position ; when I
went in, he was getting up out of his chair to fix himself
more comfortably;  I told him mother was sick ; he
motioned me away, and told me not to bother him ; I
asked him if he was in  pain; he  said, no, he felt as
though he was in heaven to what he was an hour ago ;
I then went down stairs.to my mother, who was suf-
fering very much, and stayed with her until about half-
past four in the  morning ;  I then  went up to see
father;  he was  breathing very hard ; his face  was
swelled  almost twice its usual size, and his hands  also ;
his face was of a deep  purple color, and the perspira-
tion was pouring off him ;  I  shook him as hard as I
could, but could  not wake him ;  I  then woke  Mr.
Welch, living next  door, and asked him  to go for Dr.
Wilkinson ;  the Doctor  came ; he  stayed until  about
nine o'clock, then went away, and came back in about
an hour; I saw no  other doctors there as  I went for
one of the neighbors ; I  saw Dr. Lund on Wednesday
morning, about seven o'clock, come in the house and
go up in the room  where father was ; I followed him
up, but  did  not  hear him  say anything; my mother
said to him that it was a very great loss to her, and he
said she had not lost him yet; he asked me to go
down stairs  with him ;  I  did so;  he  asked me who
sent for those doctors;  I said we  did; he asked  me,
" AYhy was not I sent for ?" I said, " Why, Doctor, you
told us  not  to  come after you again to-night;"  he
asked me who said  so; I told him my mother; he said
" your mother," and looked very much  surprised ;  I
said yes ; he said  " that is a mistake,  I have  said
nothing of the kind ;"  I  said " O, yes. Doctor, for my
uncle was with her;'' he asked me  who my uncle was
or where he  was;  my uncle then stepped forward and 
112            DOt )TOR  Ll'NP's TKIA L.
    told him that he did tell my mother not to come back
    that night ;  he then said that he saw it  all, that  the
    powders were intended for a man by the name of Mike
    Xoonan, suffering from delirium tremens,  and that he
    had mistaken mother for Mr.-. Xoonan ; he then went
    away ; I again saw him at  Airs. A\relch's gate, when he
    said he was not used fairly at  all, that  he ought to
    have been sent for ; Airs. AYelch asked him if he could
    do anything for lather, for,  if he could, she was sure
    the other doctors would give him up ; he said that  the
    other doctors had taken  it entirely out of his hands ; I
    don't think I saw him  again ; Dr.  Lund,  when I was
    down at the door, asked me to be careful  of the medi-
    cine that was left  up stairs, but gave no reason why
    he wanted me to be careful of them.

      < ross-examined by Mr. Dixon :
     There was a clock in  the front room, and I  looked
    at the time when I went from mother up to see fa tier ;
    it was then between two and half-past;  I  am not sure
    about the second time, but it was between four and
    half-past; my father complained of pain in his  bowels
    that night;'  after  he took the powder, I  went to  mv
    room, but I heard mother say, " John, what  is  the
    matter *" and  I  heard him answer,  " Go  away, I  am
    mad, I am crazy."

                   Mrs. Ann Welch,'
    Examined by Mr. Garretson, testified :
     I live in Atlantic Street, Bergen, next door but  one
    to the house occupied  in  July last by Mr. Coates; I
4   saw him the Monday before he died, complaining of pain;
    he was  in his own house; I  saw him next, Tuesday
    evening, he, as before, being in his own house ;  he was
    not well then, but did not complain to me of anything
    special : it was about nine o'clock when I  left.
     Q. AYhen  did you see him next *   A, I don't think 
DOCTOR LUND S TRTAL.
113
I saw him again until  I  was called  in  AYednesday
morning.  Q.  A\7hat time*  A. It was then between
half-past three and four  o'clock ;  Mr. Kelly called me
at that time in the morning.   Q How  was Mr. Coates
when you went  in*   A. I was not called to see Air.
Coates ; I was called to  see Mrs. Coates, she was sick.
Q.  AYhere did  you  find her*    A.  On  the sofa,
in  the front  room down stairs.  Q. Did  you see Air.
('oates * A. AYhen I had stopped a little while with Airs.
Coates, Mr. Kelly came into the room, and I asked him
how Air Coates was, and he said he was very bad, and
I said J  must go up stairs and see him ;  I went up stairs
and saw him.   Q.  How did he seem then *  A. I went to
him and spoke to him, and asked him how he felt, but
he did not speak; I spoke the second time and  he did
not speak; Air. Kelly came into the room and I said
to  him  I think Mr. Coates is dying, for he seemed to
have  great  pain when  breathing;  I said  to  Mr.
 Kelly it would be well  to have  a doctor; he said he
was just going down to the city to get the lodge doc-
tor ;  his daughter, Lizzie, came into the room ; I  said to
her I think your father is dying ; she said, " don't say
that;'1  she seemed excited when I spoke  to  her;  I
said it would be well to  send for a doctor, and asked
her would I  •go;  she said she would wait for  Air.
Welch to go ;' Mr.  AYelch went  for Dr.  Wilkinson;
that was a little before five o'clock ; I  think Dr. Wil-
kinson must have been in the house about  five o'clock :
I was there when he came.
  ().  Did you see Dr. Lund there*  A. I did ; I was
there when he came into the room ;   I  couldn't say
what time that was ;  I think it must have been about
seven o'clock,  but I wouldn't say sure.  Q.  What did
he do when he came in *  A. I  don't know as  Dr.
Lund did anything to Air Coates; Mrs. Coates came
into the room', and said to Dr. Lund it was a loss for her,
and the doctor said, that she hadn't lost him yet;  Dr. 
114
DOCTOR LUND S  TRIAL.
Lund didn't say anything else that I remember; 1 don't
think he staid there long ; when he went out I went
down stairs and spoke to him at the door.  Q.  A\ natdid
you say to him * A. I asked the Doctor if there was any
danger  of  Mr.  Coates, and he said he had just found
out his mistake, that he made  those powders for a man
who was a  very hard drinker, by the name of Noonan ;
I saw Dr. Lund after that: I couldn't say how long,
but I saw him just as I was going into my own house.
Q.  Did  you have any conversation with him there *
A.  Yes; Dr.  Lund said, " Is there any change in Mr.
(1oates *  "  I said no, and asked Dr. Lund if tliere was
any danger of Mr. Coates; he said the case was entirely
out of his  hands;  I said if  he thought he could do
anything for Mr. Coates that I had no doubt  the other
doctors would  give  him up, and he said, " Xot now,
it is too  late."

  Cross-examination by Mr. Dixon :
  Q.  AYas  Lizzie present at the conversation as  yon
were  going into your own house *  A. She was  with
me, but  I don't  know whether she went into the house
or stopped with me.  Q. Did Dr. Lund say anything
to you  about  Mr.  Coates getting better; whether he
thought he would get better or not *  A*  A'es, he said
he thought he  would.   Q. A\rhen was that *  A.  I
think it was when we were standing at the door.  Q.
The first talk *  A.  I think it was the first;  I am not
sure.  Q. AYhat door  do you mean ?  A. The front
door of Mr. Coates' house.  Q. That is where you had
the first  talk,  was  it  not?   A. Yes, sir.   Q. Who
called you for Airs. Coates ?  A.  Mr. Kelly,  her
brother.   Q. How  long were  you with Mrs.  Coates
before Mr.  Kelly came  into  the room *   A. Only  a
few minutes.   Q. Was  Mrs. Coates asleep when  you
went into the room *  A. No, sir.  Q. Was  she Ivino-
down *  A.  Yes,  sir.   Q. Tndressed *   A.  No," sir, 
DOCTOR LUND S  TRIAL.
115
   she  was not  undressed.  Q. What was the matter
   with her *  A.  She had  cramps.  Q.  Anything else
   the matter *   A. That is  all ;  she said to me she was
   taken with cramps.  Q. Did anything else seem to be
   the matter with her *   A. No, sir.   Q. Had she taken
•  anything for the cramps, did she say *   A. She didn't
   say to me ; she asked me to  rub her with some dry
   mustard.   Q.  Did you*   A.  I did.   Q. Anything
   else done for her *  A.  I did not do anything else for
   her.
     Q. Did  you give her anything for the pain *  A.
   Yes, sir.  Q. What did you give her *   A. There was
   a tumbler with a little  brandy on  the table  in the
   room where she was lying; she asked me to hand it to
   her, and I did so.  Q. AYhere was the tumbler*  A.
   On the table.   Q. Near her *   A. Not very near ; it
   was on  the table ; she was lying on the sofa.  Q. In
   the  same room *  A. A"es, sir.   Q.  Did she drink it *
   A. Yes, sir, she took a little of it, not all of it.  (Appen-
   dix y.)   Q. What was done with the rest *  A.  It re-
   mained on  the  table.   Q. Do you know where the
   brandy came from *  A. I do not.  Q. Did you do any-
   thing else for her or give her anything else ?   A. Not
   then.  Q.  When did you *  A. AYell, she got  up to
   her bed-room then ; I did not  help her up, nor I don't
   remember of seeing her come up, but the next time I
   saw her, she was in the bed-room.   Q.  Do you mean
   Mr. Coates' bed-room *  A. Yes, sir.   Q. What then *
   A. Well, I went into the room where Mr. Coates was;
   he always remained in  the front room, sitting in the
 *  rocking-chair.
     By the Court: Which room did Mrs. Coates go into
   when she came up stairs ?  A. In the back bed room ;
   Mr. Coates was in the front room ;  there was no bed
   in the front room.
     Q. What else was done for  Airs.  Coates*   A. I
   did  not  do anything then.  Q. When  did you next 
1 Lf>            DOCTOR LLNd's  TRIAL.

do anything for Mrs.  Coates*  A. Well, Mrs. Coates
sent  into  the  room where I  was  for  me.  0.  Sbo
sent  out  of the  back room  into  the front room *
A. Yes, sir.  Q.  How did she send*   A.  Well.  1
think she sent  my sister-in-law, or her own daughter.
Q. She sent for you ;  did you  go in *   A.  I did ; she  .
asked  me if I would not go  to the  corner store, a
saloon, for her; I went to Mr.  Havers.
  By the Court: AYas that the corner store?  A. Yes.
sir.
  Q. Did  she  say what she wanted you  to go  for*
A. Yes, sir 0. AYhat was it?  A. She  wanted  me
to go for some  brandy ; I  went to Air.  Bayers and got
twenty cents worth  of brandy: I got it  with some
peppermint, and I came; home to Mrs. Coates.
   By the  Court :  YYas  the peppermint  put in  the
brandy then, or did you put it  in afterwards*   A. In
the store.
  Q.  AYhat. was done with  it?  A. I gave  her  a
little  of it.  Q. Did she ask you for it *  A. Yes, sir ;
I put the other, that was in the bottle, in a closet  that
stands in the  lower hall.  Q. Did  you see anything
more of  it*   A. I did  not.  Q. Did you  see  any
brandy in  the  back  room, or  front bed room, wdiile
 vou was tliere  *   A. None, except what I brought in.
0. AYhat sort of a store  is  Air. Bayers?  A.  It is a
liquor store, a saloon.  (}.  Grocery store*  A.  No.
 no groceries.  Q. AVhen  you went  up stairs and saw
 Mr. Coates on  AYednesday morning, how did he look *
 A. He was breathing very loud, and  seemed to  be
 distressed with the breathing.  Q.  Do you mean as if  ►
 he was snoring *   A. Yes, a kind  of  hiccough  I
 believe he had.  Q. Did  you notice anything peculiar
 about his  appearance except that*   A. lie  was  very
 warm, looked  very hot and bluish.   Q. AYas he per-
 spiring *   A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you touch him *   A.
 I did.  Q. AYhere *   A.I  put my hand on his fore- 
               DOCTOR  LUND'S TRIAL.            117

head.  Q. Warm ?   A. Yery warm.   Q.  \Yere his
eyes shut, or open ?  A.  Shut.  Q. Did you  notice
whether his appearance changed during the morning *
A. He looked blue when I went in, but on in the day
he did not look so blue.   Q. What time  in the day
did you notice he did not look  so blue?   A. Early in
the morning.   Q. How late in the morning *   A. I
could not say.  Q. Did he look so blue when he died *
A. I don't think he did.
  Q. AYhen Dr. Lund came there, were any physicians
there *  A.  Dr. AYilkinson  and  Dr. Forman were
there, and, I think, Dr. Bock was there.  Q. In the
room with Mr.  Coates ?  A. Yes,  sir  Q.  That was
when he  came tliere about seven o'clock *  A. Yes,
sir.  Q. AVhat^lid they say to Dr. Lund *  A. I don't
remember their saying  anything  to Dr.  Lund.  Q.
You went in right  behind Dr. Lund, did you *  A.
When Dr. Lund came out, I came after  him; I don't
know whether I went in with him or not, but I was
in there when' he was.  Q. Do  you recollect whether
you were  in tliere at the  time Dr. Lund came in, or
not?  A. I think I was; yes, I  wras.  Q. In the room
where  Air. Coates was*   A. Yes, sir.   Q. Did you
hear any of the physicians say anything  about Dr.
Lund, just before he came in *   A.I don't remember
if I did ;  T think I heard some one say,  " Here comes
Dr. Lund ■" which of them it was I don't know, but
some one in  the room said,  k" Here comes Dr. Lund."
Q. Did you hear them  say anything about speaking
to him*'  A. I don't remember anything said.  Q.
Have you talked with any of those physicians  since *
A. Well,  I have talked with Dr. AYilkinson, because
he is our physician, and my husband has been  sick
lately; he has  been  there "pretty much every day.
( ). Talked with him  about this matter ?   A. I think
xvemerelv named it; but I could not tell anything
he talked'about.   Q.  Talked about it often*  A,  Xo, 
118
DOCTOR LIXD S TRIAL.
Q. More than once ?  A. Well, I think the most we
said, was this1—the trial  was coming  on a week ago,
at least we thought so, and I said  if it came off, it
would  be bad if  I  had to go and leave him.   Q.
Have you talked with Dr. Avery about it *  A.  Dr.
Avery  has been  in  our house, but  I don't know that
we  have talked  about it *  Q. Dr.  Avery did  not
attend  you?   A.  No, sir.   Q.  \Yhat did he come for*
A. We called him  in to  see  my  husband ; he  has
been tliere several times ; we might have  talked it
over, but I  don't remember;  we  did  not  like  Dr.
Avery, and we called Dr.  Wilkinson.  Q. Had you
anything else  to  talk about with Dr. Avery, except
the trial of  Dr.  Lund; was tliere anything to bring
him to your house, except the time y<gi called him for
your husband *  A.  No, nothing.

  Re-direct examination by Mr. Garretson :
  Q. What sized bottle was that down stairs that had
brandy in ?  A. It was a soda water bottle.  Q.  That
was the bottle down stairs that you  found standing on
the table *  A. No ; it was a tumbler  standing on the
table down stairs; when I  went out for the  brandy I
took the bottle.   Q.  There was no  bottle at all  down
stairs when  you  gave her the brandy ?  A. No • it
was in a tumbler
  By Mr. Dixon  : How much did you get in the soda
water bottle*  A. Twenty cents worth.  Q. Much?
A. Very little; I asked  for the best  brandy; I told
him Mrs. Coates was sick, and he asked me if I wanted
some peppermint  in  it, and I  told him I thought it
would be good, and he put some into it.

                AAtilliam Welch,
Examined by Mr. Garretson, testified  :
  Q. Where  do you live?   A. Atlantic Street, South
Bergen. 
DOCTOR LUND'S TRIAL.           119
  Q. AYhat relation is the last  witness to you ?   A.
Sister-in-law.
  Q. How near did you live to Mr. Coates ?   A. Next
door.
  Q. Do you  remember the  time he was sick ?   A.
Yes, sir.   Q.  What time did you see him after he was
first taken sick ?  A.  The first I knew of his sickness
was somewhere near ten  o'clock Tuesday night; when
I got home from New York,  my wife told me he had
been very sick, had to send for the doctor, and asked
me to go and see him.   Q. Did  you go and see him?
A.  Yes ; I think it must have been in  the neighbor-
hood of  ten o'clock.   Q. Where did you find  him ?
A.  Upstairs,  in the front room;  when I went in at
the door  I was in darkness; I did  not  know whether
he  was up stairs or down stairs ; I rapped at the door,
and he sung out to come up stairs, and I  went up
stairs; I did  not know where he was, and I  asked,
"Are you  alone, Mr. Coates ?"  says he, " Yes,come
right in here ;" I went in and had a talk with him for
about  twenty-five  minutes, and then went home and
went to bed.
   Q. How did he seem wliile you were there ?  A.
He said  he was sick; he told me he had had the doc-
tors ; that he had had Dr. AYilkinson before that, and
he did not think he was paying  much attention to his
case, and he had quit him and got Dr. Lund.
   Q. AYhat did he complain of?   A. He complained,
I think,  of his bowels ;  I did  not think he was a very
sick man ; I thought he  was more nervous and fidgety
than anything else.
   Q When did you  see him next? A. About  tour
o'clock in the morning; I said, when I saw the state
he was in, 'k AYhv didn't you call me sooner  * the man
is dyino-  send for a doctor immediately,"  and some-
body said, " Dr. AYilkinson ;" I went out  and down
the plank road, when it jumped into my head, that he 
1^(1            DOCTOR LIXDS TRIAL.
told me the night before that he had quit  Wilkinson
and had u'ot Dr. Lund; I went  back, and on my wax-
back I met James Kelly, and he told me to get Wil-
kinson,  so I went for Wilkinson and roused him.  Q.
Where did you find him *   A. I think he was in bed.
  Q.  How did Mr.  Coates appear when you went in
first *   A. lie appeared to me to be a dying man.  Q.
AYhat color was his  face?   A. It was a bluish  color.
(,). How was he  breathing?  A. He was breathing
pretty hard.   Q. What time did he die *   A.  I  think
it was a little after twelve.
  <).  Did you see  Dr. Lund there*  A.  I saw him
down stairs on the stoop.  <<>. AVliat time *  A.  Well,
it was after these doctors  had been there,  for I saw
him  then talking with Lizzie  Coates.  Q. Did you
hear what he said ?  A. I heard him ask her what
became of the rest of the powders ; she said they were
up stairs, and that he wished to get them to preserve
them, or for something of that kind  ; I passed on and
went up stairs, and  she came directly up after me.
   By the Court :  State precisely whafThe did say *  A.
That is, as near as  I can recollect, that he wished to
preserve them.
   By the Court: State again  all  that he said *  A.
She asked  Dr. AYilkinson what  he had done with the
powders; he said,"A\rho  wants them*" she said
Dr.  Lund wanted  to preserve them ;  he said,  "  We
will save hint the trouble,  we will do it for him."
   Q. AAHiere did Dr. Lund go after he said this at the
door*  A. I don't know, sir.   Q.  Did  you see him
up stairs before you  saw him  downstairs?  A. X"o,
sir.

   Cross-examination, by Mr. Dixon :
   Q. AAThere  were you  when  Lizzie and  the  Doctor
 were talking on the stoop *  A. I was passing, going
 out the door.  Q. Did you stop ?   A.  Xo. sir. 
DOCTOR LUND'S TRIAL.
121
  Q. Did you notice whether Mr. Coates continued to
look bluish until he died ?  A. I cannot say whether
he continued in that  same state all the time or not ;
he was not a good color all the time ; but  whether he
was as bad up to his death, I could  not swear to it.
  Q.  You  sav  he was  fidgety *   A. Yes, sir.   Q.
What  do you  mean by that?   A.  I thought he was
kind o' cankered when he  hollowed to me to " come
right  up here;" he  says,  "Aly  folks don't think
enough of  me  to stay in the house with  me," and I
think he was a  little put out at the  time.
   Q.  How  long had  you known Air. Coates ?  A. It
will be four years next April.
   Bv  the  Court: What  was the particular business
Mr. Coates had to do ?  A.  He run a  dummy  engine
on the Cunard  dock.
   Bv the Court: That is hoisting  *  A. Yes, a hoist-
ino- apparatus; he  had another man, a foreman, who
knew the  business as well  as  he  did, and he could
 trust him with it.
               Mrs.  Mart Noon an.
 Examined bv Mr. Garretson, testified :
   I live in "Jersey City, foot of Madison Avenue.  Q.
 Do you remember the  time Mr Coates  died ?   A. I
 heard tell  of it.  Q. Was  vour husband sick about
 that   time? A. Yes, sir.  Q. Who  attended him*
  V  Dr Lund.   Q.  On  Tuesday night, near  the
 twentieth of Julv. or on Tuesday, during the clay,
 did he call to see your husband*  A.  I  went tor
 him  between  twelve and one. Tuesday.   t>. Did he
 come *  A. Yes, sir.   Q. What did he  prescribe for
 your husband  *  A. Well, I could  not say, but he gave
 me a prescription.   Q. AYhat did you do  with it ?  A
 I went to  Air. Gardner's drug store.  Q What did
 von  get *  A. I got a liquid  in  a bottle for it.  Q
 Did  vou see  the Doctor  again*  A. Yes,  sir.  Q.
0 
122
DOCTOR LUNn's  TRIAL.
What time *  A. As near as I  can think, it was be-
tween ten and twelve at night.   Q. At the time you
got the first prescription, what else did you get?  A.
Nothing  else.  Q.  AYhen he came between ten and
twelve at night, what did he do * , A. He gave me
the same prescription.   Q.  AArhat did you do then *
A. I went and got the same bottle renewed.  Q. A\rhat
else did he give you *   A.  Nothing else.   Q. A\That
did he say when he was at your house between ten
and twelve* A. T  could  not  tell you what conver-
sation he had  with my husband, for 1 was  not  in
when he came.  Q. Did he have any conversation
with you *   A.  He made some remarks.   Q. What
were they?   A. Something about my husband being
under the influence of licpior at the time.   Q. Any-
thing else *  A.  Xo, sir, not  as I  remember.  Q.
When  did  you  see him next *  A. I never had any-
more  conversation  with him ;  to my knowledge he
was never in the house again.  Q. He did not come
there again *  A. No, sir, not to  my knowledge,  nor
I did not go after him when he came that night.
  By the Court: You say you went for him the first
time*  A. Y^es, sir.
  B}T the Court:  Did he then go to your house ?  A.
Yes, in a few minutes afterwards.
  By the Court:  He then gave • you  a prescription *
A. Yes, sir
  Q. And  then came to your house again between
ten and twelve at night?  A. Yes, as near  as I can
say.

  Cross-examination by Mr. Dixon :
  Q. Did Dr. Lund ever attend in your family before *
A.  No, sir.  Q.  AA'hat  was the matter with your
husband?   A.  I could not say.  Q.  He had been
drinking*  A. AA7"ell, he was not at  the time when
Dr. Lund left him, but he was  afterwards.  (}. He 
DOCTOR LUND'S  TRIAL.           123
had been  drinking  some time previous to that *   A.
Yes, sir.   Q. Drinking pretty hard?   A. I suppose
so ;  it is pretty hard to say.  Q. What was the matter
with him  when you went for  Dr. Lund on Tuesday ?
A.  I could not say ; if I knew I would not have to go
for  a doctor.  Q. Don't you think it was because he
had been drinking *  A. I don't know, sir.  Q. Do you
ever drink *  A.  I  drink tea and coffee sometimes.
Q.  Ever  drink liquor *  A. No,  sir.   Q. Never
drink *  A. AYell, if I need it  I suppose.   Q. Do you
need  it often*  A.  No, sir, if  I did  I suppose  I
would.
  By the Court:  The  question  is whether you do
drink ?  A. No, sir, I don't.
  Q. Have you children ?  A. No, sir   Q. How long
have  you  been married *  A. Thirteen years.  Q.
Ever  had children?  A. No, sir.  Q. What is your
husband's business *   A. Carting.  Q. He drank after
Dr. Lund was tliere with the  medicine ?   A. Oh, yes.
Q.  You did not go for him when he came on Tuesday
night'?  A. No, sir,  I did not.  Q. Did you send for
him ?  A.  No, sir.   Q. Where were  you when he
came*  A. I was away for some water.   Q. Try  and
recollect whether you saw him  in  your house that
evening, or Avhether it was .not by the gate you  saw
him *  A. I sawr him in both places; the conversation
that Dr. Lund and I had, was at  our gate, in  regard
to  drinking.  Q.  Had you taken anything to drink
that day *  A. No, sir.  Q. AYhen did your husband
commence to drink?  A. Not till after the Doctor
was with  him.  Q.  At noon ? A. Yes,  sir.  Q. Was
he  pretty bad  at night when the Doctor came ?  A.
AYell,  he  was.  Q.  Bretty wild? A. Yes, sir.,  Q.
Do you know when  last he  drank before the Doctor
came*  A. No, sir, I could not say.  Q.  Had he been
out ?   A. Xo,  sir.   Q. AVhat he  had  taken, he  had
taken  in  the'  house?  A. Yes,   sir.  Q. AYhen  the 
124
DOCTOR LUXD's  TRIAL.
Doctor came, was there any liquor in the house*  A.
Yres, sir;  but he did not have more at the time.  Q.
Do you recollect how long before the Doctor came in
that night, that he had had liquor*   A. I could not
say ; I judge he was taking it  pretty often.
  By the  Court: How long before ? A. I could not say.
  By the Court: More  than four hours, or less *  A.
It was less than four.
  Q. Before the Doctor came in*  A. Yes, sir.
  By the Court:  Lie was drinking all  along you say *
A.  Yes, sir, drinking all along that afternoon.
  Q.  AYhere  had the  liquor been procured *    A.
Jersey City, I believe.   Q. AYhat was  your husband's
name? A. Michael.
  By the  Court: AYhen the Doctor was there the second
time, did  he say anything to you about your having
been there for him that night ?   A. I forget, indeed.
  By the Court:  Just recollect  it ?  A.  I could not
say, indeed; I suppose he made a mistake in coming,
for I did  not see him, or go after him.
  By the  Court :  Was  anything  said  about  your
having been there  after him that night ?  A. Not to
my recollection.
  By the Court: Either to you  or to  your husband *
A.  I don't know, sir;  I  don't remember if he said
anything  to me about it.
  Q. AYhere is your husband?   A.  Tke dear only
knows; I don't  know  where  he is  now.  Q.  Is he
about here *  A. He may be around some place.  Q.
He was  home to breakfast this  morning *  A. Yes
sir ; I could not exactly tell where he is now.   Q. He
is a little uncertain I  suppose?   A.  Sometimes.  Q.
Is your husband  a large man ?  A. Yes, sir.  Q. Over
six feet is'nt he *  A. AY ell. I  don't know the length
of him, I never measured him.
The State here  rented. 
DOCTOR LUXD's TRIAL,
125
  Col. AVm. E. Rogers opened the case on the part of
the defense, by stating a few facts he hoped to prove.
The defendant occupied  to  himself  the doubly dear
position of client and of valued friend ; the jury had per-
haps gathered, from the line of cross-examination pur-
sued,  an idea of the course which the defense were go-
ing to take ;  he claimed that the present trial was, in
reality, a  prosecution on  the part of jealous rivals, a
conspiracy to injure  the defendant's reputation;  he
had little  doubt in his own mind, but that  a motion
made here to take the case from  the jury would pre-
vail ;  his  client, however, wished more than a mere
acquittal;  he wished to  show  his  friends  and  the
public all the facts, from  the very first  day when  he
was summoned  to the bedside of a  dying  man, and
found there his bitterest enemies, being met on their
part with cold looks and averted faces; he desired to
show how the same evidences of malignity and hatred
followed him to the Coroner's Inquest; by some leger-
demain, not yet understood, one of his most important
witnesses was not allowed  to  testify;  the  one-sided
medical, testimony, with  no opportunity of eliciting
truth or shaking falsehood by cross-examination, was
all so strong that  the  only result was a verdict of
o-uiltv; here,  at length, before  an able and impartial
judge and an intelligent jury, he hoped for justice, and
expected  to  prove that John  D. Coates did not die
from  an over dose of morphine.

                Dr.  Joseph Palmer,
Examined by Col. Rogers, testified :
   I live  in Bergen, and have been an allopathic phy-
sician thirty-five years ; I am practicing now, although
I was not during the Inquest;  I saw Air. Coates about
nine  o'clock the morning of his death ;  tliere were no
physicians with him at that time; he was sitting in  a
rockin<>--chair, his  face  flushed, warm and moist skin. 
126
DOCTOR LL'Xd's TRIAL.
nnd  a slow, full, regular pulse, being perhaps sixty-
five beats to the minute;  his mouth and tongue were
moist, the latter having a slight fur; nothing was
being done for him at that time;  Dr Lewis and my-
self then went  round to where  Dr. Bock lived, and
asked him where the doctors were ; he said they had
gone  home, but would be back  at about ten o'clock ;
we then went back to Air. Coates; the physicians got
there about half-past ten o'clock ; I think I asked them
if they had given stimulants ; they said they had not,
because he could not swallow; the question was then
asked, if  in that case, they could not be injected into
the bowels ; I think they then sent for some whiskey;
I remained there  until  about one o'clock, but saw
nothing done for Mr. Coates.
  I next  saw him  at the post-mortem ; the brain was
congested, and  one of the lateral ventricles contained
bloody serum, there being as much or more blood as
serum ; the lateral ventricles are  connected ; the brain
was not sliced very carefully, not enough to determine
with  absolute certainty  that there was no effusion ;
the lungs were  much*congested  and very adherent to
the walls  of the chest; the crepitation of the  lungs
was  not so distinct as in health  ; the liver was much
enlarged, and the gall bladder filled with a dirty, yel-
lowish, milky fluid;  the  cystic  duct was  completely
closed up; an  attempt was made to find  an opening
with a small probe, but it did not succeed, and the duct
being opened with the knife was found entirely closed ;
the effect of the adhesion of the lungs would be the
same in effect as tying down a blacksmith's bellows;
it would prevent the admission of  as much air as in
health, and so the blood would not get all  the oxygen
it needs;  the carbonic acid in  the blood  also not es-
caping entirely, would tend to poison the blood, retard
the circulation  and so  cause congestion; all these
causes working together,  would obstruct the return of 
DOCTOR LTX'd's TRIAL.
127
l/ieo'd  from the head, the congestion would increase
and apoplexy  would be the result ;  I don't know how
the bloody serum could be found in the brain, except
from  the rupture of some small vessel ; that would
cause apoplexy and death ; there can be apoplexy and
after  death no trace whatever of  it  be found, so it
does not necessarily mean an effusion of blood in the
brain ; the pus in the gall bladder could be absorbed,
and  of course would have a material effect upon the
blood ;  it would  poison the  blood, and not going  to
the extent of causing absolute pyaemia would still be-
numb  the  brain, paralyze the heart, retard the circu-
lation, cause  congestion, apoplexy and death; the
serum of pus is as poisonous as the pus itself, and the
serum is  the part that would be likely to be  absorbed ;
the absorption of the  pus can cause a great many
things : peritonitis, pleurisy, congestion  of the brain,
multiple  abscesses, erysipelas  and boils; I  have seen
cases of narcotic poisoning; in one  case a man took as
much  as twelve  grains of opium;   I found him with
cold extremities, pulse feeble and  quick, and  all the
appearances of a  dying man ; he was entirely insen-
sible and could not  be  aroused;  I  gave him some
brandy, of the kind called cider brandy ;  I  put some
on his tongue, and although  he could  not swallow,
still in a few moments it went down his throat of itself;
it was entirely involuntary on his part; he recovered.
  Another case, a woman was poisoned by lobelia,
and  I  found  her in  a state of  coma, pulseless and no
sign  of beating in the heart:  I gave her brandy and
she finally recovered ;  in  other cases I  applied the
same remedies with  the same  results; the  difference
between the symptoms of apoplexy and narcotic poi-
soning, are a smaller and more rapid pulse in the latter
than'in the former, and  also  a drier skin; I  should
also  expect  in poisoning by opiates a dry mouth and
tomrue : it was moist in Mr. Coates ; my theory of the 
128
DOCTOR LTHSTD'S TRIAL.
 cause of death in his case was this, the lungs did not
 properly oxygenate the blood, and absorption of some
 of the serum of the pus contained in the gall bladder
 still more poisoned the blood; the result was a conges-
 tion of the brain, gradually increasing,  all  the vital
 forces  being clogged by the stagnating blood, until
 death  came;  I should not  under Ordinary circum-
 stances, as  in a strong man accustomed to the use of
 tobacco and suffering severe pain, consider a grain of
 morphine as a dangerous dose.
  I have given myself four large teaspoonsful of lauda-
 num in an hour, a teaspoonful at a dose;  a teaspoon-
 ful of  laudanum  contains one  hundred  and twenty
 drops,  equal to almost five  grains of opium or  one
 grain of morphine ; it had very happy effects ; I have
 always been in the habit of giving my own medicines,
 and to measure them out by the eye, and could do it
 with the utmost accuracy; I do not think that in put-
 ting up two powders of morphine,  side by side, from
 one bottle,  that they would vary one-sixteenth in size ;
 I have given morphine in two-third grain doses, once
 m four hours, for  three days at a time; I had become
 so accustomed to  measuring it out  by the eye, that I
 could  shake it out in papers, and then equalize the
 powders by the eye,  so that  there would be no differ-
 ence in their weight; if a person had taken a grain of
 morphine and gone to  sleep, slept for awhile,  and
 then woke up of his own accord, asked for a drink  and
 talked  intelligently, I should not  expect he would go
 to sleep again from the morphine, but should consider
 that its effect as  a narcotic  had ceased ; if after that,
 the person  should go into a coma, I should  look for
 some  other cause of the  coma; I  am the father-in-
law of Dr.  Lund, and attended the post-mortem as a
friend  of Dr. Lund's, to see that he met with  fair
treatment. 
DOCTOR LTJND's TRIAL.
129
  Cross-examined by Mr. Garretson :
  I resumed practice four or five weeks ago, by myself
and  not in connection with  Dr.  Lund;  I was  living
with Dr. Lund at the time of Air. Coates' death ; I
commenced practice  with  my  father,  in  Ashford,
Conn., having graduated in medicine at New Haven ;
I then practiced three and a half years in Eastford
and  twenty-nine  and a  half years in Canterbury,
Conn. ; I first heard of the trouble by hearing it talked
over either by Dr. Lund or Dr. Lewis at the house; it
was about  eight o'clock, but I am not sure about the
exact time  ; it was about nine o'clock when we went
to Air Coates', but I am not sure what makes me
know the exact time, whether I  looked at my watch
or the clock in the house;  Dr. Lewis went with me  to
the house ; I do not think that I knew the  house  or
where to go, but think Dr. Lewis knew the way ; I
don't know how far Air. Coates'  house was  from Dr.
Lund's, but if I must guess the distance, should-say a
thousand feet;  I  don't remember who were in the
room,  but  there were some  members  of the  family
there * Air. Coates' breathing was stertorous, and the
pupils' of his eves were dilated ;  I could not say how
much  dilated "they  were, or  their size, for  I cannot
think of anything"to compare them to.
  Air Dixon here handed the witness apiece of paper
and pencil, suggesting that he should show the size of
the pupils by a diagram.   He did so, representing by
two  circles the natural pupil, and the pupil  dilated  as
seen in Mr. Coates'  eye.
  I  cannot give an estimate of  the size of  the pupil,
although I do  consider myself  expert  in measuring
quantities bv the eye; but  in  medicine it is the den-
sity  we look at; the difference in the pupils depends,
naturally,  upon the amount of light  or shade ma
room ; the opening of the eye suddenly, in Mr Coates
case, might have an effect upon  the size of  the pupil, 
130            DOCTOR LUND'S  TRIAL.

but the effect would be to make it smaller, if there
was any effect;  but as the optic nerve seemed para-
lyzed, the light  would  not probably have  any effect
upon it;  I did not try and see whether Mr.  Coates
could swallow or not, but believe he could,  from what
I have seen in my own practice; if we  put  a liquid in
the mouth of a  person on his back,  it is very  apt to
run down  his throat; I don't know that his pulse did
differ very materially from the pulse of a healthy per-
son ;  I  did not then form any opinion as to the cause
of his condition, although he resembled  very much one
or two cases of persons I had seen struck by apoplexy ;
my treatment in cases of apoplexy used to be bleeding,
or giving purgatives to remove the congestion of the
brain, but I never gave stimulants in apoplexy;  I
recommended stimulants, not from an}7 impression I had
received  from the appearance of the man, but if they
were treating him with the honest supposition that he
was poisoned by morphine, I wanted to know why one
of the best remedial agents was not employed;  nor
had I then fully made up my  mind what the trouble
was,  so  that I would not  say  that  I was  advis-
ing a remedy for  one trouble when  I thought  he
had  another; I did not make my mind up until
after the  post-mortem examination  ;  if I had then
not seen  him at all before, and knew  nothing more
about the case  than what I  then saw, I should not
have thought brandy a  proper  remedy,  because I
should  have considered the brain trouble of the kind
that  would  have  contra-indicated it; I   had  heard
that morphine had been given ; I don't think I even
recommended  brandy  to be  given, but asked if  it
had been given, as  it is such a good remedy in opium
poisoning; I did not  suggest either bleeding or the
use of  purgatives ;  I do not think  I  recommended
anything,  but only asked if  certain  things had been
tried;  I  'don't  know,  however, as the remedy  for 
doctor lund's trial.
131
apoplexy occurred to me at all at that  time, nor do
I say that  I  then  even thought he  was suffering
from apoplexy ;  I think now  that I went from Mr.
Coates', with  Dr.  Lewis,  over  to Dr. Bock's, and
with them  back to Air. Coates' again,  but whatever
I testified to  before the Coroner is more likely to be
correct, as being nearer the time of the occurrences ;
so probably,  as I- testified then that I went from Dr.
Bock's, home to Dr. Lund's, and then from Dr. Lund's
to Air. Coates'  again,  that is probably the correct
statement of  the case; what  I swore  to  before the
Coroner was more probably correct, than my recollec-
tion now; Dr. Bock lived near Mr. Coates' and about
the  same distance from Dr. Lund's' house ; when we
got there the second time, there were no doctors there :
they came about half past ten o'clock ; I don't remem-
ber  whether anything  was said  in regard to what
remedies were used ; the galvanic battery was sent for
soon after  the doctors' return ; Air. Coates had been
removed into an adjoining room ;  I remained by my-
self in the front  room, and did not go with the other
doctors into the other room ;  as I testified before the
Coroner that it  was about one o'clock when I left,
that is probably right; so  I was tliere two and a half
hours, doing nothing, and did  not see Mr. Coates after
lie was removed into the other room ;  I )r. Lurid and
Dr. Lewis went away after the  other doctors came ;
they had not done anything I  know of for Air Coates.
   I do not know when I examined the pupil, whether
belladonna had been  given or not, but it is  my im-
pression that it had been.  The effect of belladonna is
to dilate the pupil, and opium to  contract it.   In apo-
plexy  the pupil1 mav be either contracted  or dilated.
 The' condition of the pupil,  therefore, is  no certain
 test.  The symptoms of opium poisoning are drowsi-
 ness,  stupor,'  coma, death  ; also dryness of skin  and
 mouth.   It  also lowers  the volume  of  the  pulse. 
132
DOCTOR LUXd's TRIAL.
There  might  be  in  the first  place a flush upon  the
skin, but when coma comes on, we  then have pale-
ness.  The breathing would be stertorous, and lessened
in number, say  about twelve  to  a minute.   The
symptoms of apoplexy are stertorous breathing, a dark
flush in skin, and a depressed state of the system.   I
would  not  here  expect a  small quick  pulse.  The
difference between the symptoms of morphine poison-
ing and  apoplexy, are  the  absence  of that purplish
hue in the former, that we have in the latter;  also in
the latter we have? a moister skin.  The pupil in mor-
phine poisoning is more generally contracted, and in
apoplexy  more generally dilated.  Apoplexy, speak-
ing generally, is congestion  of  the brain, with  or
without  effusion  of  the blood,  .or  serum,  or both.
Tliere  have even  been cases of apoplexy, where there
was no congestion visible, nothing to show the cause
of death ;  I can  imagine a  case where from some
cause  there may  be  an impression upon, or  de-
pression  of  the brain, which would  cause apoplexy.
It might perhaps be, that a sudden rush of blood  to
the head would prove fatal.  I think I  remember a
case  where  a  man  of  apopletic habits,  on sudden
exertion, or bending  over, immediately died.  I think
there was a  post-mortem, but am not sure.  Have not
a very  clear idea where the serum in serous apoplexy
comes from ; cannot tell how the serum gets separated
from the blood.  Morphine affects the system through
the blood.   Cannot name  the particular  arteries
which  supply  blood  to  the  brain, as I  have of late
years forgotten much of the minutne of anatomy.  Am
not very familiar  with belladonna, only I know it is
very poisonous,  and  dilates the  pupil.   Think the
blood at the post-mortem was fluid,  but  not particu-
larly well marked.  The left ventricle  of the brain
contained bloody  serum, and I think that there was
more blood than serum.  The  liver was enlarged, but 
DOCTOR LUND S TRIAL.
133
saW no  particular  disease about it.   Am not positive
whether the gall bladder was much enlarged  or not,
and forget what I testified before  the Coroner's Jury
on  this point.  The effect of the adhesions upon  the
lungs would be an indirect one.   They would  pre-
vent the lungs from expanding properly, taking in the
usual amount of air, and, therefore,  the  blood would
not receive  as  much oxygen as it ought to, and the
venous   blood  would  not  be entirely  changed  to
arterial.  Tubercles also prevent the  whole amount of
air from being inhaled.  I think that^ the poisonous
part of  pus  is  the serum.  Pyaemia is a general name
for poisoning by pus.  I know that we can have boils
from  it, as  I once accidentally cut myself at  a post-
mortem, and had after it about twenty-five boils upon
the arm of the  hand that was cut.   If I had ten grains
of morphine in a bottle, I think I  could  measure  out
one grain very  accurately.   I never gave one grain of
morphine itself, at a dose;  think  it  would be safe in
some cases, and dangerous  in others.   If I had  a
severe case  of  cholera-morbus, should not hesitate to
give one grain at a dose, and not weigh it out.  In
the case I alluded to where  I gave  the  laudanum,  if
the pain had come  on  again, 1 should not have hesi-
itated to have sent one grain of morphine, and  not
gone myself.  If I had  not  seen the man before,  and
knew nothing  of his  constitution, I  should  not of
course do so.  One visit, however, would be enough
to teach me his constitution, and what he would bear.
If he had congestion of the lungs, it  would make  the
risk  greater.  Do  not  remember where I saw   Dr.
Lund the morning Mr. Coates died.

  Re-direct examination by Mr. Dixon:
  Morphine  is a  proper prescription, for a man with
delirium tremens, even in two grain doses.  I think
Dr. Lund was  sick  at that time.  I gave him both
advice and medicine. 
131
DOCTOR LlJXD S  TRIAL.
  Mr.  Garretson :  Was he attending to his practice
then?  A.  Yes, sir.
  By the Court: Do yon  remember anything about
this particular night ?   A.I heard the bell, and think
I called the colored boy myself, as his room was next
to mine, to go down to the door  Q. "Where does the
Doctor keep his medicines ? A. In the room occupied
by Dr.  Lewis.  Q. Wras Dr. Lewis at home that night?
A. I think he was.

  Dr. J. J. Craven was  here called,  but  did not re-
spond.
  Col.  Rogers complained to  the Court of the diffi-
culty experienced  by the  defense  in procuring the
presence of physicians of the old school, for the pur-
pose of getting their testimony.  He then read the
following affidavit:

State of New Jersey, )
  Hudson County.   )
  "Wm. H. Barrett,  being duly sworn, on his oath
saith, that on this 12th day of December, 1870, about
the  hour of 9:30, in the forenoon, at  Jersey City, in
said County,  he served a copy of the within subpoena
on Dr.  J. J. Craven, personally, by handing the said
copy to the- said Craven, and  leaving the  same with
him, at the  same  time  showing  him the  within
original, and  at the same  time  handing to the said
Craven the witness fee of fifty cents.  That the said
Craven  remarked  at the time deponent served upon
him the said subpoena, that he should not come.
                               Wm. H. Barrett.
  Sworn to before me this 12th )
day of  December, 1870.       (
        Albert S. Cloke.

  Col.  Rogers then asked for an execution against
Dr.  Craven, to compel his attendance. 
DOCTOR LUND'S TRIAL.            135
  By the Court:  In this case, it is proper to use com-
pulsory force to  oblige the witness to come;  it shall,
therefore, be done.

              Dr.  James W. Elliot,
Examined by Mr. Dixon, testified:
  I am an allopathic physician of twenty-two years
practice; I do not know Dr. Lund.  My practice has
been  in New York.  I have followed  this case as it
came out.  Morphine is generally used to allay nervous
irritability, inflammation, pain, and to cause sleep.
  Q.  Doctor, if  you had a man  with severe pain, and
you should give him one-half or one grain of morphine,
and he should become  quieted, sleep  an hour or so,
and then wake  up, be  rational,  converse about his
business, remain  awake twenty or thirty minutes, and
take  a drink of tea, would you then consider there
was any danger  from the  morphine?   A.  Certainly
not.
  Witness  continued :  If the stomach  were ^ empty
when it was taken, in ten or fifteen minutes  nineteen
twentieths of it would be absorbed ;  if its effects  were
to be fatal it would be  continuous in its action ; the
sleep that supervened would be unending, unless some
strong means were used; you could then get some signs
of life, but not an intelligible state, so as to  carry on
a conversation ;  I  frequently have given a  grain;  I
have even known a two years old child to take three and
a half grains of morphine by mistake,  and  yet live;
my practice in giving large doses is to give one grain
first, and then repeat one-half grain doses, at intervals
of every half hour  as long as was necessary; I never
staid  myself to give it or see it given ; I have known
one ounce doses of laudanum (960 drops) to have been
frequently used  for suicidal purposes, but never suc-
cessfully when remedies were afterwards used;  I re-
member a  case where one-half ^an ounce of laudanum 
136            doctor lund's trial.

was taken to commit suicide, and I recommended that
it be allowed to work, fearing no danger, in order to
cure the person of his suicidal tendency ;  there are
full six grains of morphine in one ounce of laudanum ;
in actual  practice  there is really seven grains equiva-
lent ; this is not according to the books,  but they ex-
aggerate the strength of  morphine very much ;  from
one-half to one grain of morphine is an ordinary dose
for a man in pain ; for a strong, robust, laboring man,
threatened with  delirium tremens, I should give from
two  to  three grains at a time;  in  some cases would
have  to repeat the dose; never gave less  than  ten
drops, or one-half of a grain, of Magendie's Solution at
a time for the relief of pain.
  Mr. Dixon: If after the train of symptoms I have
already given to you, the  man should again go to sleep,
become  comatose,  have livid skin,  profuse  perspira-
tion, cold  surface, contracted pupils, inability to swal-
low,  with a slow and full pulse, and then have  eight
grains of belladonna injected into his system, and die
in nine hours, then  after death be kept upon  ice,
and the post-mortem  should show  congestion of the
body, bloody serum in one  of the  ventricles of  the
brain, small  lungs bound  down by adhesions, enlarged
liver, distended gall bladder, filled  with  decomposed
pus, closure of cystic duct, striations of colon, containing
impacted faecal matter, would you think he died from
morphine or from some other cause  ?  A.  From some
other cause undoubtedly.  Q. What other cause ?  A.
Some poisoning  of the blood, perhaps  from  absorbed
pus; that  would cause apoplexy.  A.  Do the symp-
toms indicate apoplexy ?  A. No, sir,  the symptoms
before death  do not, except the collapsed condition of
apoplexy; but from  the  post-mortem  appearances
should say decidedly he died from apoplexy  • I have
seen  contraction of the  pupil frequently  in apoplexy.
especially  in simple apoplexy ;  there  is  no general 
doctor luxd's trial.
137
rule about it;  in the later stages of morphine poison-
ing or apoplexy, there  is very little difference in the
symptoms of either; in the early stages  should have
a fuller and more regular pulse, and a more congested
condition  of the skin in apoplexy ; the bloody serum
found in the ventricle of the brain was the main cause
of death in this case;  in narcotic poisoning the post-
mortem congestion is not well marked as it was here,
but it is in apoplexy; in pyaemia the fragility of the liver
is not even common ;  I have seen a great many cases
where  it was absent; I do  not consider belladonna an
antidote to morphine ;  it relieves the symptoms, as in
dilating the pupil of the eye, but it does not have any
influence over the case;  it would be very injurious in
apoplexy.

  Cross-examined by Mr. Garretson :
  I never saw Mr. Coates ; I have a general  practice,
and am now in practice; morphine affects the system
by controlling muscular contractility; Dover's powders
contain opium, ipecacuanha and sulphate of potash ; I
have given sixty grains of it  at a dose, ec[ual to six
grains  of opium, equal to one and a half grains of mor-
phine,  as proved from actual practice and not from the
books ; in pain I do not give over one grain of mor-
phine,  but  in  delirium  tremens giveniore;  books in
many cases  are wrong; in severe pain I should give
one 'grain first, and  then repeat one-half grain every
half hour,   as  long as  the pain lasted;  if I repeated
such a dose every fifteen minutes, I  should remain
with the patient, but should not do so if 1 did not re-
peat it any oftener than once every half hour;  if I had
seen the patient a short time before, I should not hesi-
tate, if it was indicated, to send one grain of morphine
without seeing the patient, if  I gathered from the
messenger  his present  condition;  neither should I
hesitate to  repeat the dose ; if I knew he was suffering 
138
DOCTOR LUND's TRIAL.
from congestion of the lungs, I should not, however, do
so; I have given, though, one-half grain doses in con-
gestion  of the lungs, for pain accompanying it; we
have to here use more care, as the vital powers are not
as strong as when tliere is no lung trouble; this is not.
however, because the morphine would tend to produce
the congestion, but because it affects the muscles of
respiration; apoplexy is  congestion, with or without
an  effusion  in the organ; congestion is  the filling of
the vessels with a liquid, and its remaining there ; apo-
plexy may be  a result of the condition of the blood ;
if tliere was a tendency to apoplexy, morphine  might
assist that  tendency ; morphine can  be found in the
body after  death, even when it has been given in a
very small dose; if only one-sixteenth of a grain was
given this might be true.
  By Mr. Garretson: Suppose you found a man suf-
fering from these symptoms : the pupils contracted to
the size of a pin's head, surface blue and livid, cold
perspiration, stertorous  breathing, respiration twelve
to a minute, pulse slow and full, what would it indi-
cate ?  A. Congestion;  the  respiration  being twelve
to a minute, would lead me to believe that it was
not narcotic poisoning.
  Witness  continued : If I  knew that he had  taken
morphine, should act  on the supposition that he was
poisoned by morphine, but  should  not  think he was
poisoned by one grain ;  I consider it impossible for
one grain of morphine  to kill ; should not  think it
could, even if  the  lungs were weak ;  should think
there  was more than  one grain of morphine, or that
some other  narcotic  had been given / the condition
of the lungs would not have much influence upon
the size of the dose.
  Q. Has there been cases  where morphine has  not
acted  in fifteen minutes ?   A.  If  we do not have
coma  in  one-half an  hour,  I do not think we will 
DOCTOR LUXD's TRIAL.            139
have it at all ; I do not think that there are any cases
so recorded.
  Mr.  Garretson   referred the  witness  to  Beck's
Medical  Jurisprudence, second  volume,  page 790,
where  twenty-five  grains  of  morphine  were taken,-
and the appearance of coma  delayed.
  Mr.  Dixon then  turned to  the place  himself,  and
remarked, after  reading the case quoted,  " Yes,  Mr.
Garretson, but if you will  read a little further in  this
case you will see that the man recovered.
  Mr.  Garretson to witness : How many cases of mor-
phine  poisoning have you  seen ?   A.I cannot ex-
actly say,  but in twenty-two years' practice have seen
perhaps from fifty to a hundred ;  I think, out of that
number, five or ten have been fatal, in all of which I
saw a  post-mortem : there was very little congestion
present in these  cases.
  Q. How many cases of pyaemia have you ever had ?
A. It  is hard  to tell; I have seen about twelve fatal
cases.
  Q. Has the pus  in  these cases ever been absorbed
from a cavity?   A, Yes, sir ; in several cases ; in  one
case the pus' came from an  abscess in the liver, and in
another, from the uterus.
  Q. Did you ever know a case where it was absorbed
from the gall bladder ?   A. No,  sir.   Q. What is the
probability of its coming from that place ?  A.  There
is not the  slightest doubt but  that it could ; the  fact
of the bloody effusion in the brain is a strong point to
show he died from poisoning of  the  blood  by pus;  if
I had not  seen the pus in  the gall bladder,  but  had
seen the rest of the post-mortem, I  should have  said
he died of pyaemia, or uraemia, from the presence in
that place of' the bloody serum ; that is my first  rea-
son why I  do not think lie died from morphine; second,
the rapiditv of the breathing is a strong point against
that supposition ; third, the general congestion-; fourth, 
140            DOCTOR LCXd's TRIAL.

the time of giving the poison and his arousing himself.
In pyaunia persons  may  die with coma :  nine, out of
the twelve I saw, died comatose; the pain in the head
is usually  sharp and severe ; we usually look for fra-
gility of the liver in death from pyaemia, but seldom
find it; I did  not  find it in  one half my cases; I
should  not think there could  be a question  about
the man's  not having been poisoned, if  he woke up of
himself.
  By Mr.  Dixon : Doctor, in your practice, have you
ever  mistaken  individuals and  gone  to the  wrong
house ?  A. Yes, frequently, especially at night.
  Q.  If you had seen two women, both in  the common
walks of life, thereby resembling each other in dress
and manner, for the first time, the previous day, while
attending  their husbands and paying  no  attention  to
the women themselves, and one of them should come
to your house  late at  night, give  no name,  street  or
number, simply say, my husband is worse, come and
see  him, would it be strange if yon should  make a  mis-
take by confounding one with the other ?
  Question objected to, and objection sustained.

             Dr. F.  B.  Mandeville,
Examined by Mr. Dixon, testified :
  I  am  a homoeopathic  physician,  residing  at 940
Broad street,  Newark ; have known Dr.  Lund three
years; I am familiar with the effects of morphine, and
have used  it in my practice ; the largest  dose  I  ever
gave was three  grains, in  a case of sciatica;  the pa-
tient was a female;  I would not  consider one grain
as  probably  fatal, when  a person  has  pain ; there is
never any  remission in the sleep if the  case is fatal.
  Q.  If you had a man  with severe pain, and  you
should give  him one-half or one grain of morphine,
and  he should become quieted, sleep  an hour or so,
and  the«  wake up, be rational,  converse about his 
               DOCTOR LUXD's TRIAL.            141

business, remain awake twenty or thirty minutes, and
take a drink of tea, would you then consider that tliere
was  any danger  from the morphine?  A. I  should
think the effect had gone away.
  Q. Are you familiar with apoplexy '.   A.  I  am;
tliere are three kinds—the first and second having a
sanguineous or serous effusion, and the third no effu-
sion at all; in all there is a tendency to coma, dryness
of the fauces and dilation of the pupils.
  Witness continued : Usual dose of  Magendie's So-
lution  is from five  to ten drops, and in severe cases
even more.
  A prescription  was here  shown  Dr.  Mandeville,
which he recognized as one of his own.
  Q. How much  of morphine did you give  in this
case?  A. I gave one and  a half grains at the first
dose; although I  call myself a homoeopath!st, I give
morphine whenever it  is indicated ;  we have a law
governing our school, and with that law the size of
the dose has  nothing to do.

   Cross-examination by Mr. Garretson :

   The largest dose I ever gave was three grains ; when
I was in a hospital  I frequently  gave morphine, and
sometimes in dilutions; in delirium tremens, if I gave
one o-rain or one and  a  half grains of morphine, I
should watch my patient.

                 George Haslett,

Being examined by Mr. Dixon, testified:
   I five within two hundred feet  of Mr.  Coates.  _ I
knew the deceased six years before he died.   I was in
his house the Tuesday night  previous to  his death.  I
found Mr.  Coates iii a rocking  chair   He   said  he
wt- sick, and in reply to my inquiry  how  he was
sick s;dd he  had pain"right here (placing his hands 
142            DOCTOR  LUND'S TRIAL.
on his stomach).  He said he had had Dr. Wilkinson,
but did not like him, as he did not pay much atten-
tion  to  him, and did not seem to know  what the
trouble was.  So he had sent for Dr. Lund, a homce-
opathisi.  I said, to him, that I did not  believe in
homoeopathy.  He  replied that he did, for Dr. Lund
came and examined him, and told him where the trouble
was.   I asked him if his lungs were affected, and he
said  that  perhaps  they were.  His  breath seemed
short.  I then bade him good night and said, I hope
vou will be all right in the  morning, when he replied,
I shall be all right when I am in York Bay Cemetery;
I have more the matter with me than the doctors
understand-.  I have known Mr.  Coates to have been
complaining before, but  not  to  be  in bed,   Last
winter he asked me to try and get him a purchaser
for his house.   It was so far to the city, and he had
to work so late in a hot place, and then come up to
the hill, that he could not get over a cold  he had.  I
have known him to be taking a cough medicine within
six months of his death.   He also was taking an egg
and  o-in for some trouble  about his  urinary organs.
He said he heard me speak, but it hurt him to answer.
The  next  morning  when  I went in, I found  Drs.
Wilkinson, Bock and  Forman there.  I asked them
what Mr.  Coates  had taken,  and they said some
powders, given  by a liomceopathist.  I asked them if
it was not  necessary for  Dr. Lund to be tliere.  Dr.
Wilkinson said  he was just thinking of it.  I said I
would go for him, and no one objecting I did so.  Dr.
Lund  arrived  after  my  return  in  about twenty
minutes, at about  a quarter  to  seven.  When  Dr.
Lund was  entering the yard from  the street through
the  gate,  Dr. Wilkinson  saw him through the win-
dow, and  said,  here  comes  Dr. Lund now, let us
not  recognize'him  as a doctor.   (Appendix 2)  Dr.
 bund then came in, took off his hat. and saluted them 
               DOCTol; lund's trial.           143

by  saying  good morning, doctors.  They made  no
answer to him, neither did they look him in the face.
Dr. Lund sat down beside me on a trunk for a few
minutes, and then rose and left the room.   The other
doctors never spoke during the whole of that time.

  Cross-examined'ion :
  Mr. Coates worked on the Cunard Dock.  Saw
him next after Tuesday night, at six o'clock the next
morning.  I am sure  about the time, as none of the
doctors had a watch, and so borrowed mine.  After I
was called, I jumped my fence, and went right to his
room.  No  one was there when  I went in,  but the
doctors soon came in.   They wanted to feel his pulse,
and so borrowed my watch to do  it.  I did not hear
Dr. Wilkinson suggest to any one to go for Dr. Lund.
He  lived three blocks distant.  I  saw* Dr. Falmer at
the  house, and asked him to tell  Dr. Lund that Mr.
Coates wanted  him.   I did not then see Dr. Lund,
not until he came into the sick room.  When he came
in, Dr. Wilkinson was sitting about the middle of the
room, and the other two  doctors on the other side of
Mr.  Coates.   I had not  at any time seen them do
anything for  Mr. Coates.  The doctors  did not look
at Dr. Lund while  he  was in the  room, nor speak to
him even to return his salutation ;  they all hung their
heads and did not look up until he  left.  Dr. Lund did
not  feel of Mr. Coates' pulse.  When Dr. Wilkinson
made his remark about Dr. Lund, he could see him
out  of the window plainly.  I did not see Dr. Lund
again that  day.  I believe that I did tell  Mr. Welch
about a week or two  afterwards,  that I did  not tell
Dr.  Lund that Mr. Coates wanted  him, and wondered
how he knew where to come; but I am sure that I
told the old gentleman, who came to the  door, that
Mr. Coates wanted Dr. Lund. 
144
DOCTOR LUNd'8 TRIAL.
                Dr. J. J. Craven,
Having been persuaded to appear as a witness, and
being examined by Col. Rogers, testified:
  I am a physician of the old school.   Was a Brigade
Surgeon  in 'the  U. S.  Army.   In the year '03-64,
was Medical  Purveyor  to the Army of  the South.
Have  been  in  practice sixteen  years.    Q.  Doctor
while you was  at  Fortress Monroe,  did  you have a
case of morphine poisoning ]  A. No, sir.  Q. Case of
belladonna poisoning?  A.  No, sir.   Q. Did you
ever have a case of belladonna  poisoning I   A. Not
at Fortress Monroe.  Q. Where  then, Doctor;  don't
evade  the question!"    A. At Hilton Head.   (Dr.
Craven here appealed to the Court, that as this  was a
case of belladonna poisoning, and not  morphine, it
would not be necessary for him to  give it,  and for
certain reasons he would prefer not to do so).
  The Court decided he must give  the case, but  he
need not mention names.
  It was in 'Go  or '64, that a medical  officer visited
the South and stayed  with  me.  One morning not
feeling well,  by mistake, he  took  from his  pocket a
powder of morphine—three or four grains in amount
—and swallowed it, thinking it  to be quinine.   I ap-
plied the nitric acid test to some that remained  in the
paper, and found it to  be morphine.  He refused to
take anything then, but filled a pill-box with bella-
donna, and put  it in his pocket.  After breakfast we
sailed for Pulaski, sixty  miles  distant.  He took at
short intervals doses of the belladonna ; as he took so
much I cautioned him, saying,  I  am afraid  you  are
taking too much.  Leaving  him for a  few moments
and returning, I found him insensible, with all  the
symptoms of  poisoning  by belladonna, stertorous
breathing, and it was  only  after long exertion that
his life was  saved, and then only  after giving him
opium to counteract the belladonna. 
DOCTOR LUXTl's TRIAL.
Ur>
  Q. What  is a  poisonous  dose of belladonna?  A.
A grain would be a dangerous dose for some people.
Q. Is eight grains of belladonna injected after poison-
ing by morphine a dangerous dose ? A  If it were in-
jected  as often as the syringe could be filled it would
be dangerous.  Q. Are you  sure in the above case the
coma was from belladonna and not from  morphine?
A. I  am, sir.  Q.  Wdiat is  the largest dose of mor-
phine  you ever gave?  A.  One grain  or one and a
half grains ; I have given a teaspoonful of Magendie's
Solution (two grains).   Q. Suppose you gave one grain
of morphine to  a laboring man, and he  slept an hour
and a  half, and then woke  up of his own accord and
conversed  intelligently,  would  you think  that  the
effects of morphine had gone?   A. I  should, sir, feel
at ease concerning him ;  I should not then expect him
to go into a coma.

   Cross-examination:
   I  should  only give a grain when a lesser dose had
failed, and not then without seeing the patient; if I
had given the morphine, and afterwards found symp-
toms of morphine poisoning, I should think it was
morphine ; but if he had gone to sleep and woke up as
he did, I should want strong evidence to  convince me;
I believe that belladonna is  an antidote to morphine,
most certainly; if I had been called to a patient with
his symptoms,  I should  have looked in several direc-
tions' for  the cause ; I should look for apoplexy first;
seeing the contracted  pupil would make me look for
druo-s; if I found  he had taken large  doses of mor-
phine, should then believe he was poisoned by mor-
phine ; I should, however, inquire into  the quantity,
time of giving it, and the history of the case; if after
the  post-morFem I should   find  general  congestion,
that would not necessarily name a  drug,even with my
previous knowledge: it would only indicate a sudden
        7 
i4«;
DOCTOR LI XD's  TRIAL.
and violent  death  without haemorrhage ;^ if I found
nothing but congestion  it would be difficult to  say
what  he died of;  adhesions of the lungs would  not,
necessarily tend to apoplexy, but would  be  injurious
in subsequent lung diseases; morphine  causes  cold
perspiration.
  By  the Court: In the case  you have given us, where
your  friend  had taken  the  morphine and  then  the
belladonna, if he had died what would he have died
of?  A. Of  poisoning by belladonna.
  Witness continued: The effect of morphine upon
the mouth is to cause the lowei jaw to fall ;  the pupil
of the eye may be contracted in apoplexy.

                Michael Noon ax,
Examined by Mr. Dixon, testified:
  Although'subpoenaed yesterday, I could not come, as
I was sick and under the care of Dr. Lewis; know Dr.
Lund; I live  in Jersey City, Plank Road; Dr. Lund
visited me the night  Mr. Coates was sick, some time
about  ten or  eleven  o'clock ;  did mot send for him
then; the Doctor asked me what the trouble was. and
I told him it acted to me like the shaking ague ; I had
been  drinking, and bad  rum  too; I am thirty-seven
years old, and am a cartman;  I weigh  one hundred
and eighty-four pounds, and am six  feet one inch in
height; do  not remember whether the Doctor asked
me why I had sent for him. ,

              Dr. Wm. Henry Lewis,
Examined by Mr. Dixon, testified:
   I am a homoeopathic physician of nine years practice.
"and was in  partnership, in July last, with Dr. Lund;
remember the night  of  the lyth  of  July perfectly;
that  day I called with  Dr.  Lund upon  Noonan, and
told him he had a bad attack  of bad rum;  Dr. Lund
the same day was called to  Mr. Coates; I only know 
doctor lund's trial.
147
what the matter was from what Dr. Lund told me on •
his return ;  he said " Mr. Coates is suffering from a
severe  pain in  the region  of the  liver, pain in
his  head,  and  short  difficult breathing;  I  want
you to see him to-morrow;"  I  suggested nux vomica
and bryonia as good remedies for him, and he told
me  afterwards that he  had put  them up and sent
them;  I don't know when  Dr. Lund  retired  that
night; I  came in about  half-past ten,  and met him
within  twenty feet of his gate, coining  home, as he
said, from Mr. Noonan;  he  went up stairs into his
chamber, and I suppose he went to bed; about midnight
he came into my room—I slept in the office—and said
Noonan was making trouble ;  that he was nervous and
drinking freely, and  his wife  had said he  had plenty
of liquor in the house;' we had some further conversa-
tion, and then  decided upon  the remedy, which was
morphine, in half  grain doses; I  took  the bottle of
morphine out of my vest pocket and shook out three
powders,  each containing one-half grain, upon the
papers ; Dr. Lund  folded up the papers, took my direc-
tions for giving them and left the room;  the directions
were to dissolve one powder in a tablespoonful of water,
beino1 careful to give the whole, and if no. relief came,
to repeat it in an hour.
   I am  certain the powders only weighed one-half a
grain ; I had weighed into the bottle eleven grains of
morphine ; I had taken two doses of one-half a grain,
and  then I weighed the contents after the three pow-
ders were taken  out,  and  they weighed just nine
"■rains   making one  and a half grains for the  three
powders, or  half a grain for  a powder;  they were as
near alike in size as three powders could be made ; it
is  utterlq impossible that one  powder  should  have
weighed twice as  much as the other; there were no
lumps in  the powder; I  have frequently measured
out one-half a grain of morphine ; when I commenced 
148
DOCTOR LEAD'S TRIAL.
 practice  I used to weigh out  medicines, to accustom
 myself in guessing at their weights ; I have, at the re-
 quest of Col. Rogers and Capt. Cloke, put up one-half
 a grain  of morphine by guess, and given it to one of
 them to  have it weighed ; it  was utterly impossible,
 as I put  up those medicines, for one to weigh one grain
 and eight hundredths and  the  other  six-tenths of a
 grain ; I saw Mr. Coates the next day, in company
 with Dr. Palmer, at about five minutes past nine;  I
 found  him  in  a chair, in a state of coma, stertorous
 breathing,  slow and peculiar pulse, and  pupils very
 much  dilated; I did not  notice about perspiration,
 but it was warm enough to start perspiration in any
 one; there were no physicians there; we  then went
 round the corner to Dr. Bock's, and from there we re-
 turned to Dr. Lund's ; at half-past  ten I  again  saw
 Mr. Coates;  there had  been  no marked  change,
 neither were there any physicians there at that time;
 Drs. Forman and  Bock  soon came  into  the room;
 they then removed Mr. Coates  from  my  sight into
 another room;  they did not consult with me, but  I
 asked  them some questions; I did not  again see Mr.
 Coates until the post-mortem ;  the  brain was in an
 unhealthy condition,  the  left ventricle being filled
 with bloody serum ; also tliere were marks of conges-
 tion present; the  left lung was so  tied down to the
 diaphragm and walls of the chest, that the man who
 separated them was red in the face, he pulled so hard
 to break  them ; the right lung was adherent, but not
 so much; the lungs themselves  were congested,  but
 not  much; on  opening the abdomen, the liver  was
 seen reaching over to the right side; they were going
 right along with the post-mortem, when I said to Dr.
 Wilkinson, " Pretty large liver, isn't it V he  said,
"# No, guess not;" I asked him if he would not look a
little closer,  when he then directed it  written in the
report  that  it reached as far as the  left  mammary 
               DOCTOR LUND'S TRIAL.            14U

line;  it was quite an unusual size, and the congestion
did not account for the size;  a liver may be very
much congested, but no larger than natural; next, the
colon was much out of place in its different sections ;
the gall bladder was examined and found to contain a
dark, grumous substance that smelt badly ; the lining
membrane had a very unhealthy look;'it proved to
be  pus; the cystic  duct was entirely closed.   (More
definite than  saying  it would not admit  a small
probe.)  The above were all the symptoms of disease
we found ; the post-mortem was rather different from
any I ever saw under  those circumstances; wc never
allow  a body  to  be put upon ice,  and we weigh
everything that  can be weighed, so as  not to guess
that such an organ was " about" a healthy  size, or
such  a cavity contained  "about'' so much  serum;
nothing  was  weighed  here; the  temperature  was
" guessed" at as about 80°,  there being  no thermom-
eter in the room; there was no care  taken with the
stomach, as I always presumed  to be necessary, if
it was to be submitted to an  analysis;  it was  first
laid on the body  and then  upon one corner of the
table, which was a painted door;  the jar was brought
from down stairs, and was not a new jar, as the ques-
tion was disked if it was clean ; it was not washed in
my sight;  neither the opinion of Dr. Palmer nor my-
self was asked ; we were not tliere by invitation ; Dr.
Wilkinson decided that the lungs crepitated healthily,
and I decided they did not; I commenced the study
of medicine at Harvard College, then at Jefferson Col-
lege, Philadelphia, and graduated at Bellevue Medical
College, New York.
   A diploma from  Harvard  Medical College  to Dr.
Oscar F. Lund was  here shown to Dr.  Lewis, and
recognized by him  as genuine.
   Witness continued :  I thought Mr. Coates died from
congestion of the lungs ; the bloody serum in the brain 
150
DOCTOR LI'XD S TRIAL.
was  abnormal, and may have  been the cause of his
death, which in that case would have been apoplexy ;
the pus in the gall bladder could have been absorbed,
as tliere are more absorbents there than elsewhere,
they having a particular office to perform, to thicken
the bile by taking up the watery part;  I never have
given over a grain at a dose of morphine,  but have
given it more than once ;  I gave it yesterday : I was
called to Michael Noonan, and found him in a tremu-
lous  condition,  approaching  delirium  tremens,  and
with  colic ;  he was in the same condition as  lie was
'wfien Dr. Lund last jtrescribcd for him, at the time of
Mr. Coates' death.; in the presence of witnesses I had
a grain  of morphine  weighed out  at Mr. (Jardner's,
gave  it to him in  water, rinsed the  tumbler, and made
him drink the water, so as to be  sure that he got it
all ;  it had  no effect upon  him whatever, and it was
some hours  before he went to sleep; it  did not flush
his face nor create any excitement; I feel certain that
one  grain  could not have produced death  in  Mr.
Coates; the effects of morphine are continuous, and,
from  the  time it takes hold, it does not let up;  a
man would not wake up of his own accord, if he were
poisoned by morphine, unless he recovered ; Dr. Lund
had  not been well all summer, and was n<Tt at  that
time capable of much exertion.
  I had once, in my own family, a case of belladonna
poisoning, and the jaws were rigid.  The dose of the
extract  of belladonna and  of morphine  is the same.
Belladonna  may  produce  coma.   I should  expect
serious  effect  from eight grains  of belladonna.   It
would increase the danger of apoplexy,  as it tends so
strongly to the head.   I should call the administration
of eight grains as heroic treatment.

  (!ross-exami n ed:
  I went into partnership with Dr. Lund the  17th of
January, 1870, and we dissolved the lit of October. 
DOCTOR LCXD's TRIAL.
151
 1870.   I did not see any symptoms of pyaemia in Dr.
 Lund's description of Mr. Coates' condition, nor  did 1
 consider it a clear case ; the  bryonia was for the lung
 symptoms,  and the mux vomica for the pain; when
 the bell rang that night, I heard the colored boy go
 to the door, and heard Dr. Lund say  I will not go to
 your house  again to-night; he was at  the head of the
 stairs wdien he said it."
   Q. Did Dr. Lund  say I will  not go to your house
 to-night?  A.  He said'I will  not go to your house
 again  to-night; he also said  stay there, and I will be
 down in a minute; I could not  hear anything said at
 the door : he came into my room before he went down
 stairs  ; -1 next saw Dr.  Lund at half-past  seven the
 following morning ; he came into my room as I was
 dressing,  and said that  the medicine intended for
 Xoonan had gone to Coates ; that he had been there,
 and the family told him  that he was  dying from the
 effect of the powder ; 1 said give yourself no concern,
 it is an utter impossibility ;  he said he  had  done
 nothing for  Mr.  Coates,  as the doctors  refused to
 notice  him, and seemed anxious  to look in some other
 direction, so that he felt he was not  among friends,
 and came away ;  he said he did not talk with the
 doctors, for  their  manner was such that he was  com-
 pletely dumbfounded.  At  nine  o'clock I went down
 with Dr. Palmer,  and found no physicians there ; I
 did not examine  Mr. Coates  very carefully, and  was
 not in  the room five  minutes ;  I went after Coroner
 Burns  myself, as soon as I returned from  Dr. Bock's;
 I saw  Mr. Coates was going to die;   had  been  told
 that he was  poisoned, and so wished the Coroner to
 see him before he died; when we got to the house we
found Dr. Palmer and Dr  Lund at the foot  of the
stairs;  they  went  up  into the room with  us; there
were no physicians there then ;  when they came  in, I
asked then!  what  they had  done ;  they  told me ; 1 
L>2            DOCTOR lt'nd's  trtal.

asked if they had given any stimulants; they said  he
could not  swallow ;  I asked if it was not customary
when a man could not swallow, to inject  the remedy
into the bowels ; they said yes, and sent for a syringe
and whiskey;  Dr. Forman picked me up suddenly by
saying, "I suppose you acknowledge that  it was mor-
phine you gave ?" I said "certainly, sir;" I did not know
that  morning what was the matter with Air. Coates;
the only sign  I saw  of congestion of the lungs, was
the difficult breathing; the other symptoms  might
indicate apoplexy or pyaemia;  I sbould  not have
given brandy, nor did I advise it; if I had known he
was poisoned by morphine, I should have known what
to do; neither Dr. Lund nor myself did anything for
him,  for he was not our patient then;  he was our
patient  the day before, but  when he sent for Dr.
Wilkinson, he became Dr. Wilkinson's patient.   At
the post-mortem, the blood  in  the body was the same
a? you would expect to find in  any dead body;  the
bloody serum  in the ventricle could come from  the
rupture of a vessel, and effusion  ; I do not remember
the name  of the particular artery that  supplies  the
ventricle, but  it is derived from the Circle of Willis,
formed by the opthalmic anterior and middle cerebral
arteries, and  the  anterior communicating  artery;
could not  say how  much serum  there  was  in  the
ventricle, but  tliere was more serum than blood;  did
not see any one examine to see if there was a rupture
of an artery to cause the bloody serum ; I looked,  but
did not see where the blood came from ; the adhesions
in the lungs may have existed for years; they would
increase in strength without new inflammation  ; these
adhesions  would tend to  impoverish the blood,  and
cause disease; congestion may be caused  by the stag-
nation of the blood, consequent upon blood poisoning,
like  pyaemia,  ursemia, etc.; congestion of the lungs
may cause an effusion  of  bloody serum  in the ven- 
doctor lcxd's trial.            153
tricles  of  the  brain; the heart was natural, as far as
could be seen with the naked eye, but  in  order to
settle it, we should need to examine it by the micro-
scope ; the liver was very large, extending four inches
further to  the left than natural; inflammation of the
gall bladder would not materially affect the lymphatics
so as  to  prevent absorption of  its contents;  the
unhealthy  condition of its  mucous membrane might
even hasten absorption; I have made a great many
post-mortems, but do not remember the exact number;
I am happy to say that  they were not all confined to
my practice;  I  have given  one grain  of  morphine
after a double amputation ;  never heard  of it  as a
remedy for pyaemia; I weighed  the morphine  into
the bottle  on the 2d of July, 1870, because I went
that  day to Long Branch, and took my medicines with
me; it then weighed eleven grains; I took the mor-
phine myself on Sunday, July 10th, 1870 ; I was  then
in Bergen, having returned Friday, the 8th ;  my doses
were one quarter of a grain each;  I next weighed it
the day Mr.  Coates died ;  it had  been in my  vest
pocket all the time.
   Mr.  Garretson here showed some powders to Dr.
Lewis  and asked him to tell how much they weighed..
   Witness: I don't know what the powder is, in the
first place, whether it is morphine, arsenic, quinine, or
something else;  in the second place, I cannot tell how
much  it weighs, as it has been compressed so much;
if I have a bottle and  know what is in it, and how
much  it is packed, I  can then guess at the weight of
powders, but will not do anything of the  kind when I
know nothing about tire preparation  of  the powder;
five grains in  a bottle will be, as far as the eye can tell,
about one-half the height of eleven  grains ; it is not as
easy to tell the difference  between  five and five and
one-half grains  as between one-half and one grain;
when  Dr. Lund was  sick  he was attending to hi? 
154
porror lend'* trial.
practice as usual; when a doctor is sick he takes some
medicine himself, and all his friends give him some;
I did not graduate at Williams' College  where Dr.
Lund did;  I know the  signature upon  his medical
diploma from  Harvard, and I recognize  Mark Hop-
kins' name  upon  his Williams'  College diploma,  be-
cause I  have seen his name in a letter and have every
reason to suppose he wrote it himself, although I  did
not come in  the mail with the letter; I left Boston on
the 2Sth of November, 1869; I went to  New York
and from there to Bergen ; I gave up practice in Boston,
May 1st, 1869, and practiced at Long Branch  during
that Summer; I then wenfto Boston again and left, as
above, in November.
  To Mr. Dixon: Mr. Coates was short,  stout, short
neck, answering exactly to  the  description of a man
liable to be attacked with apoplexy;  fatty disease of
the heart will interfere  with the propulsion  of  the
blood, and so cause congestion, and yet in order to de-
tect that disease it might be necessary to examine the
heart microscopically.
  To the Court: The  cause of the pain  might also
cause  all the other  post-mortem  appearances,  as
the congestion, and produce  death without morphine.
Anything that irritates  the nerve centres, as conges-
tion, would cause contraction of the  pupils; Dr. Lund
said that night that the medicine was for Noonan,  and
left my room with the medicine, under the impression
it was for Noonan.
  To Mr Dixon: It was myself that first discovered
the closure  of the cystic duct; I made some inquiry,
and on the strength of that inquiry the duct was care-
fully  examined, and some argument arose in  regard to
it, Dr. Wilkinson insisting it was not completely closed;
a careful dissection was then made and every one ac-
knowledged it was completely shut  up. 
DOCTOR LUXd's TRIAL;
loo
             Dr. JoiiK AL Cornetlson,
Kxamined by Mr. Dixon, testified:
  Have been practicing until within the last ten years,
since 1825 ;  I live in Jersey City.
  Q. Doctor, if you should administer morphine to a
patient who was suffering severe pain, and he should
go to sleep, sleep an hour and a half, wake up, say he
felt better, converse about his busine.-s, ask for some-
think to drink, should you then think there was any
danger from the morphine?  A. I should  not; if the
dose had been one grain and  the pain came back, I
should not  hesitate to repeat the  dose; a  fatal close
would not relax its hold.

  Cross-examin ed :
  The  symptoms,  of  course,  vary   much,  but in
such a  case  as narrated by Air. Dixon, a dose of a
grain could not cause death ; in my experience, if the
morphine did  not act in fifteen minutes, I should^ re-
peat it; I think, generally speaking, that a grain is a
large dose ;  in  giving Magendie's Solution, I give from
five to twenty-five drops ; I never saw Dr. Lund before,
until he was pointed out to me to-day.

                Dr.  I. N. Q.itimby,
Examined by Air.  Dixon, testified :
  I live in  Jersey City, and am an allopathic physi-
cian of thirteen years practice.
  Q.  Doctor, if'a patient  should take a dose of mor-
phine,  having  severe pain, should  become quieted,
sleep  an hour  or  more, wake up of himself, converse
intelligently, ask about his business, call for a drink of
tea, would' vou think he was in any  danger ?  A. 1
should not think there was any danger from the mor-
phine ;  morphine  commences its action almost imme-
diately upon being taken  into  the stomach, and its
action is continuous and persistent • if after the above 
 l5f)           DOCTOR  LCXd's  TRIAL.

 described case, the patient again went to sleep, I should
 look for some other cause than  morphine; the usual
 dose of morphine is  from one-quarter to one-half a
 grain ; some give at the first dose as much as a grain,
 although such is not my practice; this is a matter of
judgment, however, some giving as high as two grains;
 I would  not expect a grain to prove fatal; it is  cus-
 tomary to give grain doses in  severe pain; in post-
 mortems  from  death  by morphine, the congestion is
 not well marked • in one case where four grains were
 taken, I found no congestion ; in apoplexy we find the
 congestion principally in the brain; in a post-mortem
 it is always necessary to weigh and measure every-
 thing ; blood poisoning always causes congestion, blue-
 ness of skin, contraction of pupil, coma, clammy  per-
 spiration; in poisoning  by morphine the  skin on the
 other hand is usually dry ; I knew a case once where all
 the physicians assembled thought the patient was dying
 from paregoric (a preparation  of  opium), when  the
 post-mortem showed  that it  was  poisoning of the
 blood by uraemia; pus can be absorbed from the gall
 bladder.
  Q. If, after the train of symptoms I have given you,
the man should again go to sleep, become comatose,
have a livid skin, profuse perspiration, cold surface,
 contracted pupils, inability to swallow,  a slow and full
pulse, have  eight grains of  belladonna injected  into
his  system and die in nine  hours, then  the  body be
kept upon ice, and the post-mortem should show  con-
gestion of the body, bloody serum in one of the  ven-
tricles of the brain, small lungs  bound down by adhe-
sions, enlarged liver, distended gall bladder, filled with
decomposed  pus,  complete closure of the cystic duct,
would  you  discover in these  symptoms  a sufficient
cause of death ?   A. I find them, evidences of serious
disease, as pus could not accumulate there without
being serious; pus may be dormant for sometime and 
                 DOCTOR  LUXn's  TRIAL.            157

 then suddenly wake into life, and carry the man off;
 the pus here  indicates  to me a very serious trouble ;
 tJie gall bladder is in a vital spot; the brain may have
 been congested from the pus; death has occurred from
 not one-half of  these causes ; manv do not think that
 belladonna is an antidote to morphine; I should think
 the giving of eight grains of belladonna for one grain
 of morphine would be hazardous ; if the patient was
 apopletic it  would determine the blood to the head and
 so increase the danger.

    Cross-examination :
    I have seen  ten or twelve cases of pyaemia ; it causes
 congestion;  if I was called to a man with the symp-
 toms of Air. Coates, and found he had taken a grain
 of morphine, I should inquire into his history ; taking
 the symptoms  by themselves, I should say it "might be
 due to apoplexy, uraemia, or morphine poisoning; al-
 though the  action of morphine is sometimes delayed,
 I never heard of a case where it was delayed for a long
 time; brandy  would not suspend the action  of  mor-
 phine,  which  after it had once taken  hold would be
 continuous;  the  contraction of the  pupil  is a good
 symptom  of morphine  poisoning; I  do  not myself
 give more than one-half a grain at a dose, as I regard
 it  hazardous;  if I had  sent one grain from my house
 I should wanted to have seen the patient that day, at
 least; the smallest fatal dose  I ever knew was two
' grains; it  is problematical whether the diseased con-
 dition of the man would have hastened the action of
 the morphine ; the action of that and pus are similar ;
 cases of pyaemia are generally preceded by protracted
 sickness; the shortest time I have known  is  four or
 five days;  I  should not give  morphine in pyaemia, un-
 less there was pain ; in post-mortems we do not weigh
 everything, but only those things that seem  out of the
 way ; but we always measure the fluid contents of any
 part. 
'L>8            doctor i.i xd's trial,

                 AIrs. J. IIaslett,
Kxamined by Col. Bogers, testified :
  1 saw Air'. Coates the night before he died ; I talked
with him, but he said it hurt him  to talk; before I
left I said, Air. Coates, you talk so feeble that it seems
to me  as if something was  the matter  with your
lungs;  he said no doubt but what  tliere is;  I have
known  him to complain of his  health many times since
I have  known him.
  By the Court: Are you accustomed to seeing sick
persons ?   A. Yes, sir.
  Cross-examined:
  Have heard him complain  of a  cough or  severe
cold; do  not think he was complaining of a cough at
this time; he  said he had something  here (witness
placed  her hand in the region of the stomach), which
if he could only get it up he would feel better.
  By Col. Rogers : Do you know whether Airs. Coates
ever said  to you  that Dr. Wilkinson had given her a
letter of introduction to a lawyer ?
  Question objected to, and objection sustained.

              AIr. Walter B. Cook,
Examined by Air. Dixon, testified:
  In July last I was a clerk in the drug store of Mr.
Wells,  Monticello Avenue; I remember Dr. AVilkin-
son bringing me a powder to  weigh, and asked me to
be very particular  about it;  I took the powder and
went behind the counter to weigh it; he came behind
the counter  and saw  me weigh  it; it weighed, just
one-half  a grain  • he said it was  one of the three
powders that had been given by Dr  Lund and he had
killed a man, but did-not say what man; I  did  not
hear until after this of Mr. Coates' death; I did not
ask Dr. Wilkinson if he was satisfied with the weight,
nor did he express any dissatisfaction; I balanced my 
nor to n ltjxd's trial.
159
scales, as I always did, to see that they were correct;
they were brass druggist's prescription scales;  they
were  accurate, and  my  weights  were true; I  had
no weight smaller than one-half a grain ; Dr. Wilkinson
called me  out of  the  store  about  eleven  o'clock
the next  night,  and  asked  me  if I  had  told  any
one   about  weighing  the  morphine; I  told   him
I  had  told Mr. Wells that  it weighed one-half a
grain;  Dr.  Wilkinson then told me I  had better
say nothing more about  it, as  he had had it weighed
on  a very  delicate  pair of scales, and it weighed a
grain, instead of  one-half a grain ; he thought we had
better hush  it up for the  reputation of our scales.
  Q.  Did Dr. Wilkinson suggest  that you weigh the
powder over  again?  A. No,  sir.  Q. Did  you tell
him you could not weigh  so small a  quantity as one-
half a grain ?  A. No, sir, not that  I remember; I
don't see why I should say so, as I  could weigh it;
o-enerally, if t want a quarter of a grain, or any  small
amount,' I weigh out four grains, and then subdivide
it by  the eye ;  it is more accurate;  it is impossible to
o-et one-half a grain in one powder, and one  grain  in
another, and  not see the difference  in bulk ;  I am
sure  I told Dr. Wilkinson the powder weighed one-
half a grain-; I am positive I weighed all the powder,
as I  cleaned  the paper out with the spatula ; Dr.
Wilkinson had always been in the habit of sending
prescriptions to  our store, and we had  always  used
these scales.

   Cross-examined:
   I  am not now with Air.  Wells;  I left  him last
Au<nist; I  do sometimes  weigh  so small  a  quantity
as one-half a grain; I am twenty-five years old, and
have been a drug clerk seven years ; do not remember
the color of the'paper that the powder was in ; I told
 |)r  Wilkinson that there was one-half a grain,  not 
160
DOCTOR lot * TRIAL.
that I  thought there was; I did not ask Dr. AYilkin-
son to reweigh  the powder when he came the second
time;  Dr.  Lund  used  to send prescriptions to  Air
Wells when I was  there, but  has  not sent me  any
since I commenced business for myself; my store i*
on Bergen Avenue, but is not yet open ; I never made
any effort to disguise the fact that the powder weighed
one-half a grain.

               Col. Wm. E. Rogers,
Examined by Air Dixon, testified :
  I  was present  one evening at Dr.  Lund's  house
with Capt.  Cloke  and Dr. Lewis; in order to test the
accuracy of Dr. Lewis in putting up medicine* by the
eye,  we asked him, unexpectedly to him, and with no
premeditation on  our part, to put up for us one-half a
grain of morphine; he put up a powder, without
weighing it, and gave it to me  for one-half a grain ; I
carried  it down to De  Alott A, White's drug store,
corner of Newark Avenue and Cole Street, and asked
the clerk to  weigh it, and be particular about it; I
saw him weigh  it, and it weighed  just exactly one-
half a grain, not varying a particle either way ;  he  ex-
plained the marks  upon the weights to me, so  that I
knew it was a half grain weight he put on the scales.

  Cross-examined :
  Q. How do you  know it was not a half-pound weight
instead  of half  of a grain ? A. The  weight had the
figure  1  upon  it,  and the clerk  told  me  that that
meant one-half of  a grain; the grain weight had  one
circle on it; the two grains had two circles.

               Mrs. AIaky Coates,
Recalled by defense, and examined by Air. Dixon :
  Q. After your husband^ death, did Dr.  Wilkinson
give  you a letter to a lawyer?   A.  Yes, sir; he gave 
IHHJToR lund's trial.            161
me a letter to Mr. Archibald I'rown to introduce me
to him.   Q. Did Dr. AATilkinson say anything to you
then ?  A. He told me I ought to have a lawyer.  Q.
How long after your  husband's death?  A. About a
fortnight.

   Cross-exa/mined;
   Q. Did you ask him for the letter ?  A.  Yes, sir.

                 JosErn  Bonder,
Examined by Air. Dixon, testified:
   I am about twenty-three years  old, and  have lived
with Dr. Lund for a year  and  three months ; I was a
slave, and came from A^irginia ; "I recollect the night
Air  Coates 'died  some  one coming for Dr. Lund ; I
was undressing when the bell rang; I ran down stairs
without  putting on my clothes, and opened the door
a little ways, so as not' to show myself; a lady was at
the door, and she asked if the  Doctor was  in ; before
I could answer, the Doctor called out, " stay where you
are :"" I asked her to shut the door, and ran up stairs,
but! heard her laugh as she saw my bare legs; when
I went up stairs the Doctor had gone into the office;
I would not know the  lady if I  should see her; she did
not give  me her name.
   Cross-examined:
   Have  not been in  the habit of attending the door,
after I had gone to  bed, but did in  the  day time ;
there was a light  in the hall;  when I  went up stairs
the Doctor was in  the office;  the words I heard him
use were, " I will be down in a minute."
   By the Court: Was there a bright light in the hall ?
A. I don't remember.

   Air.  Dixon  offered  in conclusion, as evidence, the
first testimony  of Airs. Coates and  James Kelly, before 
 162            doctor lund's trial.

 the Coroner's Jury, wishing  to show that their  evi-
 dence had been  contradictory  at different times.
   Air.  Garretson objected to  it,  unless  Air Dixon
 should also offer their second statements before  the
 Coroner's Jury,  as evidence.
   Air Dixon  refused to do this; he, however, wished
 to  be  understood as not objecting to the admission of
 their second statements, but  only that he did not in-
 tend to offer those statements  himself.
   The  Court  desiring those portions first read, whicli
 were to be admitted,  Air Dixon  read at  length  the
 testimony  he had alluded to.   In  that  testimony
 neither of the witnesses swore to Mrs. Coates having
 given  her  name to the boy  at the  door that night.
 This was an interpolation afterward, and  entitled to
 no credit.  Many other evident discrepancies gave ad-
 ditional  force to  the idea, that these particular wit-
 nesses were either not honest, adding from  time to
 time such  testimony as seemed necessary, in  order to
 secure conviction, or else their memories were too de-
 fective to be relied upon.
   Those portions of the testimony before the Coroner's
 Jury, read by Air. Dixon, were admitted in evidence
 by the Court.   As Air. Garretson did  not read  the
 portions he also wished admitted, the result was that
 that read by Air. Dixon was the only part received in
 evidence.
            The Defense here rested.

   Captain Albert S. Cloke then summed up for the de-
 fense.   He reviewed, in a most eloquent manner, all
 the evidence brought out upon  the trial; although there
 was so  much  of  it, he  still never grew wearisome to
his audience.  His argument  was both  able  and  ex-
haustive, and attested  in a remarkable manner to his
fidelity in following the evidence. 
IXMTOR luxd's trial.
163
  Mr. Dixon then succeeded him. also for the defense,
in a short, but very able argument.   Xo one who has
ever heard him  speak, or  who is at all familiar with
his  happy facility for condensing his thoughts into a
few words, and driving them home in a forcible manner
to the minds of his hearers, can doubt for a moment
but what he was listened to with most profound atten-
tion.
  After Air. Dixon had resumed his seat, Mr. Garret-
son closed on the part of the State.  His argument was
also able and well delivered, and reviewed in a brief
but complete manner all the evidence for the prosecu-
tion.
  His Honor, Judge Randolph, summed up for the
Jurv.  Every word"that fell from his lips showed most
clearly his double nature, that of the judge and of the
man. On the one side he was always stern, if neces-
sary, but the second part of his nature enabled him to
temper that sternness with compassion. No one could
listen for a  moment to his utterances without feeling
that the words came from the good heart of a just ar-
bitrator.   His desire was evident to see justice done,
without impugning, in the slightest degree, the motives
or honesty of any man.

  His Honor charged the  Jury as follows:
  Gentlemen of the Jury;  I congratulate you on
being so  near the termination of this case, which has
occupied so many days of your time and to which you
have devoted that attention, care and constancy which
has been so marked ;  and the  Court take this oppor-
tunity to thank  you  for  the undeviating  attention
which each one of you  has given to the case during
its progress.  It  is'a case of great importance, on ac-
count of the grade of the crime that  is charged, on
account  of the effects it may have upon the commu-
nity in  reference to  the practice in which the defend- 
164
DOCTOR LUND S TRIAL.
 ant  is engaged,  as a physician, not  to speak of the
 effects that  it may  have in  Lvi'oivn; c to  him himself.
 It is the duty of  the Court  * !  ihc  lury to lay aside
 every  consideration, so  far as the effects of the  dis-
 charge of our duty are concerned, and simply do our
 duty at  the moment, leaving the consequences to the
 law.  You have been so long accustomed, gentlemen,
 to the discharge of  duties of this nature, that it is en-
 tirely out of place to make  any  suggestions in refer-
 ence to the necessity of looking only at the facts which
 have been proved, and of not permitting any other
 influences to mould~your action, other than the simple
 effect of those facts  acting upon your minds, and thus
 bringing you to a conclusion.
  Doctor Oscar F.Lund is charged with the crime of
 manslaughter, which is the taking  away of the life of
 a human being without malice, and upon  your verdict
 will  depend  whether or not he has  been guilty of that
 crime.   And I would here say that if, when you come
 to look at all the facts,  you have a reasonable doubt of
 his guilt, you must give him  the benefit of that doubt;
 that  is  right, that is proper.  Gentlemen, it would not
 be justice if it wTas not  done.  He has the right to ask
 that, and he has  the right to be considered innocent
 by you until  your  minds are  convinced,  beyond  a
 doubt,  that  he is guilty of  the crime with which he
 stands  charged.         ,
  In the first place,  was  the  death of Air.  Coates
 caused  by morphine ?  In coming  to  that  conclusion
you must take into  consideration all  the  facts which
bear  upon the question as to what caused his death,
for that question meets you  at the threshhold.  If it
is not proven, beyond  a doubt, that Air. Coates died
from the administration of that morphine, then you
need go no further; that  is  an end to this case, and
the defendant should be acquitted.
  Now, look at it a moment and see what determines 
               DOCTOR LUND's TRIAL.            I60

the question whether the State has proved  that mor-
phine was  the cause of Air. Coates' death.   Is it so,
beyond a reasonable doubt ?  Take into consideration
the condition of the patient from Sunday night until
the morphine was administered at  half-past twelve on
Tuesday night.  AYhat were his symptoms?  Bain on
Sunday night, a physician called in, who brought re-
lief during the night; Afonday morning, feeling bet-
ter, not, however, going to his work, but on Alonday
going about, sitting down to his dinner; after dinner,
going to the ball ground, standing two hours or more,
returning home, meeting his  physician in the aftei-
110011, receiving a prescription to remove the difficulty ;
the physician, on  Alonday morning, looking at him,
considers  him not  as having much the matter with
him, only pain and a nervous system out of order, and,
in that  view, prescribes for him.  On  Alonday after-
noon  he parts with his physician ; he goes to  bed,
sleeps well during Monday night.  Tuesday morning
he rises, eats his breakfast,  don't go to  his work / dis-
ease knocks at  the door, steps in, engages his attention,
arouses his interest; he is troubled ; he begins to think
more than  has been spoken here.  You have a right
to say what has been operating upon  his mind.  He
asks his wife whether there is not some honueopathic
physician; she names to him  Lewis  and  Lund ; he
says he would like Doctor  Lund.  In  the meantime,
his disease, whatever it is, comes on and seizes  him
with pain, and his wife employs all  her skill and
knowledge, gained  from  years of experience.   A
woman  knows what it is to be in .the sick room, for
she is  a guardian  angel, to minister to our wants in
times and places when no physician can come in ; she
knows where to put her soft  hand, when to exercise
her care.  Airs. Coates bestowed on that man all the
fertility of her thought  in  seeking out  remedies  that
afternoon.  Hot cloths and  mustard were brought  to 
166            DOCTOR LFNO'S TRIAL.

remove pain ; she does not  succeed.  Doctor Lund is
sent for; he comes, scrutinizes the patient, returns and
tells Dr. Lewis that he examined him and found his
pain  radiating from the liver upward,  in both direc-
tions.  He examined the medicine that had been given,
and he sent back a  medicine, which reached there_
Tuesday afternoon; it was  to be taken in one-hour
doses, and it was taken at three, at four, and ■ at five
o'clock.  It  did not  seem  to remedy;  the  difficulty
was there still.  He was more sick  than he had been,
and, for some reason, he gave up taking the medicine.
At nine o'clock you have the neighbors present, and
talking Avith him, and they take their leave, never
dreaming that death was standing near  the door.
  You will  remember all the facts in  this case, and
you will use them without reference to any theory the
Court may have;  but  you will remember that one of
the neighbors thought at first that Mr. Coates was not
very sick; he had an idea that the man  was nervous;
but when he was about taking  his leave, he noticed
Air. Coates' remarks, and he was impressed by what
he said, and  it was then that he referred to his seeing
him in the  morning,  and there was something  said
about the cemetery, very significant, showing that the
deceased  was carrying about with him a knowledge
or perception of something  in his system which  had
not been observed, and he  said that the doctors did
not understand his case.
  Now, follow it on.   It  goes on to ten, Airs. Coates
says eleven o'clock, when she called  up her  brother,
who had been sleeping upon the floor  below, telling
him  to wait for  the  Doctor to come ; that she had
been tliere,  and for him to remain  by her husband
until the coming of the Doctor.  Then  the symptoms
kept increasing until  twelve o'clock, when  she  went
back,  and  received from Dr. Lund the three powders.
Look  from  the beginning of the disease on  Sunday 
               DOCTOR LOTS TRIAL.            I 67

night, until the powder was  taken  by Air.  Coates.
What was the extent of that  disease?  It  was not
morphine then.  It was not the effect of the first
powders  that  were given,  because it was all there.
But  the  difficulty  kept  increasing.  How far it may
have been precipitated by his being out upon  the ball
ground we cannot  tell.
  The subtile operations of the influence that comes
upon this  delicate organization of ours,  combining
with  what  we have  in us that  is deleterious,  and
brings about fatal disease, we know nothing  of.  AVe
only know that to-day we are alive, to-morrow we are
on our way to the grave.  Tliere is a point where the
keenest intellect of the brightest genius cannot pass
beyond ; and  he  is an  honest  man, and a fair man,
who at once  acknowledges it.  How  much  there is
about  this system of ours that we  know nothing of.
Take Air. Coates^ for  instance, from the time he was
attacked until he  took  the morphine.   AYas not he a
sick man?  It is  for you to say whether he was not
a very sick man.  But then,'certainly, it  was not
morphine.  Now, take him from the time he took the
morphine.  From the testimony, to be general, in a
short time  after that he was excited;  that would  be
the  natural effect of morphine.  Then in the course
of fifteen or  twenty  minutes, perhaps longer, he sat
down in a chair and  went  to sleep, and he continued
to sleep for an hour, probably an  hour and a  halt.
Then he awakened himself.  At that  time there was
with him a neighbor, with whom he conversed about
o-oing to see  Air.  Gross, a  gentleman connected with
die  Cunard Docks, and in reference to business trans-
 actions.   He  spoke of feeling better.   His daughter
 Lizzie came in, and, fondling up to him, asked him
 with a daughter's love, as to how he  felt:    A\ hy,
he savs, "1 feel  as  if I was in heaven  compared  to
what'it ,a, an hour ago."  That was the difference 
lt'S            DOCTOR LENd's TRIAL.

between the racking pain and the lull that succeeded
it, an expression  which one  who is in  the  habit of
speaking strong might make, and a rational expres-
sion.   Then a. little while  after,  as Airs.  Coato'
brother,  James  Kelly, was  sitting  by him,  there
occurred a  marked  incident.   He  said  to James,
■* James, the crisis has come ; the crisis has come.'"
I do not recall  the  other  expression.  It was very
marked ; showing that something Avas going on within
him that he did not understand, but which gave him
a premonition of  his approaching end; and  his head
sank, his eyes  closed,  and James Kelly noticed, cr
imagined he noticed, a change; the eyes of Air. Coates
sank.  That was  in the neighborhood of four o'clock
in the morning, after he had  been roused up, and in
a  condition—if there  is  anything  in  the  medical
testimony—which showed that he. was rid of  the
effects of the morphine  that he had taken at half-
past twelve.  If you find that something  took  place
in his system, at that time, or any other, independent
of the morphine and its effects, which would cause his
death,  the  curtain lifts, and  you are  relieved in ref-
erence to what your verdict shall  be ;  for if  death
was caused  by something other  than  morphine, or, if
you have doubt of its being morphine—from the sur-
rounding circumstances—the defendant has a right to
.have that  doubt, without any criminal  imputation
against him.
   Follow it on.   The wife's attention is attracted, for
the stertorous breathing then comes in, and all that ava-
lanche of symptoms which show the end.  The result
is, she sends for another physician.  He comes, and he
sends for two other physicians.  They  examine  the
man; they  find  that he has taken morphine ;  they
all conclude that  morphine is the  cause  of  death.
Did they, at that time, carefully inquire as  to all the
symptoms ?  Did they ascertain from Dr. Lund how 
Ikm-'IOR LUND'S TRIAL.
169
much  he had given i  Did they know what quantity
had been taken ?  Did they know how it had operated
during the night (  Did they inquire  whether  Mr.
Coates had awakened, and had  passed some minutes
or half an  hour in a state of consciousness after he
had taken  the  morphine?  Did this only  come out
upon  this trial, and not appear before the  Coroner's
Jury ?   ()r, having learned that morphine was given,
did they at once  go to work upon that theory without
looking  into the case more particularly, and endeavor
to work up a case by giving an antidote for morphine?
Well, if they did, they were doing just what you and
I would  have done if  we had been physicians.   At
the same time  the foresight of  man is so little, that
when  events  have passed, and we look back and ex-
amine  with the  light of experience, we may say '• it
was all a mistake."
   I cannot understand how it is, that, even  when life
is  at stake, physicians will give expression to animosi-
ties  against fellow  members of their  noble  profes-
sion ;   and  1  am  afraid   that sometimes  from these
bickerings, the patient has slept the sleep that knows
no waking.  That is not the general rule, I know, and
within  the  last  few years the medical profession has
been raised to a  standard  higher  than it  has ever
occupied ; and I may say that the time  is very near
when physicians of the different schools will meet
each other  cordially, recognizing the common object
of their study to be  the  welfare of humanity.  These
gentlemen were exercising their best judgment in their
endeavors to rescue Mr. Coates from impending death.
But it has become our  duty,  since this  matter  is
brought into a criminal court, to sec whether they may
not have been laboring  under a mistake when  they
ascribed  the death to morphine, and to inquire whether
death might not  have occurred from some other cause :
from a disease which was not noticed or discovered
S 
 17"            DOCTOR LUND*S TRIAL.

 until afterwards.  It is  true  that some of the  symp-
 toms manifested in the case of Mr. Coates were recog-
 nized  as the effects  of morphine.  But it is also true
 that those same symptoms accompany other disorders.
 One difference between the  effects of morphine and
 the appearance  of apoplexy is that in case of poison-
 ing by morphine the pupils of the eye are contracted.
 made  smaller;  whereas in apoplexy they  are, ordi-
 narily, both dilated.   Those are general rules.  They
 are  subject to exceptions.  And when you come to
 apply  general  rules in criminal cases you must give
 the  defendant the benefit of the exception.  You are
 to consider whether, in this case, the contraction of the
 pupil  may not have been brought about by the causes
 which brought about  death,  if it was not morphine.
 Now, the physicians examined all the way from the head
 through the trunk; in  the head they did not find any-
 thing very marked ; indeed, you cannot rely upon the
 marks of  morphine;  you can rely better upon the
 marks of  some other poison, as a metallic poison, lie-
 cause the traces  are more distinct than in the case of
 a narcotic.  Then examine the lungs and you find
 they are attached  to the walls A A' the  cavity in which
 they are lodged.   Some  of the physicians say this at-
 tachment  would  have  no perceptible effect.  Others
 <av it would reduce the powers of the man generally.
 You are to look  at that  in  connection  with  other
 things  which go  on hidden in the system.   You find
 the colon  giving evidence of disease.  One of the
 physicians  stated it was  in such a condition as would
 cause pain, and account for symptoms of approaching
inflammation.   You  look. further,  and you find the
liver enlarged, and under it, what ?  That pear shaped
sack, which is placed under the liver for the purpose
of receiving the surplus  bile,  is found distended, and
full or nearly so.  And when they come to open it, in-
stead of :inding bile, they discover a material which is 
DOCTOR LUND'S TRIAL.
171
   not normal, nor does it belong there; and every physi-
   cian who has testified  in the  case, points  it out as a
   cause of disease ; the contents, if not in a state of putre-
   faction, are approaching it, so as to be offensive to the
   smell.  And  then the cystic  duct, whose office  has
*   been explained to you, was found completely stopped
   up, so  that it could not be probed, and it had finally
   to be opened. Tliere was a cause of disease. One of the
   physicians said that in  twenty-four hours, at all events
   in a very short time, through natural pressure, some of
   the contents  of the gall bladder might have passed
   into the  system.   Now, that kind  of material in the
   system is what people are dying of every day.  We
   call it  septicaemia, or pyaemia, from whatever  way it
   affects  the blood ; sometimes the symptoms are noted
   for a long while,  tliere is a tendency to  congestion,
   and very many of the symptoms are those that accom-
   pany morphine.
     Now, gentlemen, it is for you to take the casa ac-
   cording to  the post-mortem examination.   Take  the
   condition of the man according to his own statement,
   as to how he was, and see if you are satisfied that his
   death was  caused by  morphine.  There  is another
   feature in the case to  which  it  is, perhaps, proper to
   refer, and that is the effect of belladonna, which was
   infused into his  system, as an antidote for morphine,
   though some doubt that it is an antidote.  But the
   usual effects of belladonna were produced in the skin
   and in the eye.   Now, it  is  a question whether the
   disease of which  he died  may not have been acceler-
   ated by the use  of belladonna.  From all the testi-
   mony in the case, it is a question whether the effects of
   the 'morphine he had taken had not passed away, and
   whether the pain from  which he was suffering had not
   been subdued by  the morphine, which was antagonistic
   to it,  when he roused, after his sleep of an hour or
   more, and said that he " felt  as if he was in heaven, 
172
DOCTOR LENDS TRIAL.
compared with his feelings of an hour ago ;'' and then,
the " crisis came," the deadly power asserted itself, and
struck  the mallet right upon the spot, and death fol-
lowed.   If that was the case, belladonna would  not
have been the proper remedy.
  But  if you still hesitate as to whether  morphine
was the cause of death, the Court would suggest that
you examine as to the  quantity of morphine.  What
is the  proof?   It would appear  that the rule is  not
settled as to what is a  maximum dose; and  it is for
you to  say whether  or  not a grain  is to be considered
a fatal dose, or that bad consequences  might be ex-
pected  from it.  Upon the question whether morphine
was the  cause  of death, it is  proper for you to  ask
how much was  given.   If you find half a  grain was
given,  instead of  a grain, it makes  a  very material
difference; because it is clear that half  a grain is not
considered a dangerous  dose at all, as compared with
a grain.  Well, one of these powders was taken, and
two were left; Dr. AVilkinson  and Dr.  Forman each
took one. Dr. Wilkinson had his powder weighed by
Air. Cook, and, according  to  Air. Cook,  it weighed
half a grain ; Dr.  Wilkinson went behind the counter
and saw it weighed.  He did not correct  Air. Cook,
and say  it weighed a grain, or that it weighed at all
otherwise than as  Mr.  Cook announced.  Still, he
had some misgivings as to its having  been correctly
weighed; probably  on account of the conversation
that was had, for Mr. Cook says they talked about his
scales not weighing half a grain ; and the powder was
weighed again  at Gardner's, and there, he says, Air.
Gardner said it was a  little short of a  grain.   In
addition, it is  said  it  was sent to  New  York,  and
weighed there.   But   look at  the  evidence.   The
druggist, Mr. Cook, twenty-five years of age,  and
seven  years  in the practice, says he weighed it, and
he distinctly remembers that it weighed a half grain; 
DOCTOR LUXD'S TRIAL.
17>:
Dr. Wilkinson  says he was there, and that Mr. Cook
told  him it weighed half a grain.  Then the Doctor
says  he took it somewhere else, and there it weighed
a grain.   Now, where is the weight of evidence be-
tween these two ?   As between  these two scales the
Doctor stands balanced, and Mr. Cook is left unques-
tioned.   Professor Doremus  states that he received
from  Air.  Burns,  himself, two powders.  That he
weighed them, and found in one, six-tenths of a grain,
and in the other a little over a grain.  Now, which of
these two was weighed by Air. Gardner?   Which of
these two was weighed by Mr. A\7ells or the clerk, Air.
Cook?  It could not be that Cook weighed the one
that weighed a little  over a grain, unless he made a
mistake, supposing his evidence to  be correct.  And
it could not be that Mr. Gardner weighed the one that
the Doctor says weighed half a grain. So, here we have
two powders,'both alike.   Neither Professor Doremus,
nor Air. Cook, nor Dr. Wilkinson would be sitspected,
for a moment, of saying  that which they did not be-
lieve to be true.  Therefore, there must be some hidden
clue to this which is undeveloped.  A7on  must pick up
what facts  vou can to account for it.   Is it not pos-
sible  that  "Dr. Forman  and Dr. Wilkinson, after the
measurement  at the first drug store,  by  Mr.  AVells,
mav have, in talking it over, with the powders in their
hands,  both  alike, by  some misunderstanding and
without  noticing  it,  got them  exchanged (Appen-
dix  aa), so  that the next time Dr. AA^ilkinson had
his powder weighed,  he  had  the one  which weighed
a  grain, instead of  the  first one?  That accounts
for it,  and  leaves  every one  of  these gentlemen
testifying just  precisely to what  did  occur.   T  do
not  see  any other way  by which  this question can
be solved.  ' Now,  what  have you ?  The result  of
all  that is,  vou  have  two  powders, one of them
weighing little over  half a grain,  and  the  other  a 
174
DOCTOR LUND'S TRIAL.
little over a grain.  Now we pass on to the third pow-
der.   How much did that weigh (  Was it equivalent
to a  grain or  a  half grain ?  The probability is, that
whoever put up the powders would try to make them
alike.  But if there is any doubt in your mind as to
the size of the powder you must give  the defendant
the benefit of that doubt.  That is'just where the case
stands as to the quantity of morphine,  except the tes-
timony of Dr.  Lewis, who certainly states very clearly
the whole of the  transaction in reference to the mor-
phine that was in the bottle, which he carried in his
pocket.  On  the second of .Inly he  went  to Long
Branch.   He  arrived at Bergen,  on  iiis  return,  on
Sunday, and took two quarter grains, and subsequent-
ly he took out three half grains.   That on  this night
he rolled  it out of the  bottle,  and made it all alike,
and  that,  after  the difficult)'  occurred, he weighed
what remained, and found there were nine grains left.
That would seem to coincide with the statement on the
part  of the defense, only it leaves this: it leaves one
of them having a grain and a little over, and the other
a little over a half  grain, which would make a grain
and  sixty-eight  hundredths,  which  would  be more
than  three half grains.   It is  tor you to inquire
whether the other powder was still  smaller.  Then
there is another consideration.   May it not be that the
carrying about of  this morphine, the having it  ex-
posed to the atmosphere, in examining it, caused it to
appreciate in  weight?  Such  is the result with very
many-substances, particularly feathery substances.
   The next question for you to consider is (if morphine
was  the cause of  death) whether the defendant  is
guilty, although  he may have  been the instrument of
administering it.  It is alleged on the part of Dr. Lund
that he made a mistake.  It is  for you to say whether
that    mistake   involved   a  degree   of negligence
that   was criminal.   Negligence  is the omission  of 
                doctor lund's trial.            1 To

care in the discharge of a duty.   It is said to consist
in omitting  to  do something that a reasonable man
would do, or the doing of something that a reasonable
man  would not  do.   What is, or is not  negligence,
depends upon the peculiar circumstances surrounding
and  connected with the person whose acts are to be
criticised or examined.  The degree of care which en-
titles one  to recover of  another compensation for in-
juries, resulting from  his negligence, is such as a pru-
dent  man would observe in order to prevent the acci-
dent or injury.   If a man is in the exercise of due and
ordinary care, he is not negligent.   But  the care must
be such as the circumstances require.  This is familiar
law when a civil suit for damages is before the Court.
Every man must  respond in damages for injuries re-
sulting from his want of care.   Ordinarily he is liable
for the consequences, without reference  to the  kind of
negligence.  But the  rule in  criminal  cases is some-
what modified.   In the  case of a physician  who, in
his daily practice, is constantly dealing with health and
life, the  degree of negligence in the discharge of his
duties is well  settled.   By  the earlier  authorities it
would seem that in no case where a physician intended
to cure could he be held criminally responsible.  It is
now held there must  be a responsibility  though the
intention was  laudable.   A physician who,  under
ordinary circumstances which  require care, attention
and prudence, in administering or in dispensing medi-
cine, omits  the  use of any care, or attention,  or pru-
dence, or uses very little care, attention, or prudence
in the  giving  of medicines, in quantities which are
dangerous  to  life, if  death result from  such a degree
of carelessness, he would be held criminally responsi-
ble.   A physician must be at liberty to exercise his
judgment in the  use  of remedies and  in dispensing
them ; but in doing so he cannot with impunity throw
away all care, or act with  indifference as to the effect 
176            doctor lcnd's trial.

of a dangerous medicine, or  as  to whether the right
person receives a dangerous medicine when it may cause
death.   He  is criminally responsible, however,  only
in case  of gross negligence;  that is, such a want of
care as  persons who are  not accustomed to do things
with much care would, under the circumstances, give.
The mere lack of a degree of care with persons who
are quite careful in the performance of their duties, is
not  sufficient,  but it  must  be such a gross want
of  thought   and  attention   and care  as evinces  a
reckless,  indifferent   mind,  not  appreciating  the
danger  nor  impressed  with the  consequences  of
a  mistake.    In  our  State   a  physician  receives,
under the authority of the  State,  a license, under
which he acts, and he is supposed to have a discretion
equal to the emergencies which will ordinarily  arise
in his practice.   If he omits to  use such care and at-
tention  as would  show that he acted  without  any
thought  of  the  consequences,  notwithstanding his
license,  he would  be guilty in case death resulted from
the mistake he might make.   Now look at this case.
What do you find ?  Llere was Dr. Lund, who, in the
afternoon, had been to see Air Noonan, and had found
him bordering on  delirium tremens.  He had returned
and  had seen Air.  Coaffes, and  had  administered to
him; he had then  again gone to visit  Mr.  Noonan,
and  had returned  from  the  visit  at  half-past  ten.
Whether Airs.  Coates  had been to his  house before
that and he had  gone to Noonan's, in consequence of
her call, does not appear.  But why did Dr. Lund go
to Mr. Noonan's house again ?  Was it because some-
body had called for him to go there ?  Airs. Noonan says
she did  not go after him; yet he was there twice that
day, the last time being about half-past ten in the even-
ing.  Dr. Lewis says he met Dr. Lund coming home at
half-past ten from Noonan's, showing he had been there.
AYas Airs. Coates laboring  under  a mistake  as to 
DOCTOR LUND'S TRIAL.
177
the hour of her call being eleven^  Was it earlier I
When he said he would go in a few minutes, could he
have supposed  it was Airs. Noonan who had called?
Suppose it was  eleven when Mrs. Coates came;  what
did she do ?  She saw him and  told him she wanted
him   to  come  and see  her  husband;  she  left
no  name,  no  street,, no  number;   she  did  not
tell  him  her  name  was Coates;   but  only  that
she  a wanted  him  to  come  right  awa}'."   He
said  he would  do  so, showing what was the  state of
his mind.  You must look at it just as though these
things had  not  occurred,  and  you must ask yourselves
did he, at that time, act negligently '.   A'on saw the
two women, their  appearance, their size, the make of
their  shoulders,  their   heads.   Yon  could  judge
whether a person might mistake the one for the other.
If Mrs. Coates was at Dr. Lund's house before half-
past ten o'clock, he  might have gone to Noonan's by
mistake.  If she was not  there until eleven o'clock, he
did not  go  out at  all.  She came  again  at twelve
o'clock, and then she gave the name to the boy and,
as she says,  told him  to say to  the Doctor that Mrs.
Coates wanted  him,  which the boy contradicts, how-
ever.   The  Doctor  answers, from the head of the
stairs, that he will be down in a moment, and goes in
and  consults with Dr. Lewis.  Now, what took place
in that room ?  That goes to show how much mind
the Doctor had upon the matter.   Was  he in that
room talking about  the  man with delirium tremens ?
Was he  using  the care that  persons would use ordi-
narily under the same circumstances ?  If he was act-
ing as a prudent man, and if he was prescribing this
morphine for the patient  with delirium tremens, which
would be proper,  it is  for  you to  say whether he
would lose his presence  of mind suddenly, then and
there, and be guilty  of gross  negligence.
   There are  some cases  scattered through the books,   * 
178            doctor lund'r trial.

which touch upon the duties of physicians.  But there
will  not be found a  single case parallel  with  this,
although  such  a case may have  occurred,  without
being recorded.  The case of the  State vs. O'Brien.
a switch-tender in Newark, is  a very different case
from this.   Tie  neglected a simple, plain  duty; no
number was to  be told him, no street, no name.  But
the Court will take one sentence  and read it:
  u If the defendant,  at the time of the accident, was
intending to do his duty, but in a moment of forget-
fulness,  omitted something which any one  of reason-
able care would be likely to omit, he was not guilty."'
  A person  must be  held properly responsible.  In
this case, if there was an omission on the part of Dr.
Lund, under circumstances which render it probable
that  another physician  would have made  the same
omission, you must give Dr. Lund the benefit of it-
There is one case, in  1828, to which  the books refer,
where a druggist's boy gave laudanum instead of pare-
goric, and when his attention was called to the bottle,
and  he  was asked how much was  a dose for a child
nine weeks old, he gave a dose, fatal, even of pare-
goric, showing  that his mind  was totally abstracted
from the business he  had in hand.   Gentlemen, the
case is in your hands.

  The  District Attorney called  the attention of the
Court to the fact that one of the powders examined
had been tasted, and that would diminsh its size and
weight.   He also requested the Court to charge that
if morphine accelerated  the disease, and contributed
to the death of Mr. Coates, then  death was caused by
morphine poison.
  The  Court: The Court decides it is for the Jury to
say whether morphine might have caused death ; even
the belladonna may have contributed to the furthering
of the  disease.   The  question is not between bella- 
               DOCTOR LUND'S TRIAL.            179

donna and morphine, but whether the morphine was
the cause of death independent of the belladonna.
  The Jury retired, but their doing so was simply a
matter of  form, as they were absent only two minutes
before they  agreed upon  their  verdict.   They re-
entered the court-room.   The most perfect stillness
reigned throughout the apartment.  It was a moment
of "suspense.   On  their lips hung both the reputation
of the accused and the happiness of his family.   With
them rested his future life, whether it should be bright
and prosperous,  or dark and dismal.  The verdict
came, the clouds of doubt were dispelled, all anxiety
removed,  and all suspicions banished, by the magic of
the two simple words
" NOT  GUILTY." 
APPENDIX.
  (a.) This witness in her first testimony before the Coroner's Jury
r-aid nothing to  indicate that she gave her name to the boy, but
she simply made use of the pronoun " I."  The boy himself de-
nied (page 161) that she gave him her name.  See also page DV2

  (b.) Upon  page 115,  Mrs.  Welch  testified that  she gave  Mrs
Coates some brandy.  Either the cramps or the brandy made Mrs.
Coates' memory defective.

  (c.) Mrs. Welch  upon this point again contradicts Mrs. Coates.
(Page 111}.)

  (d.) This is a  disputed point.  Dr. Forman, upon page 69, ad-
mits that many physicians do not consider belladonna an antidote
to morphine.  Dr. Youlin,  also a witness for the State, declares.
page 102, that, so far from considering it as an antidote, he even
considers it as dangerous.   Dr.  Elliot, upon page 137, gives the
same testimony.   And when it is seen in the evidence that the
form of belladonna injected  into Mr. Coates' arm was about of the
same strength as morphine it>elf, the question is suggested which
would be most dangerous to human life, one-half a grain of  mor-
phine (or even  a  grain), or sixteen  times as  much of  another
equally powerful and poisonous remedy'!  The amount of bella
donna administered is stated upon  page 69.  In  this connection
reference can be made to  the  case quoted by Dr.  Craven, page
144, where a medical officer, poisoned through mistake  by mor-
phine, took so much belladonna as an antidote that he came very
near  dying  from  its effects.   Fortunately for the officer, the
physicians  in attendance did not leave him alone and uncared for
in the midst of  their  treatment, during an hour and a half, but
their selection of the proper remedies and their continued use, so
long as necessity required, at length saved his life.

  {e.) The reader can best judge for himself whether "it  was
impossible to give him medicine."  Many physicians believe that
even  in a  state  of profoundest insensibility, medicine placed in
the back of the mouth will still go down involuntarily.  See pages
li>2.12T and 130.  And even if medicine cannot be introduced into
the stomach, it still can be injected into the bowels, and so reach
the system.  Thi* the  physicians did not attempt, even if the 
APPENDIX.                     181
possibility of doing  so  occurred to them, until the idea was sug-
gested by Dr. Lewis, when  they at once proceeded to act upon
the suggestion.

  (/.) See Mr. Cook's testimony, page 159.

  (g.) It is a fundamental principle in all medico-legal examina-
tions, that most scrupulous care-shall be taken with everything
that is  to be  subjected to a chemical analysis.  Was it so in this
case ?  There did not seem to be a single witness able to identify
the jar,  its  contents, or the  powders, and  to  be sure, by tracing
their progress from  one person to another,  that they were not
tampered with.  Dr. Wilkinson, page 46, was neither sure how
the jar was sealed nor whether he even saw  it done at all.  Cor-
oner  Burns, page 57, stated that he left the stomach and powders
with some unknown person, to give to Professor Doremus.  But
that unknown person was not brought forward, and his absence was
a link missing from the chain of evidence.  Dr. Buck testified, upon
page 80,  that he did not think  any special care was taken with
the  stomach to keep foreign substances from  it.  Professor Dore-
mus, page 91, said nothing about the jar having being sealed, but
testified that he received it directly from  the  Coroner  himself.
This being  denied by the Coroner, made the  whole analysis per-
fectly worthless.   Dr. Lewis  said, upon page 149, that the stomach
was left carelessly lying upon  a painted  pine board, and was
finally put into an old jar.  The whole testimony, in fact, proved
that  sufficient care  was not  taken to render  the subsequent
analysis of any value.  But a q uestion properly arises as to what
value an analysis, no matter how carefully conducted, could pos-
sibly have been in this case ? The admission  was made that mor-
phine had been  given.  Dr. Elliot testified, upon  page  138, that
morphine administered in even so small an amount as the one-six-
teenth of a grain, just before death, could yet probably be detected
by a post-mortem analysis.  Consequently the finding in this case
of " mere traces " of morphine did not prove the dose before death
to have been excessive.
   It would be an interesting question for the tax-payers of Hud-
son  County to ascertain how much money they had thus unneces-
sarily to  pay Professor Doremus for his analysis, and double trip
to Jersey City ; also what they had to pay him for weighing two
powders of morphine, that had already been in the  hands of three
different druggists, three different physicians and one coroner.   It
was  hardly fair treatment to  the individual who labored  so
earnestly in wandering from one pair of scales to another, seeking
after the exact weight of the powder in his  possession, to thus
doubt his disinterestedness  and question the result he obtained,
by calling upon another man to reweigh the morphine.

   (A.) The same witness, upon  page 46, with a ready facility of
contradicting himself, stated the exact  opposite of this answer, 
1*2
APPENDIX.
that the post-mortem alone did not indicate morphine as the cause
of death.  The Doctor at that time had not learned by experience
to adopt that plan of answering which he afterwards pursued
upon his cross-examination.  If he had done  so he would easily
have avoided the present inconsistency,  by those, his few bul
favorite words, " I don't know."

  (t.) Dr. Buck, upon page SO, corrected Dr. Wilkinson, by  stating
that there were one hundred and twenty drops instead of sixty.

  (j.) The Doctor here makes the congestion precede the paralyz-
ing of the brain, while upon page 2S he reverses the order, and
states that the benumbing of the brain caused  the congestion.  It
is a little difficult at times for one to tell just exactly what the
Doctor does mean.

  (k.) Kefer back to page 26 and appendix j.

  (I.) Upon page 21 the witness alluded to cases where matter had
been absorbed from the gall bladder, and yet he " don't  know "
whether there are any absorbents about the gall bladder.   Even
a first year medical student would have answered the question by
saying"that there are very  many absorbents about the gall bladder.

  i//>.)  If bile is not absorbed from the gall bladder, how  did the
witness, upon page 21, suppose it could be absorbed ?  He certainly
made a truthful  answer to the question, asking how it could dry
up (" in toto ") without being absorbed, for it was certainly mani-
fest to all upon this point that he did " not know " what.he was
talking about.

  in.) Kefer to page 20 and appendix //.

  (o.) Dr. Elliot did not think  so, or else he would not have per-
mitted those persons to have gone without treatment, who had
taken that amount  in  order to commit suicide.  See pages 135
and 136.
  (p.) But Mr. Haslett remembers, as will be seen by reference to
page 142.

  (q.) Here again  it is  proper  to  refer to Mr. Cook's  testimony,
pages 159 and 160.

  (r.) Mrs. Coates, the  widow and principal witness for the prose
cution, swore, upon page  160, that he  did give her a letter of in-
troduction to an  attorney.  The  Doctor's memory  was certainly
poor, as the  many times  he contradicted himself in his evidence
proved ; and it may be that the  same interest in the case which he
exhibited in his  migrations after the weight of a powder  of mor-
phine, and which was  also  manifest  in  his volunteering  to save 
APPENDIX.
183
Dr. Lund "the trouble" of preserving the powders, was still
potent enough  to have influenced him in assisting Mrs. Coates to
obtaining legal advice.

  (*.)  Professor Doremus, upon page 92, stated that he received
the powders directly from Burns' own pocket.

  (t.)  The Doctor is very non-committal.  Even the last witness
but. one  upon  the  stand was positive enough upon this point, to
say he thought he could tell the difference between the two (page
51).  And Professor Doremus laughed at the idea of a man not be-
ing able to tell the difference between two things lying side by
side, one of which was twice as large as the other (page 92). Dr.
Youlin, page 102, Dr. Palmer, page 128, Dr. Lewis, page 147, and
Mr. Cook, page 159, were also  all  sure that a mistake would be
most unlikely in such a case.

  (v.) See Dr. Veir's testimony, page 96, where he states that mor-
phine produces relaxation of the muscles, and not rigidity.  The
witness's " opinion" would not have been quite so worthless, if his
experience of the drug had been more extended and his mind less
prejudiced.  He had  evidently  made a firm resolve to swear that
" Mr. Coates died of poison from morphine," and, right or wrong,
to ascribe every appearance and symptom to morphine.   In poi-
soning from belladonna the  jaws are sometimes rigid, as will be
seen by referring to a case alluded  to upon page 150.

  (w.) Which is equivalent, according to Dr. Elliot, page 136, to
seven grains of morphine.  As  a child, eight years old,  can only
bear about one-fifth as much opium  as an adult, that amount would
have been equal to thirty-five grains of morphine for a grown per-
son, or nearly  nine grains  an hour.  That can hardly be called
" giving it tentatively."  Did the Doctor also give it tentatively in,
the case of Mrs. Copeland, alluded  to in his evidence ?  If so, her
death in a comatose condition prevented  him from  afterwards
speaking of her as " living yet."

  (a;.) Burns' testimony conflicts with that of  Professor Doremus,
as will be seen by reference to page 57 and Appendix s.

  (y.) This contradicts Mrs.  Coates' evidence upon page 13.

  (z.)  This is the remark which Dr. Wilkinson  did not remember
(page 49).

  iaa) Such an exchange could not have taken place, as  Dr. For-
man gave  his powder to Coroner Burns before Mr. Cook had
weighed the other  for Dr. Wilkinson.  See pages  17, 57, 62 and
158. 
INDEX.
WITNESSES FOR THE STATE.
	Page.		Page.
Mrs. Mary Coates,	7	Dr. Charles A. Veire,	92
Dr. James Wilkinson,	14	Mr. Horace Bowen,	98
William Burns,	56	Dr. J. J. Youlin,	99
Dr. S. R. Forman,	60.	James Kelly,	104
Dr. Emmanuel Bock,	72	Mrs. E. Hassell,	110
Dr. W. Buck,	76	Mrs. Ann Welch,	112
Dr. Culver,	81	William Welch,	118
Prof. R. 0. Doremus,	91	Mrs. Mary Noonan,	121
WITNESSES FOR THE DEFENSE.
	Page.		Page.
Dr. Joseph Palmer,	125	Dr. J. M. Comeilson,	155
Dr. J. W. Elliot,	135	Dr. I. N. Quimby,	155
Dr. F. B. Mandeville,	140	Mrs. J. Haslett,	158
George Haslett,	141	Walter R. Cook,	158
Dr. J. J. Craven,	144	W. E. Rogers,	160
Michael Noonan,	146	Mrs. Mary Coates,	160
Dr. W. H. Lewis,	146	Joseph Ponder,	161
Judge Randolph's Charge page 163. 
 
 
 
 
£'J
tj?

 
WZ 100 L962t 1871




55821820R
NLM  0SET5MDS  S
NATIONAL LIBRARY Of MEDICINE
NLM052954052