Victorian CSI E-Book

William A Guy

• Herausgeber: The History Press
• Kategorie: Fachliteratur
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 477

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2009

Beschreibung

The first edition of William A. Guy's "Principles of Forensic Medicine" was published at the start of Victoria's reign; the final edition, from which these selections derive, was published towards the end, just a few years after the Whitechapel horrors had pushed the emerging science to the forefront of the public's consciousness. With this guide in hand, a detective could tell whether the victim had suffocated, drowned, been shot, stabbed, or struck by lightning, spontaneously combusted, frozen to death or expired due to starvation - or, as the guide warns, was not dead at all, but simply in a state of 'suspended animation'. Suggestions include examining the face of the deceased for an 'expression of angry resistance', a clear indication of murder, and studying the demeanour of the nearest and dearest in cases of suspected 'secret poisoning'. With original woodcuts, case studies and notes on identifying the corpse and walking the crime scene, Victorian CSI will fascinate lovers of crime fiction and of true crime alike.

Leseprobe

Contents

Title page

Introduction

Part I Personal Identity, Age and Sex

Part II Persons Found Dead

Chapter I Real and Apparent Death, Sudden Death, Survivorship

Chapter II Drowning, Hanging, Strangulation, Suffocation

Chapter III Wounds and Mechanical Injuries

Chapter IV Death by Fire, Spontaneous Combustion, Death by Lightning, By Cold, By Starvation

Part III Toxicology 204

Chapter I Definition of a Poison, Action and Classification of Poisons

Chapter II Evidence of Poisoning

Chapter III Methods of Procedure in Cases of Poisoning

Copyright

PRINCIPLESOF FORENSIC MEDICINE.

INTRODUCTION.

THE State avails itself of the knowledge, experience, and skill of the medical man for three distinct purposes:—1. For the care of soldiers and sailors, prisoners, paupers, lunatics, and others for whose safety it makes itself responsible; 2. As officers of health and analysts; and 3. As skilled witnesses in courts of law.

The duties of the medical man in the first of these capacities are such as devolve upon him in the ordinary practice of his profession; but he is expected to prevent as well as to cure disease, and to add to professional skill administrative ability.

As medical officers of health, however, and as witnesses in courts of law, medical men have duties to perform for which the ordinary practice of their profession affords no adequate preparation; medical education, till of late years, no proper training; and medical literature no sufficient guidance.

The distinctness, importance, and difficulty of these duties led at length to the establishment of a distinct science, taught in separate courses of lectures, treated in separate works, and engaging the attention of men more or less separated and set apart for the practice of the corresponding art.

This new science either embraced all the duties the medical man may be required to perform on behalf of the State, in which case it received the name of Political or State Medicine; or it was divided into two sciences, the one known as Hygiene or Public Health, the other as Forensic Medicine, Juridical Medicine, Legal Medicine, or Medical Jurisprudence.

As regards the second of these, the term Forensic Medicine expresses with sufficient clearness the application of medical knowledge to legal purposes, and consequently it is used in the title of this work. The term medico-legal is also in common use, as in the phrases “medico-legal knowledge,” “medico-legal experience,” “medico-legal skill.”

It is to be regretted that this division of State Medicine has not made the same progress in this country as that of Hygiene or Public Health, a fact doubtless due to the difficulty of obtaining practical experience by those who are teachers of the subject.

In reference to the first of these sciences, Hygiene or Public Health, it is no part of our present duty to deal, but be it noted that in this department of State Medicine a registrable qualification is now obtainable only after compliance with a strict curriculum of study, and the possession of such qualification is necessary for all the more important Public Health appointments.

The history of Forensic Medicine is that of most other sciences. Necessity or convenience gives birth to an art practised by persons more or less skilful, without guidance from general principles; but its importance, and the responsibility attached to the practice of it, soon create a demand for instruction, oral and written, which gradually assumes a systematic form. Thus it was that the Science of Medicine sprang from an empirical art of healing. In like manner, the Science of Forensic Medicine took its rise in the necessity of bringing medical knowledge to bear on legal inquiries relating to injuries or loss of life; the medical witness being at first without guidance in the performance of his duty, and so continuing till a growing sense of the important bearing of his work on the interests of society, and on his own reputation, created a demand for instruction that could not fail of being supplied. Cases were accordingly collected, arranged, and commented on, illustrative facts sought after, special experiments devised and performed, till at length the medical witness received in books and lectures the same distinct instruction as the physician or surgeon at the bedside had already derived from written or oral teaching in the theory and practice of medicine, or of surgery.

But the importance of medical testimony received an earlier recognition from Continental Governments than from the public or the medical profession; for the first State recognition (1507) anticipated by nearly a century the first medico-legal treatise (1597); and the first appointment of medical men to perform medico-legal duties followed soon after, in France, in 1603.*

The history of Forensic Medicine in England is of more recent date. It begins with the publication, in 1788, of Dr. Samuel Farr’s “Elements of Medical Jurisprudence,” and the subject was first taught in lectures at Edinburgh, in 1801, by Dr. Duncan. sen., the first professorship being conferred by Government on his son in the University of that city in 1803. In England the first professorship was created in King’s College, London, Sir Thomas Watson being appointed to the chair in 1831. The new science soon justified the distinction thus conferred upon it, and made good its claims to more general recognition. It is now taught in all our medical schools, and recognised by the examining bodies; its principles are being constantly applied in our courts of law; and England continues to contribute her fair share of observation and research towards its extension and improvement.

The application of the principles of the science—in other words, the practice of it as an art—devolves, for the most part, on the medical practitioner. But those specially versed in the entire subject, or in important parts of it (such as Toxicology), or eminent in certain branches of practice (such as midwifery and the treatment of the insane), are occasionally summoned to give evidence.

There are many reasons why the medical man should approach this class of duties with apprehension. He is conscious of the importance that attaches to his evidence; he is wanting in the confidence which a more frequent appearance as a witness would impart; he is painfully alive to the unstable foundation on which many medical opinions rest; he knows that it is not easy in practice to observe the rules of evidence with which in theory he may have made himself acquainted; and, above all, he shrinks from the publicity attendant on legal proceedings, the unreasonable licence allowed to counsel, and the disparaging comments of the Bench itself.

Sympathising in these reasonable apprehensions, some writers of eminence, and most authors on Forensic Medicine, have tried to prepare the medical witness for his duties by setting forth in more or less detail the precautions he should observe both prior to and during his attendance in court; and by special directions for conducting medico-legal inquiries under the heads of “Post-mortem inspection,” “General evidence of poisoning,” “Unsoundness of mind,” etc.; the general precautions to be observed in the witness-box being made the subject of distinct treatment under the title Medical Evidence.

Before treating of the duties of the medical witness, it may be well to show the number of cases that occur year by year in England and Wales of a class to give rise to medico-legal inquiries. The following figures are extracted from the Annual Report of the Registrar-General for the year 1892:—

The following special causes of death were recorded in the year 1892:—

In the same year (1892), the deaths by accident or negligence were distributed between the sexes as follows:—Poison, men 340, women 174; Gunshot, men 95, women 7; Cuts and stabs, men 20, women 9; Drowning, men 2231, women 406; otherwise, men 1222, women 535.

The suicides were distributed as follows:—Poison, men 177, women 124; Gunshot, men 257, women 4; Cuts and stabs, men 393, women 108; Drowning, men 343, women 241; Hanging, men 532, women 139; otherwise, men 87, women 18.

In the year 1892 the premature, sudden, and violent deaths gave rise to 32,254 inquests, and as the qualified practitioners in England and Wales fall far short of this number, it follows that, if medical evidence were called for at every inquest, and the duty of attending at inquests were distributed equally, each member of the profession would attend at least one inquest every year.

The committals for trial arising out of these 32,254 inquests amounted to 180, of which 76 were for murder and 104 for manslaughter. In 2545 instances the death was returned as suicidal.

The number of cases requiring medical evidence in our higher courts of law may be judged of approximately from the printed returns of commitments for trial for offences against the person. In the year 1891–2 these amounted to 1859, and comprised—

If we add to the occasions for medical evidence arising out of these crimes, the civil cases in which skilled medical evidence is required, and proceedings in respect of lunatics, the occasions on which medical men are summoned to courts of law, either in the service of the State or on behalf of individuals, will appear very considerable—certainly numerous enough, and important enough in themselves, to justify all the attempts which have been made to construct a science of Forensic Medicine, to teach it systematically in books and lectures, and to draw up a code of instructions for the guidance of the medical witness in the performance of his duties.

MEDICAL EVIDENCE.

The medical man may, like any other person, be summoned as a witness merely to state facts which have come within his knowledge, in which case he will occupy the position of an ordinary or common witness; or he may be called to express an opinion upon facts observed by him as a medical man at the request of friends or others, or upon the views held by other skilled observers in reference to such facts; in each of these cases he becomes a skilled or expert witness.

In performing these duties there are certain precautions which the witness ought to observe, and certain legal requirements of which he should not be ignorant.

1. He should “use his best endeavours that his mind be clear and collected, unawed by fear, and uninfluenced by favour or enmity.” (Percival.) He will not find it easy to maintain this impartial frame of mind when the crime alleged is one of unusual enormity; when popular feeling runs high for or against the accused; or, in times of public agitation, when his evidence tends to discredit some popular movement or deep-rooted prejudice. Nor, when he is engaged as a skilled witness, or expert, for the prosecution or for the defence, must he deem himself free from the risk of partiality, even though, after hearing all the facts which should influence his opinion, he feels that he can conscientiously give his evidence in support of the side for which he is retained.

2. The medical witness requires to be specially cautioned against expressing an opinion on the general merits of the case under inquiry, thus offending against an admitted principle of English law, that “when scientific men are called as witnesses, they are not entitled to give their opinion as to the merits of the case, but only as to the facts proved on the trial.

3. A special caution is also required against indulging a feeling of misplaced humanity, or an equally misplaced condemnation of the law on the score of undue severity. Both these feelings too often found expression in former treatises on the lung-tests and in early trials for infanticide. But the witness should understand that he is not responsible for the consequences to which his opinions may lead, provided always that they are the result of cautious inquiry and due reflection. Percival accordingly treats “the dread of innocent blood being brought upon us by explicit and honest testimony,” as “one of those superstitions which the nurse has taught, and which a liberal education ought to purge from the mind.”

The witness approaching his duties with a mind thus free from bias, requires some instruction as to the mode in which his evidence should be given.

1. Bearing in mind the distinction just laid down between a common and a skilled witness, he should be cautious not to obtrude his opinions when facts only are required of him, nor dogmatically to assert as facts things which are merely matters of opinion. He should answer the questions put to him, whether by counsel, court, or jury, clearly and concisely, and if these do not elicit the whole truth, it is quite competent for him to offer to the court such explanation as he may think necessary.

2. His statements should be made, and his opinions expressed, in the plainest and simplest language; and he should avoid as much as possible all technical terms, and all figurative and metaphorical expressions—e.g., a blood clot is a better witness-box expression than an apoplectic extravasation, and a bruise is a phrase better understood than a contusion.

3. The medical witness ought also to abstain from quoting authorities in support of his opinions; for though the rule of exclusion has not always been rigidly acted on, the common usage of our courts of law is certainly to disallow these appeals. Nor is this exclusion open to any serious objection, for the witness is supposed to make himself master of the views of the most eminent writers on the subject matter of his evidence, and to use them as aids and guides to his own special inquiries.

But though the witness may not cite authorities, he may be asked whether A. or B. is an esteemed authority with his profession, and whether he (the witness) coincides with some opinion expressed in his works. If the witness answers in the affirmative, he becomes the exponent of the opinion to which he thus gives his assent. The medical witness should carefully avoid all flippancy of manner and exaggerations in language, and give his evidence in a concise, plain, and clear manner.

The foregoing observations relate chiefly to the mode in which the witness should give his evidence. The precautions to be observed in order that his evidence may be admissible still remain to be considered, under the following heads:—

1. Notes.—When observing any facts which, at a future time, may become the subject-matter for legal inquiry, the medical man should not trust to his memory, but commit them to writing, either on the spot, or as soon as possible after the transaction to which they relate. If (as in performing a post-mortem examination) it is necessary to resort to dictation, the notes of the amanuensis should be immediately examined and corrected.

The witness may use these notes in court to refresh his memory, but not to supply its place. If they were not made till some time after the events to which they refer, or if, having been made at the proper time, they have been entirely forgotten, they will not be admissible.

2. Confessions.—A culprit may make a confession of guilt to his medical attendant. This, to be admissible in a court of law, must be free and voluntary, uninfluenced by threat, promise, or bribe. No sort of inducement should be held out to make it, no leading questions should be put, and no comments made; but the medical man should reduce the statement to writing as soon as possible, read it over to the person confessing, obtain his signature to it, and countersign it himself.

At the same time the greatest care should be taken to ascertain the bodily health and mental state of the party making the confession. The necessity of this caution has been amply proved by cases in which, during febrile attacks, or after prolonged exposure and hardship, as well as in cases of delusional insanity, confessions have been made of murders and other heinous crimes which had never been committed. In times now happily passed away, innocent persons, under like conditions of body and mind, made confession of impossible crimes, such as witchcraft.

3. Death-bed or Dying Declarations.—These are admitted as evidence in cases of homicide, where the death of the deceased is the subject of the charge, and the circumstances of the fatal injury the subject of the declaration. It is assumed that the declarant having lost all hope of recovery, is induced to speak the truth by considerations as powerful as an oath administered in a court of justice. It is not necessary, however, that he should express his conviction. It may be inferred from the nature of the injury, or from other circumstances of the case. But if any hope whatever be entertained, or may be inferred to exist, whether it be spontaneous or on the suggestion of others, death-bed declarations cannot be received in evidence.* The case of Reg. v. Mitchell, March 22, 1892 (Mr. Justice Cave, Nottingham Assizes), is interesting as showing how strict the law is in reference to the admission of dying declarations. The prisoner was indicted for the murder of a woman by procuring a miscarriage by the use of instruments or other means, death resulting therefrom. It was held that upon an indictment for murder or manslaughter, a statement giving the substance of questions put to, and answers given by, the deceased person is not admissible in evidence as a dying declaration; such a declaration to be admissible must be in the actual words of the deceased, and if questions be put, both the questions and answers must be given, in order to show how much was suggested by the questioner and how much answered by the deceased. In this case the deceased was told by the medical attendant there was little or no hope for her, and when asked if she understood her position, replied that she did. It was held, there was no proof of a settled or hopeless expectation of immediate death sufficient to make a subsequent declaration admissible as a dying declaration, and although the deceased said she understood what the doctor said, there was nothing to show that she agreed with him.

But the person, or persons, inculpated by the declarant’s statement are not precluded from giving evidence as to his state of mind and behaviour in his last moments. They may be allowed to show that the deceased was influenced by vindictive motives, or was not of a character to be “impressed by a religious sense of his approaching dissolution.”

As dying declarations are but confessions of the most solemn kind, the same rules of procedure apply to them as to confessions. The medical man should put no leading questions, but only such as are necessary to clear up ambiguity. He should commit the declaration to writing, read it to the dying man, and obtain his assent, and, if possible, his signature to it. But if this cannot be done, he should make a memorandum of the declaration at once. while it and the words used are fresh in his memory. To this document the witness will be allowed to refer, to refresh his memory, when he comes to give evidence. Another essential part of his duty is to ascertain the exact state of the declarant’s mind, whether he is calm and collected, or otherwise, and whether he is under the influence of any strong bias or undue feeling of resentment.

4. Hearsay.—This is not admissible as evidence unless it form part of the res gestæ. A medical witness, therefore, though he may state in evidence the words he has heard used in direct reference to the case which forms the subject of inquiry, could not cite a case in support of his opinions if it consisted in part, as it must needs do, of statements made by the patient, his friends, or attendants.

5. Secrets.—The medical man, in the course of his professional attendance, may receive secret information which under ordinary circumstances he would be bound not to divulge. But it should be understood that in a court of justice he may be compelled to divulge these secrets.

It is now no longer necessary to warn the medical man against taking part in duels, even though his object in being present is to save life, and not to destroy it. But if in this, or in any other way, he has acted illegally, he, in common with other witnesses, is not obliged to criminate himself.

6. Wills.—A medical man may be required, on an emergency, to draft the will of a patient, or to witness the instrument. In taking the instructions of the testator, he should limit himself to such inquiries as may enable him to understand his wishes. He should write them in the fewest, simplest, and clearest words on one side of a sheet of paper, append the place and exact date of the transaction, and at the foot of the document (leaving room for two signatures) the following words:—“Signed by the above-named testator, in the presence of us present at the same time, who have hereunto signed our names as witnesses thereto, in the presence of the said testator, and in presence of each other.” The testator and witnesses must attach their signatures in accordance with these words, for the validity of the will depends in the main upon them. Witnesses to a will cannot be beneficiaries under the will.

The medical man should take care to observe the condition, bodily and mental, of the testator; and he would do well to make a note of all the circumstances of the case while they are fresh in his memory. Wills so made have been disputed, and the medical man has been summoned as a witness, and submitted to a searching examination.

* The following dates have an historic interest:—The penal code of the Bishop of Bamberg, proclaimed 1507. A uniform penal code adopted by the Diet of Ratisbon, 1532. “Constitutio Criminalis Caroline,” published 1553. Letters patent, presented to his first physician by Henry IV. of France, empowering him to appoint two surgeons in every city and large town to examine and report on wounded or murdered persons, 1603. Publication at Frankfort of the Methodus Testificandi of Condronchus, 1597, and of the works of Fortunatus Fidelis and Paul Zacchias in 1598 and 1621. First course of lectures on Forensic Medicine by Michaelis at Leipzig about 1650. See Traill’s “Outlines of Medical Jurisprudence.

* These figures are taken from the annual report, entitled “Judicial Statistics” (England and Wales), 1892.

* In a case (Trial of Bedingfield for the murder of Mrs. Rudd, Nov. 1879) Lord Chief Justice Cockburn, by not treating as a dying declaration what other high legal authorities would have considered as a part of the res gestæ, and therefore admissible, shut out an important piece of evidence. “A woman’s scream was heard from the house, and immediately afterwards the deceased was seen coming out with her throat cut, making a statement which, according to the rules of evidence, was not admissible, and in about ten minutes she was dead.” Mr. Pitt-Taylor, in a letter to the Times (Nov. 15, 1879), quotes no less than five legal authorities in favour of his opinion that the statement of the woman Rudd ought to have been admitted as part of the res gestæ.

PART I.

CHAPTER I.

PERSONAL IDENTITY. AGE. SEX.

WHEN called upon to examine the body or remains of some unknown person, we may have first to ascertain the sex and the age, and then to identify the individual by characteristic marks; or these points may have to be considered separately, both in living and in dead persons. The three subjects are here grouped together, and placed in the most convenient order; sex last, from its connection with the subjects of Chapter II.

PERSONAL IDENTITY.

Questions of identity are often raised in courts of law; as when a claim is set up to an inheritance, or a man who has been robbed or assaulted has to identify the thief or the person who has injured him. A witness may also be required to identify an acquaintance; and a jury may be empanelled for the sole purpose of trying the question of the identity of an escaped prisoner. So also as to persons found dead; and in coroners’ inquests the first step taken is to identify the body, or such parts of it as are forthcoming.

The subject of personal identity, then, divides itself into—

I. THE IDENTITY OF THE LIVING. II. THE IDENTITY OF THE DEAD.

I. IDENTITY OF THE LIVING.

The medical man may be required to examine, with a view to identification, alleged deformities or injuries, scars, or discolorations of the skin or hair; and to express an opinion on the changes that may be wrought in stature, face, and person by time, exposure, and hardship. It is also within his province to give evidence on the influence of the like causes on the mind and memory.

In order to give completeness to this subject, some questions will be briefly noticed in which medical evidence is not needed.

In cases of disputed inheritance much stress is laid on family resemblance. The celebrated Douglas Peerage case was decided in favour of the claimant, Archibald Douglas, in consequence of his proved resemblance to Colonel Stewart, his father; the twin brother, Sholto, who died young, having equally resembled Mrs. Stewart, the mother. In this case, Lord Mansfield strongly insisted on this resemblance of child to parent, as well as on the strongly contrasted fact that, in an army one hundred thousand strong, every man may be known from another; if not by feature, size, attitude, and action, by voice, gestures, smile, and expression.

Though these statements generally hold good (and not of men only, but of herds of cattle and flocks of sheep), still there are not wanting instances of persons having no connection by relationship or descent who have yet borne the closest resemblance to each other. Of this mistaken identity, Lord Chief Justice Cockburn, in the Tichborne case, cited, among other illustrations, a case on the Western Circuit, in which two men were tried and convicted for murder. The identity of one of them was sworn to by numerous witnesses; but it was afterwards proved that at the very time of the murder he was undergoing punishment for picking a pocket hundreds of miles away. A most curious case of this kind occurred in 1772, when one Mall, a barber’s apprentice, was tried at the Old Bailey for robbing a Mrs. Ryan. The witnesses swore to his identity, and the whole court thought him guilty; but on referring to the books of the court it appeared that on the day and hour of the robbery he was on his trial at the bar where he then stood for another robbery, in which he was likewise mistaken for the thief.

When the question of identity turns on the changes which time, coupled perhaps with fatigues, hardships, and privations, may work in the personal appearance, it becomes one of unusual difficulty. Cassali, a noble Bolognese, left his country at an early age, and was supposed to have died in battle; but, after thirty years, returned and claimed his property, which his heirs had appropriated. His appearance was so changed that he was imprisoned as an impostor. Zacchias was consulted, and, in his report, expressed his opinion that such a change might have been wrought by age, change of climate, diet, mode of life, and disease, and as Cassali had left home in the bloom of youth, had been exposed to the hardships of a military life, and, if he might be believed, had languished for years in prison, the judges, influenced by this opinion, and by the fact that the heirs could not prove the death of Cassali, decreed the restoration of his estates.

The general question thus submitted to Zacchias assumes a more definite form when, as in the French cases of Baronet and Martin Guerre, a false claimant is confronted with a real one, or alleges his identity with a person long since dead, as in the Tichborne case,* or when, as in this case, the claimant is alleged not only not to be the man he is personating, but some other person.

In all such cases of disputed identity great importance attaches to the existence, or absence, of such marks as nævi, moles, deformities, scars of previous disease or injury, and tattoo markings. The Tichborne case has also given renewed importance to the effect of lapse of time in changing the stature, form, and features, and in destroying or modifying the memory and habits of thought, as expressed in words spoken or written; and it has shown the importance that may attach to photographs, as the most exact representation possible of the personal appearance at the time when they were taken.

Scars and Tattoo Markings.—1. Scars.—When a claimant presents himself without the marks or scars known to have characterised the individual whom he personates, his case must break down under personal examination; but if these marks or scars are found upon him, they are the strongest possible evidence in his favour, and would, indeed, be conclusive but that they may have been fraudulently imitated, or they may be coincidences which although improbable are not impossible. That such coincidences may happen, is proved by the case, quoted by Beck, of Joseph Parker, tried at New York in 1804, for bigamy. He was mistaken for Thomas Hoag, whom he not merely resembled, but had in common with him a scar on the forehead, a small mark on the neck, and a lisp in his speech; but, unlike Hoag, no scar on the foot. That he was Parker, and not Hoag, was proved to the satisfaction of the jury by an alibi.

Removal and disappearance of scars.—The question of identity has sometimes turned on the possibility of removing scars, upon which some difference of opinion has been expressed. Thus, in a Belgian case that occurred in 1847, M. Vandelaer stated that scars might be removed by time or by artificial means, and the physicians of the prisons of Valvorde and Ghent confirmed this opinion by stating that prisoners are in the habit of effacing scars by applying a salted herring to them. MM. Lebeau and Limanges, on the other hand, contended that scars could not be removed. On this subject Casper states that the length of time during which a scar subsists depends on the depth to which the tissues of the skin have been injured. Scars of superficial injuries which have only affected the epidermis, or scarf skin, and left the true skin intact, may entirely disappear. But we may confidently assert that even the slight wounds caused by bleeding or cupping, if they have penetrated the whole depth of the cutaneous tissues, and, à fortiori, such wounds, injuries, or ulcers as have caused loss of substance, followed by granulation, leave behind them permanent scars.

Scars may, however, fade with the lapse of time; and, on the other hand, owing to their slight vascularity as compared with the surrounding skin, be rendered more distinct by friction, pressure, blows, or irritants. Thus, Devergie states that the white brand-mark of the galley-slave which has apparently disappeared may be rendered visible by slapping the spot with the hand till it reddens.

The belief that the effects of injuries may wholly disappear is probably founded on the very slight marks left by extensive wounds when they heal by what is technically called the “first intention.” Thus, in the case of a maniac who had completely removed the parts of generation, the place of the wound was marked by a faint white line, which a casual observer might overlook; and the severe floggings of former times, which left the back quite raw, are traceable after some years only by fine white lines on the back and sides, and, where the knots had fallen, by little circular pits. In a case in which we were consulted, the entire absence of both kinds of mark enabled us to state with confidence that the man could not have been, as was alleged, very severely flogged (G.).*

The removal of scars has another important bearing on the question of identification. It may happen that an impostor, aware that evidence will be forthcoming that he has certain tattoo or other superficial marks on his person which the man he is personating had not, resorts to heat or strong corrosives, or such agents as the vaccine virus, to erase the marks in question. The substituted marks thus become a very strong presumption of imposition, especially if the person bearing these marks cannot or will not explain the way in which they were produced, or offers some explanation that refutes itself. It will be presently shown that the claimant in the Tichborne case had two such marks on his left arm.

Shape, situation, and depth of scars.—The cause of a scar may often be inferred from its appearance, and the situation in which it is found. Thus, a linear scar, or a round or oval surface scar, on the arm, ankle, or temple, follows bleeding; parallel linear scars on the loins, shoulders, nape of neck, or other fleshy part, would be the result of cupping; a crucial linear scar on any part of the body would indicate a boil treated by incision; two parallel linear scars on the nape of the neck, shoulder, or inner side of the upper arm, would mark a seton; and a depressed, puckered scar on the same parts, an issue; a honeycombed disc near the insertion of the deltoid muscle indicates the operation of vaccination; a white disc with dotted border may follow a boil that has healed without operation; and every form of cicatrix in the neck, on the chest, and elsewhere may follow scrofulous abscesses. Scrofula, small-pox, syphilis, and lupus, in common with injuries by gunshot, burns, and escharotics, may leave behind them scars of every size and form.

Changes in colour of scars.—All scars, without exception, pass through two distinct stages—that of inflammatory redness (the immediate consequence of the injury sustained) and that of brown discoloration. In phlegmonous erysipelas, and after the application of blisters, mustard poultices, and other strong irritants, the skin, which was red during the inflammatory stage, assumes a dark brown or coppery hue. This it retains for months, and even for three or four years. At length, and by degrees, the skin resumes its healthy colour. But sometimes, when the inflammation runs high, the brown discoloration is followed by a third stage, or that of bleaching. Thus we have seen, after the lapse of two years and a half, the spot to which a large blister had been applied defined by a white margin, and white decoloration occupying the whole surface on a level with the surrounding healthy skin (G.). Such surface scars follow the less severe forms of herpes, boils that heal after slight destruction of texture, and even incised wounds and lancet cuts, where the edges have not been brought together, and some slight superficial ulceration has taken place. In those cases in which the inflammation, however produced, is followed by ulceration, and consequent destruction of tissue, and still more where gangrene sets in, the scars are wholly or in part sunk beneath the surface. In these cases, too, the scar passes through the three stages of inflammatory redness, brown discoloration, and bleaching.

The cicatricial tissue is wanting in the characteristics of true skin; it has neither sebaceous nor sweat glands and no hair follicles.

Healing of scars.—This is influenced by many causes, such as age, constitution, and state of health, the situation of the scar on flat, rounded, or hollow surfaces, on parts subject or not subject to motion, and in the direction of muscles or across them.

Distinctness of Scars.—This will depend on the complexion, and the tint of parts adjacent. Thus, scars are less apparent in persons of fair complexion, when the skin approaches in tint to the whiteness of the scar itself, and more distinct over a blue vein or discoloured portion of skin.

Age of Scars.—As has been stated, all scars, whether arising from injury or disease, are first red, then brown, then white and glistening. The redness, as a rule, lasts two, three, or four weeks, during the period of healing; the brown discoloration for several months, or even for a few years; the bleached appearance for the rest of life. But the duration of each stage is subject to great variation, as is seen in some cases of small-pox, where the scars are white and shining at the end of six months, while in others they remain brown even after two or three years. Scrofulous ulcers, too, sometimes leave coloured scars for the whole of life. A scar, then, that retains its inflammatory redness cannot be of long standing; one that has a brown or coppery colour may have existed for months or years; a white glistening scar, quite free from colour, must have been of long standing; but we cannot even guess at its age.

Some scars are parti-coloured, perhaps brown in the central parts, with a white puckered halo; or white in the centre with a brown margin. Thus a scar of ten years’ standing from a boil consisted of a white disc, with a circular margin of brown spots. Sometimes we have an opportunity of comparing a recent scar with one of longer standing due to the same cause, as in a prisoner who had two attacks of herpes, one under the right, the other under the left clavicle. The first, of a few months’ standing, displayed the rash in all its details in dark brown; the second, of many years’ standing, consisted of a group of scattered white cicatrices. Scars made during infancy increase in size with the growth of the body.

Rules for examining scars.—Place the scar, if possible, in the bright light of the sun, and, in the case of small and delicate scars, use a lens. Measure the scar carefully with compasses, and note its exact dimensions. Record the form and colour of the several parts of which it consists. Redden the surrounding skin by blows or friction. Note whether it is on a level with, or sunk beneath, the surrounding surface; and whether it moves with the skin or remains fixed.

2. Tattoo markings.—The presence or absence of these marks may, as in the Tichborne case, prove of the first importance; and the question naturally arises, whether these marks can disappear or be removed. Most tattoo marks are certainly indelible if not interfered with; but that they may in some cases disappear is proved by the observations of Casper, Hutin, and Tardieu; though these authorities differ widely as to the proportion of cases, Casper alleging the high fraction of 1 in 9, Tardieu the much lower one of 1 in 25. Much depends on the kind of colouring matter employed. Cinnabar, blue ink, and common ink create less permanent marks than Indian ink, soot, washing blue, coal-dust, or gunpowder. Skilfully performed tatooing with gunpowder may be pronounced indelible. The difference in the durability of the marks depends on the relative solubility and chemical stability of the colouring matters. When they disappear, the colouring matter is found deposited in the nearest absorbent glands, where it may be found after death. The absorption of the colouring matter is rarely so complete as not to leave some traces behind.

Tattoo markings may be removed artificially; but if the pigment be deep in the skin, a cicatrix will be left in the spot where the marks existed. An experiment was made by Tardieu on a prisoner who had a crucifix tattooed with Indian ink on his forearm. After several applications of acetic acid, potash, and hydrochloric acid, a crust fell off at the end of fourteen days, leaving only a flat scar, without a trace of the original design. Escharotics will, of course, cause the disappearance of tattoo marks; but their place will be indicated by a permanent scar, sunk more or less below the level of the skin. The claimant in the Tichborne case had such a scar above the left wrist; and he had a very peculiar one on the left shoulder, which several insertions of vaccine matter at points equi-distant would be likely to produce. This scar occupied the place of the issue of three years’ standing which Roger Tichborne had on the left shoulder; and it is therefore probable that it was intended to represent it.

Of tattoo marks, then, we may say that most of them are indelible; some disappear partially; a few entirely; and that if, in a dead body, these marks have disappeared, the colouring matter may be found in the nearest lymphatic glands.

Identification by photographs.—Photographs may mislead when used to represent the whole figure, inasmuch as the limbs, hands, and feet are not all in focus. But they may render great service when we are dealing with the fixed features of the face though the expression is less to be relied upon, for it is not quite the same in any two photographs taken by the same artist. Even these may vary according as they are in light or in shadow. In the Tichborne case photographs of Roger Tichborne, of the Claimant, and of members of the Orton family were all used at the trial, and served to show that the Claimant’s face differed widely from that of Roger Tichborne taken twenty years before, and also that the Claimant bore a nearer resemblance to members of the Orton family than to Roger.*

We will indicate some of the obvious uses of photographs.

1. The eyes.—The colour of the eyes and the direction of the line which joins the inner to the outer canthus, as well as the relative position and shape of the brows, are correctly indicated by photographs. Light blue and grey eyes print light, and hazel and brown eyes have a darker tint. By lines drawn through the inner and outer angles of the eyes and made to meet in the median line, we can determine whether the eyes have an upward or downward direction. All these points are well illustrated by the photographs produced in the Tichborne case. The iris in the upper of the two figures (Fig. 1), by its light tint, confirms the evidence of the witnesses that the eyes of Roger were blue, while that of the lower figure, by its uniform dark colour, corresponds with the dark slate colour of the eye of the Claimant. In this same figure the lines drawn through the corners of the eyes indicate by their upward and downward direction a very important difference between the two persons. The photographs also show marked differences in the eyebrows. Those of Roger Tichborne are wide apart and singularly well defined, while those of the Claimant are much nearer together and of ill-defined outline.

FIG. 1.

2. The ears.—There are certain peculiarities in the ear, which may be deemed decisive. One of them consists in the absence of a pendulous lobe, and the firm adhesion of the point to the angle of the jaw; a second, in smallness or largeness of size; a third, in its direction relatively to the profile of the face; a fourth, in the rounded or angular outline, and the relative size and shape of its component parts. With the exception of the lobe of the ear, none of these peculiarities admit of being changed by any manipulation, such as the use of weights or tension, and it is well known that that part is not greatly altered as the body grows and fattens. If artificial means were used to lengthen the lobe, they could not fail to be detected. The differences between the ears of Roger and the Claimant afford evidence which it is no exaggeration to term “startling.” The ear of the Claimant is longer by one-third, the greater length being largely due to the detached pendulous lobe, which in Roger Tichborne did not exist. The dotted lines make the difference between the two ears very apparent Judging by the published photographs, the ear of the Claimant closely resembles in size and shape that of George Orton, senior, and in size that of George Orton, junior.

FIG. 2.

3. The nose and mouth.—These features, taken separately and together, admit of very marked contrasts. This fact, too, is well illustrated by the photographs produced in the Tichborne case. The nose of the Claimant, with which the lips may be said to harmonise, is “a narrow one in a fat face;” that of Roger “a broad one, with inflated nostrils, in a thin face.” The central groove which joins the nose to the upper lip, is narrow in the Claimant, wide in Roger—a difference well shown by the dotted circles in the figures. The two mouths are also quite different in character. The comparison, then, which these photographs enable us to institute between the face of Roger and that of the Claimant leaves no possible room for doubt that the actual personal appearance of the Claimant is not such as Roger Tichborne could have presented after the lapse of twenty years.

FIG. 3.

Identification by stature and girth.—In the Tichborne case these points came into play. Arthur Orton’s Register Ticket, issued when he was 18, shows that he was 5 feet 9½ inches in his shoes, or 5 feet 9 inches in his stockings. The Claimant, carefully measured in his stockings in prison, was also 5 feet 9 inches. If, then, Arthur Orton stopped growing at 18, he and the Claimant might be one and the same person. But as men, one with another, grow two inches by the time they reach 30, there is a strong probability in favour of Orton having grown taller, and therefore against the Claimant and Orton being one and the same. In the case of Roger Tichborne, the Carabineer, the stature and girth of the chest were also put in evidence.

Identification by wounds.—In January 1846, when freshly-fallen snow was on the ground, a robbery was committed at Stigny, in the house of two old men. Next morning several spots of blood were seen on the floor on the left of a chest of drawers which the robbers had forced. Other spots were found on the snow in the direction taken by the robbers when they quitted the house, and always on the left hand of the footsteps. A shred of membrane was found on the road, which proved to be skin. On searching the neighbourhood, a man was found with his left hand wounded. Dr. Lemoine and M. Cœurderoi were appointed to examine him; and they agreed that the wound was probably inflicted about the date of the robbery, and that the piece of skin, judging from its size and shape, had formerly covered the injured part. The accused confessed the crime. (“Annales d’Hygiène,” Jan. 1847.)

Alteration in the colour of the hair.—The question whether hair can be turned from dark to light was raised in Paris in 1832, on the occasion of the trial of one Bénoit for murder. Certain witnesses deposed to having seen him in Paris at 2 P.M. with black hair; white others declared that they saw him at Versailles, at 5 or 6 o’clock the same evening, with fair hair. The colour of the man’s hair was jet black, and it does not appear that he wore a wig. The tribunal consulted Orfila, and Michalon, a leading hairdresser of Paris, as to the possibility of changing the hair from dark to light. Michalon replied in the negative; but Orfila stated that as early as the year 1806 Vauquelin had read at the Institute a mémoire on the property chlorine has of giving to black hair all the lighter colours, and even of bleaching it.

This case led to careful experiments by Orfila, and subsequently by Devergie. Orfila examined the mode of turning the hair from light to dark, from dark to light, and from light-red or chestnut to other shades of colour. Devergie limited himself to the verification of Orfila’s experiments on the effect of chlorine.

Change from dark to light.—The results of numerous experiments made by Orfila and Devergie with solutions of chlorine may be thus summed up. Black hair is changed to various shades of chestnut, blond, yellow, and yellowish-white, by being steeped or washed, a longer or shorter time, in solutions of chlorine of different strengths. Less marked effects are produced by combing the hair with that fluid. The chlorine is readily detected by its odour, even after washing the hair as many as fifty times with water; while the tint is peculiar, by no means uniform, and not easily confounded with any natural colour; and the hair itself is hard, stiff, and brittle. Better results are obtained with nitric and nitro-muriatic acid, which, diluted with 50 times their bulk of water, impart a golden tinge to dark hair, without apparently injuring its texture. Peroxide of hydrogen has also been largely employed by hairdressers for this purpose. All these processes occupy time; and the fraud is easily detected by chemical tests; by allowing the hair to grow or even by stripping the person, and comparing the hair of the head with that of other parts; but the fact must not be overlooked that frequently considerable difference in colour naturally exists.

Change from light to dark.—The following methods have been adopted:—

a. Charcoal and grease.—This soils the fingers; and on placing a lock of the hair in hot water, the grease swims, and the charcoal falls to the bottom.

b. Salts of bismuth, lead, and silver.—The hair, freed from its oil by liquor ammonise, is moistened with a solution of one or other of these salts, and then, for a quarter of an hour, with sulphuretted hydrogen water. The black sulphides thus formed may be detected by steeping a lock of the hair in dilute nitric acid, and testing for the base. More than one of our photographic processes would effect the same change.

A mixture of litharge, chalk, and lime, in nearly equal proporturns, dissolved in water (the Tinctura Pompeiana of the shops) was found very effectual. The hair was kept moist with it for three or four hours, and then allowed to dry. The chalk and oxide of lead were next removed with dilute acetic acid, and, lastly, the hair was rubbed with yolk of egg. The colour of the hair was thus effectually changed without injury to its texture. By steeping a lock of the hair in dilute nitric acid, the chalk is dissolved with effervescence, and with the lead converted into a soluble nitrate. Nitrates of calcium and lead remain in solution.

The hair undergoes marked change of colour in the course of some processes of manufacture. In turning rollers, for instance, out of the wood known as “green ebony,” light hair assumes a green tint; a similar change results from working in an atmosphere containing finely-divided copper.

The effect of sudden and violent emotions of fright and grief in turning the hair grey has been much disputed, although numerous instances have been quoted, of these Mary Queen of Scots and Marie Antoinette may be mentioned; a like change may be produced by disease and other causes which are somewhat obscure. In a case related by Dr. Gordon Smith, a complete change of colour in the hair of the whole body took place in a single night in a girl 13 years of age, without previous indisposition or emotion; and Dr. Anstie (“Neuralgia and its Counterfeits,” p. 94) has shown that, during attacks of facial neuralgia, the eyebrows and hair of the side affected sometimes turn grey, and even white, but resume their usual colour when the pain ceases. These changes in the colour of the hair are sometimes permanent, but the colour may in other cases be restored. When the hair of the head is the seat of the change, it is sometimes limited to certain portions only.

Identification by footprints.—It often happens that footprints are found on the soil, or the mark of a blood-stained foot on the floor of the spot where a bloody assault or a murder has been committed; and it may be of importance to compare the marks with the naked feet or shoes of the person suspected of the crime. As regards prints of the naked foot in the soil, a question naturally arises as to whether they can be taken as exact measurements of the foot itself, inasmuch as they must needs vary with the position and pressure of the foot and the character of the soil. But when the impression is that of a foot resting firmly on a tenacious soil, a comparison with the foot of the suspected person may be made with confidence; for it is highly improbable that the foot should yield the same mould in any two persons. When the feet of a suspected person present some notable peculiarity or deformity, the inference drawn from the comparison with the print gains greatly in force. Marks* of different size and shape are made by the same foot in running, walking, and standing. This shows the necessity of carefully comparing the impressions left on the soil with those made by the suspected person under similar conditions. In order to preserve footprints for future reference, it has been recommended by Hugoulin to heat the footprints with a hot iron, or chafing-dish, and dust powdered stearic acid over them. The hot iron or chafing-dish should be reapplied after each addition of the powdered stearic acid, and in this way the imprint is stiffened and preserved, and available for identification for an indefinite period.

Footprints in snow may be preserved by taking a plaster cast from an impression of them in gelatine.

The marks of naked feet on floors may require to be cat out for future reference.

The impressions left by shoes must be treated with like caution; but the original form of the shoe, aided in some instances by the position of patches or nails, may afford very important and even conclusive evidence, as in a case related by Sir Walter Scott, in which the murderer of a poor imbecile girl was discovered and identified by the marks of the shoes of the culprit left on the clay floor of the cottage during the death struggle.

Mind and memory.—In the Tichborne case, as in that of Martin Guerre (p. 47), questions relating to the mental faculties, and especially the memory, played an important part. In the first-named case considerations based on the facts brought out at the trial are at least as conclusive against the Claimant as the person, stature, and physical marks. The life the Claimant led in Australia was not such as to raise the question of the possible effect of hardship and exposure, whether on body or mind. There was no emaciation of body, but the very reverse, and no failure of mental power. He laid claim to an excellent memory, and the most plausible parts of his case depended on its exercise; and the fact of his using this, his good memory, whenever its employment promoted his views, proved his glaring mis-statements as to matters in which he had received no instructions from others to have been the simple result of ignorance. The same memory that claimed to recollect the name of a dog, or the number of a trooper’s horse, could not have failed when tested with the Christian names of hips, mother, the handwriting of his father, his place of birth, his Paris residences, the companions of his childhood and youth, the college where he was educated, the studies he pursued, the examinations he passed, the relatives in whose houses he was always a welcome guest, the agent with whom he was in constant correspondence, the lawyer who made his will, the friends who helped him, the gallant soldier who gave him his commission, and his long, painful correspondence with the mother of the lady he would have made his wife. Nor did the defendant profess to have forgotten any circumstances connected with the lives of Roger Tichborne and his relatives. Roger’s mother signs her Australian letter H. F. Tichborne. He does not say that he has forgotten her Christian names, which Roger knew well, but for Henriette Félicité he substitutes the homely English names, Hannah Frances. Roger took leave of his dying grandfather, Mr. Seymour, at Bath. The Claimant does not pretend to have forgotten the event, but shifts the scene to Knoyle. It was therefore of the very essence of the Claimant’s case that he should display a tenacious and accurate memory. It was by the pretended exercise of it that he gained all his adherents. To admit the loss of it would have been fatal to his case.