Page:Medical jurisprudence (IA medicaljurisprud03pari).pdf/481

 A. All the effects that succeeded the draught I believe were the consequences of it; and if the muscles were relaxed or foam proceeded from the mouth, they were in consequence of it.

Q. Is it not commonly the case with persons who die of almost every disorder?

A. Very often.

Q. Are not the muscles of the throat instrumental in respiration?

A. So far as to the passage of the air in and out.

Q. Is it not a very common appearance a few minutes before death, when respiration grows feeble for froth to issue from the mouth?

A. No, not commonly. I have seen it in epilepsies.

Q. What was your reason for supposing at one time that the deceased died of arsenick?

A. Every man is mistaken now and then in his opinion, and that was my case; I am not ashamed to own a mistake.

Q. Have you been very nice in your experiments; for instance, in the conveying the laurel-water into the animals?

A. If there was any want of nicety the subject had less of it than I intended.

Q. When an animal, suppose a dog or cat, is striving to refuse a draught you are forcing into its mouth, whether it is not common for some part of the liquor to get into the lungs?

A. If it did it would make it cough, but be attended with no bad consequences unless it was poison.

Q. Did you ever convey poison immediately into the stomach?

Dr. Rattray. Do you mean by perforation through the ribs?

Mr. Newnham. Yes.

Dr. Rattray. I never have.

Q. Did you ever convey any into the veins of an animal?

A. I never have.