Page:Treatise on poisons in relation to medical jurisprudence, physiology, and the practice of physic (IA treatiseonpoison00chriuoft).pdf/265

 body, will prove poisonous, and will often act with a certainty and rapidity not surpassed by its effects when taken internally. Many of the cases furnish a striking confirmation of a circumstance formerly noticed with respect to its action,—namely, that it produces signs of irritation in the stomach, in whatever manner it is introduced into the body. In some instances, indeed, the signs of inflammation in the stomach were quite as distinct as in the cases previously described, where the poison was taken internally.

The subject of the symptoms caused by arsenic will now be concluded with a few remarks on the strength of the evidence which they supply.

The present doctrine of toxicologists and medical jurists seems generally to be, that symptoms alone can never supply decisive proof of the administration of arsenic. This opinion is certainly quite correct when applied to what may be called a common case of poisoning with arsenic, the symptoms of which are little else than burning pain in the stomach and bowels, vomiting and purging, feeble circulation, excessive debility, and speedy death. All these symptoms may be caused by natural disease, more particularly by cholera; and consequently every sound medical jurist will join in condemning unreservedly the practice which prevailed last century of deciding questions of poisoning in such circumstances from symptoms alone. But modern authors appear to have overstepped the mark, when they hold that the rule against deciding from symptoms does not admit of any exceptions. For there are cases of poisoning with arsenic, not numerous certainly, yet not very uncommon neither, which can hardly be confounded with natural disease; and, what is of some consequence, they are precisely those in which the power of deciding from symptoms alone is most required, because chemical evidence is almost always wanting. Either the peculiar combination of the symptoms is such as cannot arise from natural causes, so far at least as physicians are acquainted with them: or these symptoms occur under collateral circumstances, which put natural causes almost or altogether out of the question.

Thus, let the medical jurist consider in the first place, the symptoms occasionally observed in those who survive five, six or ten days; let him exclude for the present the secondary nervous affections; and instead of a compounded description, which may be objected to as apt to convey a false and exaggerated idea of the facts, let him take an actual example. In a paper by Dr. Bachmann on some cases of poisoning with arsenic, there is a minute account of the case of a lady who was poisoned by her maid with fly-powder and white arsenic, and whose symptoms were those of universal inflammation of the mucous membranes. After suffering two days from retching and vomiting, colic pains and purging, these symptoms suddenly became more violent, and attended with oppressed breathing and hoarseness so that she could hardly make herself be heard,—with vesicles on the palate, burning pain in the throat, and excessive difficulty in swallowing,—with spasm and pain of the bladder in passing water,—and with extreme