TRIAL OF DR. PRITCHARD. 
r *? 
i O 
the presence of antimony in the body of Mrs. Pritchard. For this purpose a piece of the 
copper toil, one inch long and half an inch broad, was boiled in a dilute solution of pure 
caustic potash, the copper foil being from time to time freely exposed to the air. The 
coating disappeared from the copper, and a solution was obtained, which, when acidulated 
with hydrochloric acid, and subjected to a stream of sulphuretted hydrogen gas, gave an 
orange precipitate, which again was dissolved in strong hydrochloric acid ; this acid solu¬ 
tion gave, on being mixed with water, a white turbidity, which again was turned orange 
by sulphuretted hydrogen. Another portion of yie coated foil, measuring half an inch 
square, was heated in a fine glass tube, with a view to ascertaining the presence or absence 
of arsenic, which occasionally exists as an impurity in compounds of antimony. No 
arsenic, however, was found, nor had any been observed in the previous trial of the con¬ 
tents ot the intestines by Marsh’s process. Finding antimony thus abundantly in the 
liver, I made an experiment to determine its actual quantity in that organ. For this 
purpose I operated upon one thousand grains, by the process described above for deter¬ 
mining the presence of antimony, and obtained an amount of antimony-in the state of 
sulphuret (0T234 grain) corresponding to a quarter of a grain (0-25 grain) of tartar 
emetic; the amount contained in the whole liver being almost exactly four grains (S'Qo 
grains). “ v 
I next examined the remainder of the solid organs removed from the body of Mrs. 
Pntchard, and have to state, that I have found more or less of antimonv in the whole of 
them. I operated in no instance upon more than 350 grains, in ever)' case following 
Keinsch s process. I thus obtained the evidence of the presence of antimony in the 
spleen, kidney, muscular substance of the heart, coats of the stomach, coats of the 
rectum, brain, and uterus. On the 29th of March I received from the hands of John 
Mui ray, sheriff s-officer, Glasgow, two parcels of clothes, with sealed labels attached to 
them, with a view to my examining some stains upon them. One of these labels bore, 
‘Police Office, Glasgow, Central District, 23rd March, 1865. Found in the house of Dr. 
Pritchard, 131, Sauchiehall Street, and referred to in the case of himself. (Signed) 
A. M Call, Audley Thomson.’ Ihe label was signed by John Murray in my presence, 
and initialed by me. On the back of the label was the folio vying list of the articles at¬ 
tached to it: ‘One night-dress, 1 chemise, 1 nightcap, 3 handkerchiefs, 1 knitted 
woollen semet, a pair of worsted stockings, 1 woollen polka.’ The other label was 
similarly dated and signed, the list on the back being—‘2 sheets, 2 pillow-cases, 2 
towels, 1 toilet-cover. I examined such of the stains on these articles as appeared of 
importance, confining my experiments to a search for antimony, and I have to state, that 
whilst with many of the stains the result was entirely negative, I found antimony on 
the following : 1st, On the chemise, from a stain obviously of discharge from the bowels, 
and which had been marked by me A. 2nd, On one of the sheets, distinguished by me 
as No. 1, in a stain marked by me B. 3rd, On the other sheet, distinguished by me as 
No. 2, in a stain obviously of urine, marked by me A. 4th, On a toilet cover, in a stain 
of a reddish colour, looking like a wine-stain. It is hardly necessary to state that the 
materials employed in all these chemical operations had been ascertained to be entirely 
free from all metallic impurity. The following were the conclusions :—‘ 1. That Mrs. 
Pritchard had taken a large quantity of antimony in the form of tartar emetic. 2. That 
having regard to the absence in her case of any morbid appearances sufficient to account for 
death, aud to the presence in it of a large quantity of a substance known to be capable 
of destroying life, her death must be ascribed to the action of antimony. 3. That it is 
most unlikely that this poison was taken in a single large dose. Had this been the case, 
I should have expected to have found some more decided evidence of irritant action in 
the mouth, throat, or alimentary canal. 4. That from the extent to which the whole 
organs and fluids of the body were impregnated with it, it must have been taken in re¬ 
peated doses, the aggregate of which must have amounted to a large quantity. 5. That 
from the large amount found in the liver, from its ready detection in the blood, and from 
its being found passing so copiously out of the body by the bile and urine, it is probable 
that some of the poison had been taken at no greater interval than a period of a few 
days previous to death. 6. That I am inclined to believe that it had not been adminis¬ 
tered, at all events in any great quantity, within a few hours of her death. Had this 
been the case, I would have expected to have found at least some traces of it in the con¬ 
tents of the stomach, and more in the contents of the intestines ; whereas none was 
found in the former, and the amount found in the latter seems to be amply accounted 
