48G 
ACCIDENTAL POISONING BY MOBPI11A. 
twenty-four hours, was quite sufficient to account for the death of any adult person 
taking the dose marked on the label of the bottle, i. e. two tablespoonfuls; indeed, one 
grain of morphia is sufficient to destroy the life of an adult. I have reported four 
instances in which death has been caused by this dose. If the person taking the drug 
is in a bad state of health, i. e. suffering from a disease of the lungs or liver, it is pro¬ 
bable that its poisonous effects would be increased.; but, under any circumstances, the 
life of the strongest and most healthy adult might be destroyed if he took two table¬ 
spoonfuls of this mixture. 3. The three small Phials. —These were marked respectively 
“chloric ether,” “dil. sulphuric acid,” and “laudanum.” There was but a small quan¬ 
tity of liquid in each phial. They were tested, and found to contain the liquids indi¬ 
cated by the labels. The doses as there marked are proper, and are capable of acting 
as medicines, and not as poisons, on the body. I have subsequently made analyses of 
two powders forwarded in sealed papers to me in a letter, one marked “ bismuth nitrate,” 
and the other “sulphate of quinine.” I examined both of them minutely; there was 
no morphia in either; they were the medicines indicated by the labels. I believe I have 
understated the quantities of morphia, as I find in the residuum of the gum mucilage 
there is a certain portion of morphia existing. I have heard the deposition of 
Dr. Gascoigne read. The quantity of morphia found would represent about thirty 
grains in the mixture; the bismuth prescribed was forty grains; there were not more 
than ten grains of bismuth, and it does not correspond with the amount prescribed. 
There appears to have been no morphia prescribed. I am quite clear that de¬ 
ceased died from the effects of morphia, producing insensibility and death by 
coma. The appearance of the pupils confirms the conclusion.—By Sergeant Har¬ 
vey : How much morphia do you suppose to be contained in the eighth part of the 
bottle?—Dr. Taylor’: Taking a proportion of four grains to the ounce, and eight 
ounces in the bottle, would make thirty-two grains.—Sergeant Harding: What 
quantity do you suppose deceased took ?—Dr. Taylor : From four to six grains in 
the dose ; it might have been more. This closed Dr. Taylor’s deposition, after which 
the coroner (E. Hoskins, Esq.) summed up the case to the jury, pointing out that if they 
believed the medical testimony, supported as it had been by the scientific analysis of 
perhaps the most celebrated chemical analyst of the day, there was no doubt that de¬ 
ceased died from the administration of a large quantity of morphia; that it mattered 
not that the deceased was at the time in impaired health, as the testimony of Dr. Taylor 
was positive as to the death being occasioned by morphia. Then came the considera¬ 
tion as to by whom that morphia was administered, and the evidence also seemed clear 
on that point that Sergeant Harding mingled the contents of the bottle containing the 
mixture. If satisfied on these two points, then two circumstances arose for their consi¬ 
deration. Was it done wilfully or unintentionally ? On that point they had the testi¬ 
mony of Mrs. Spooner herself, that she did not know of any ill-feeling existing towards 
the deceased on the part of either Sergeant Harding or any one else. If, however, they (the 
jury) thought there was any evidence of such malicious motive on the part of Sergeant 
Harding, then the offence would be, undoubtedly, murder. The next point was, was it 
done inadvertently ? And here he must remark that the law clearly was, that if a man 
entrusted with the performance of such duties as Sergeant Harding performed those 
duties negligently , then if death ensued in consequence of that neffliei-ence the offence 
was manslaughter. In this case it could hardly be supposed that a man could, except 
by exhibiting gross negligence, mistake (even if he did not refer to the labels upon 
them) a round-shaped bottle for a square, and therefore inadvertence could hardly be a 
proper term to apply to it. If, as he thought they might fairly do, they dismissed from 
their minds the idea of wilful intention, they would have to say—did the deceased die 
from the effects of morphia administered by Sergeant Edward Harding, and was it so 
administered in the negligent performance of his duties or not ? He hoped they would 
take all the evidence into their consideration, and return a verdict in accordance with it. 
—The jury, after upwards of two hours’ deliberation, returned the following verdict:— 
“That the said John Spooner came to his death by the administering by mistake of a 
dose of morphia instead of bismuth by Hospital-Sergeant Edward Harding, and there¬ 
fore we say it was homicide by misadventure.” They desired to express the opinion 
that they considered it their duty to suggest that in all dispensaries a special place be set 
apart for medicines fatal in small doses, and that it is absolutely necessary that, in all 
cases, properly qualified persons be appointed to dispense medicine, whose undivided 
duties should enable them to devote their entire attention to the subject. 
