THE GAIN CASE.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume V, Issue 1468, 28 January 1887, Page 3

THE GAIN CASE.

After the exaraina ion of Dr McTntyre, the following farther evidence was Uken. Dr Drew onrrob -rated the e rider cc of Dr MoFntyre regarding the analysis made m August last, and respecting the effects likely to resu t from the administration of minute doses of antimony to a person m the condition of 0 ip.ain Cain during his last; illness.

Nurse Ellison gave particulars of Mrs Hall's illness, and of the incidents m connection with the ice wate**.

Inspector Broham and Detective Kirby repeated again tha story of the arrest of Hall, m his own house on the memorable Sunday evening, the former laying more ■trees than hitherto on Hall pressing to be supplied with a glass of brandy from tbe first .bottle, which was noticed to be dlicolorsd.

J. W, Webb, undertaker, and Edward Drake, texton, gave the same evidence •I on former ccoarione of (he burial and exhumation of Gain 1 * remains William Salek, apprentice to Watkins, chemist, gave evidence regarding the dispensing of t)r Molotyre'a preaoriptions ' for Gain on November 13, 1885, ua ounce of strychnine wpb purchased on Hall's account, bnt aa the poiion book was not In Go art, it were not known to whom it was ■applied. A. number of witness, who had been exaraned, was allowed to taice their departure, and the Court adjourned.

Dtjnbdiw, January 29. Df Hogg, ia the course of hii examination, was asked what is antimony.

Witnera : It is a mutal. MrH aprgitt : But besides beinj a metal, what is it?

Witness : An irritant poison. Dr Haggi'.t ; Al ! an irritant poieon ;It 1b not harmles* I

Witness : No. I am not awaro that metallic artimony itself is poison, Tartar emet'o ia the Bait of antimony— antinv ny In combination with cream of tartar. Tartar emetic is a poiaon m quantities of from two grains upwards.

Mr Hpgiitt: It's ta?tar emetic more likely to be fa'ally poisonous m email doses frequently repeated, or m a large donee 1

Witness : U Is more f*'al m small doses frequently repeated. Small dosea would be absorbed into the system, while a large dote would give rise to vomilmg, and perhaps a greater portion of it or nearly all would be thrown off. I would say depressants were not good nnder any circumstances. Tartar emetic administered m email closes is a deprraient Tartar emetic bo administered to a person m Gain's condition is injurious, and if administered lonz enough wou'd prove fatal. If administered m large quantities to a person m Oain's con littoo it would have a very dopro sing eff-ct, and if continued wou d be fatal. The symptoms described would indicate irritation, probably by poisoning. Tbe presence of antimony m a person co suffering would indicate that antimony might be the cause of those symptoms, Dr. Hogg was strocgly pressed by M' Chapman on the point, bat unswervingly adhered to his statement, that apart from any condition rf the system, If, anti mony were administered to a person m Cain's state it would accelerate death. Mis opinion was a single dose m a caße of tbat eort would accelerate death. Be should be sorry to give a dope of two grains or m emill quantities if 'repeated at four-hourly period*.