CORONER’S INQUIRY.

Evening Star, Issue 2947, 30 July 1872, Page 2

CORONER’S INQUIRY.

The inquiry touching the death of Jane Lydia Halliday lasted till nearly ten o’clock last night. We continue our report of the proceedings : Dr, Alexander detailed the results of the post mortem examination he made in conjunction with Dr. Harding, The appearances were inconsistent with disease, but were consistent with injury or operation. He was not prepared to say what caused the general sloughing that existed. In all probability something had been done. The cause of death was inflammation of the bowels, caused by sloughing of the parts. In answer to Air Cook, he said an operation of the sort required assistance, and should be done with good light. The eeraseur was not used without assistance. Whether a man continued to attend a person in deceased’s state without calling in assistance, depended on whether he was satisfied with his own treatment. Ho was not aware of there being any professional prejudice against Dr Docking, because he was a homeopathist. In answer to the Coroner: In plain words, something had been done to the womb to cause the sloughing spoken of.

Dr Harding corroborated Dr Alexander’s evidence, adding in answer to Mr Cook, that he would most assuredly have been surprised to have beard that a man of the highest medical character had attended the deceased and pei formed an operation singleham led.

Eliza Bowers, widow, said she had known deceased for throe years, end had seen her frequently during the hist three or four months. She saw her before the operation was performed; she thought on the Wednesday before. She was tiieu in great pain ; said that the doctor had told her she had a tumor, which would have to be taken away, and that siie would have to go under chloroform. Witness did not see her afterwards. On Monday week (22nd) deceased sent to her and told her that the operation had been performed on the Saturday night before. Witness frequently expressed to deceased her distrust of Dr Docking, and wanted her to call in Dr Burrowes or Dr Deck, but sho would not. always expressing great faith in Dr Docking. Sho had spoken to the Doctor sharply herself, and told the deceased if anything went wrong she would sift it to the bottom. The Doctor was always there at night, and sometimes stayed as late as 10 o’clock. Deceased seemed to be completely under his thumb. She had a sister in Victoria and a son-indaw up country. Some other witnesses were examined, but their evidence was unimportant. The Coroner having asked if Dr Docking would like to be examined, Mr Cook was understood to say that if hia client had been subpeeued he would have beep in the Coroner’s hands ; but seeing the turn that had been given to the case, that every little bit of evidence had been raked up by the police, and that nothing had come out in the evidence, he should merely advise Dr Docking, out of courtesy to the Coroner and jury, to volunteer a statement.

The Coroner : It is purely a matter for Dr Docking himself, as one who has a special interest in the question. Ido not press it, I merely ask if he wishes to do so for his own sake.

Mr Cook : Under the circumstances seeing the way the case has been pressed, and that thei’e is not a tittle

The Coroner: A good deal has been spoken of an operation ; and there has been a great deal of evidence about it; therefore we are quite willing to hear any explanation Dr Docking has to make. Mr Cook repeated that if the Coroner or the jury thought it satisfactory to them Dr Docldng would make a statement, to be taken for what it was worth; but subsequently he intimated that he should advise him to say nothing, seeing the turn that had been given to the case. Tiie Coroner, addressing the jury, said they would have no difficulty in coming to this conclusion from the medical evidence, upon which mainly the case hinged—that the deceased died from inflammation of the bowels caused by sloughing. Ho(v that sloughing was caused was the important point for them to consider. Both of the medical witnesses said very positively that no actual disease caused it; that it was in all probability tlie effect of physical injury, such as would be produced by the application of strong caustics or by some operation. In that opinion he (the Coroner), as a medical man, concurred ; and he did not see that disease could cause such an amount of sloughing as had been observed. The jury, therefore, might consider that the opinion of the medical men, which was a very strong one, proved that the sloughing was caused by some physical injury. He need not say that there had been nothing proved that connected Dr Docking with that physical injury ; and it was within the bounds of possibility that the deceased might have inflicted injuries upon herself. There was some mention made by Mr Cook of some instrument ; but as no evidence had been given in reference to it, nothing could be said about it. The surroundings of the case were certainly very peculiar-as regarded the making of the will for instance. In considering the question whether any operation had been performed, Mr Macfie’s statement was worthy of reliance. The deceased made a statement to him that an operation had been performed on her ; but then it was impossible to cross-examine upon it, and therefore he did not wish them to place much dependence upon it. He was well aware patients often answered the application of caustics or things of that sort an operation. If any had been performed, the surroundings showed it to have been done alone, without anyone being in the house, not even a nurse; but he again reminded them that the simple fact of the matter was that there was no positive evidence which would connect Dr Docking with the death of the person. As he said before, the case was surrounded with peculiar circumstances; and having said that, he thought he had said as much as he could.

After defending the police from the impu. tatiou thrown out by Mr Cook, the Coroner directed the jury to return a verdict in accordance with the medical testimony, which, after nearly an hour’s consultation, they did, adding the following rider:—“ While not venturing to censure Dr Docking, her medical adviser, the jury express their regret that he would not volunteer a statement as to her treatment and his opinion as to the cause of the death of the deceased.”