HAMILTON MYSTERY.

Taranaki Daily News, 20 June 1921, Page 8

HAMILTON MYSTERY.

RESULT OF INQUIRY. DEATH FROM HEART FAILURE. By Telegraph.—Press Assn.—Copyright. Hamilton, June 18. At the inquest on the body of Cecil Robert Smallfield, the coroner, after recapitulating the circumstances, said the evidence established beyond doubt the identity of deceased. An analysis made by the Dominion Analyst showed sufficient carbolic acid in the body on March 16 to cause death if it had been in the body at the time of death. The evidence of the analyst showed that poison and pure carbolic acid could only be obtained from a druggist. The police could find no evidence to show that acid not by human agency got on to or into the body. Deceased could notj on the evidence, have taken it accidentally, and any idea that it was administered by anyone else can with safety be set aside. The medical evidence showed that deceased did not die as the result of taking one dose only of acid, and his actions and state of mind were inconsistent with his having taken repeated small doses. A possible explanation of the presence of carbolic acid W«s given by the Dominion Analyst, that recently isolated bacilli of phenoldgenes present in the body might have produced the carbolic acid found. It was clear from the evidence that the first post mortem was incomplete. Even if the heart was found abnormal in structure, as stated, the practitioners should not have concluded the examination without having excluded other possible causes of death. Medical authorities showed that certain cerebral haemorrhage would cause death instantaneously. It was also possible that the heart of a person in sound health might fail owing to unusual exertion or cold water. Also the presence of carbolic acid in the system might cause shock and heart failure. There were other possible causes of deceased’s death. In the absence of any convincing evidence of a definite cause of death he could only find that deceased died of heart failure. The coroner added that in view of adverse comments made in the court, and considering the amount of insurance policies and other extraordinary circumstances, in his opinion the officers of the insurance organisations would have failed in their duty to policy holders had they not assisted in the investigations'