小说搜索     点击排行榜   最新入库
首页 » 经典英文小说 » My Fifteen Lost Years » THE BRIEF OF MESSRS. LUMLEY & LUMLEY
选择底色: 选择字号:【大】【中】【小】
THE BRIEF OF MESSRS. LUMLEY & LUMLEY
关注小说网官方公众号(noveltingroom),原版名著免费领。
This brief of Messrs. Lumley & Lumley, characterized in the preceding letter of Secretary Blaine as “very able” and “unanswerable,” is too long for reproduction in these pages in its entirety, and hence only the main points are given. The document was prepared at the instance of Lord Russell of Killowen for submission1 to himself and three other Queen’s Counsel, with a view of obtaining a new trial. It may interest the reader to know that the money required to make this searching analysis by Messrs. Lumley & Lumley was raised by a popular subscription2 in America, through the good offices of the New York World. The eminent3 Queen’s counsel, after a full consideration of the analysis of the case, submitted the following opinion:

Opinion—Re F. E. Maybrick

“Having carefully considered the facts stated in the elaborate case submitted to us by Messrs. Lumley & Lumley, and the law applicable to the matter, we are clearly of opinion that there is no mode by which in this case a new trial or a ‘venire de novo’ can be obtained, nor can the prisoner be brought up on a ‘habeas corpus,’ with the view to retrying the issue of her innocence4 or guilt5.

“We say this notwithstanding the case of Regina vs. Scarfe (17 Q. B., 238, 5; Cox, C. C., 243; 2 Den6., C. C., 281).

“We are of opinion that in English criminal procedure there is no possibility of procuring7 a rehearing in the case of felony where a verdict has been found by a properly constituted jury upon an indictment8 which is correct in form. This rule is, in our opinion, absolute, unless circumstances have transpired9, and have been entered upon the record, which, when there appearing, would invalidate the tribunal and reduce the trial to a nullity by reason[264] of its not having been before a properly constituted tribunal. None of the matters proposed to be proved go to this length.

“We think it right to add that there are many matters stated in the case, not merely with reference to the evidence at and the incidents of the trial, but suggesting new facts, which would be matters proper for the grave consideration of a Court of Criminal Appeal, if such a tribunal existed in this country.

(Signed)

“Charles Russell, Q.C.
“I. Fletcher Moulton, Q.C.
“Harry Bookin Poland, Q.C.
“Reginald Smith, Q.C.

“Lincoln’s Inn, 12th April, 1892.”

This opinion was based upon the following points, presented by Messrs. Lumley & Lumley:
Justice Stephen’s Misdirections

The misdirections which are selected for consideration may be conveniently classed, among others, under these headings:

1. As to the facts disclosed in the evidence[265] of the procuring and possession of arsenic11 by Mrs. Maybrick and of her administering it.

2. As to the cause of death.

A perusal12 of the summing-up from beginning to end impresses the mind with the feeling that, whenever Mr. Justice Stephen approached any fact offered by the defense13 which threw light upon the possession and an alleged14 administration of arsenic by Mrs. Maybrick, he drew the minds of the jury away from it; he played, in fact, the part of the peewit, which swoops15 and screams in another part of the field on purpose to hide where its nest is, and to draw the attention of the passers-by from the right spot.

Mr. Justice Stephen pointed16 out to the jury in his summing-up: “You must begin the whole subject of poison with this, which is a remarkable17 fact in the case and which it seems to me tells favorably rather than otherwise for the prisoner. You must take notice of it and consider what[266] inference you draw from it. In the whole case, from first to last, there is no evidence at all of her having bought any poison, or definitely having had anything to do with procuring any, with the exception of fly-papers. But there is evidence of a considerable quantity having been found in various things, which were kept some here and some there—kept principally, as I gather, in the inner room.[6] ... There is evidence about a considerable quantity of poison in this house, and more particularly about one or two receptacles which were in the inner room, Mr. Maybrick’s dressing-room, as it has been pointed out.”
Misdirection as to Mr. Maybrick’s Symptoms

From the testimony18 it appears that on the 27th of April James Maybrick, before starting to the Wirrall Races, was sick. There is no actual evidence of vomiting20,[267] but he is described as sick, and as feeling a numbness21 in his legs while walking downstairs, which was an old-standing complaint of his of many years. Both he himself and Mrs. Maybrick told the servants that this was due to a double dose of some London medicine. He got wet through at the races and dined in his wet clothes at a friend’s (Mr. Hobson), on the other side of the Mersey, and did not return home till after the servants had retired22 to bed; but the next morning, Sunday, the 28th of April, he was taken ill, and Mrs. Maybrick sent a servant off hurriedly for Dr. Humphreys, who had not attended her husband before, but who was the doctor living nearest the house, and in the mean time got some mustard and water, telling him to take it, as it would remove the brandy at all events. Dr. Humphreys attended James Maybrick on the 28th, but was not told by him that he had vomited23 the day before.

Mr. Justice Stephen, when referring to[268] this, said: “The Wirrall Races were followed by symptoms which were described to be arsenical.” It is submitted that this was a misdirection, the symptom there referred to being sickness, and there was no evidence of vomiting on any of the days immediately succeeding the Wirrall Races. But on the 28th of April the mustard and water was given him by Mrs. Maybrick for the purpose of producing sickness and removing the brandy, and if he had been sick it would have been attributable to mustard and water, not to arsenic.

On the other hand, the medical evidence showed that gastro-enteritis might have been set up either by improper24 food or drink, or an excess of either; or, again, by such a wetting through as deceased got at the Wirrall Races. On the 8th of May Alice Yapp communicated to Mrs. Briggs and Mrs. Hughes her suspicions that James Maybrick’s illness was due to Mrs. Maybrick poisoning him with fly-papers.

Misdirection as to Mrs. Maybrick’s Access to Poisons

The purchase and soaking of fly-papers is the only direct evidence of the possession of arsenic in any form by Mrs. Maybrick, but the judge told the jury, and it is submitted it is a gross misdirection, that Mrs. Maybrick “undoubtedly25 had access to considerable quantities of arsenic in other forms,” inasmuch as the only evidence as to such access was that after the death of James Maybrick these two women, Mrs. Briggs and Alice Yapp, who exhibited the most unfriendly feeling toward her, said they had found in the house certain stores of arsenic.

It is submitted for the serious consideration of counsel that the circumstances under which these two women produced these stores of arsenic are so suspicious as to justify26 the suggestion that that arsenic was not there before his death, and that Mrs. Maybrick never did have any access to it[270] or knowledge of it at all. There was no evidence as to where or by whom this arsenic was obtained, nor was there any evidence that the police had made any effort to discover where, when, or by whom that arsenic was procured28.

[Note.—How and when this arsenic may have been procured by Mr. Maybrick himself will appear further on as a part of the new evidence.]

The places in which arsenic was found were open and accessible to every one in the house, and no person gave any evidence that he or she had ever seen it in the house before these two women found it after death.

As regards the black powder (arsenic mixed with charcoal29) and the two solutions of arsenic produced by Mrs. Briggs and Alice Yapp, Mr. Davies, the analyst30, gave evidence that, when analyzing31 the contents of the various bottles, he had searched diligently32 and microscopically33 for any traces, and could find no trace of charcoal having[271] been introduced into any of them. So this circumstantial evidence may be eliminated.

As regards white arsenic, also produced by these women, it must be observed that not only was it not shown that Mrs. Maybrick had purchased any, but it is submitted that the judge ought to have pointed out to the jury, as the fact is, that it would have been almost impossible for her or any woman to have obtained any white arsenic at all. No shopkeeper dare sell it to any one except to a medical man, and even then under the stringent34 restrictions35 of the Sale of Poison Act.

At the trial a wholesale36 druggist (Thompson, of Liverpool) gave evidence that James Maybrick constantly visited his cousin, who had been in his employment at his stores, where he could have obtained white arsenic from him without any difficulty; and it will be observed that it was found in his hatbox.

It is a remarkable thing in this connection that, while Edwin Maybrick called the[272] police in on Sunday night, and gave them the black solutions and white solutions which Mrs. Briggs had found on the Sunday morning, he did not give them the black powder which Alice Yapp had found on the-night before; and, in fact, that Michael Maybrick did not give it to the police until Tuesday, the 14th.

It is also a remarkable fact that, although these black solutions and that white solution of arsenic and that solid arsenic which Mrs. Briggs had found, were not handed by the police to the analyst until several days afterward37, and were therefore not known to be arsenic by anybody, yet Mrs. Briggs was able to inform Mrs. Maybrick on Tuesday, the 14th, as was testified to, that these bottles contained arsenic.

It is submitted that Mrs. Briggs could not have known that without some other means of knowledge than looking at them.

The importance of this misdirection of the judge as to the question of possession of arsenic by Mrs. Maybrick can not be[273] overstated. It was conclusively38 shown that no decoction of fly-papers or of the black powder was the source of the arsenic with which certain articles found in the house and office were said to be infected, because the analyst said he had searched for the fibers40 of the papers and for the charcoal, and could not find any traces of either. If Mrs. Maybrick knew of the pure arsenic, why should she have bought the fly-papers, either for a cosmetic41 purpose or murder, and what should she have wanted with “poison for cats?”
Misdirection as to “Traces” of Arsenic

Out of the list submitted by the police, therefore, the only two things which could have been the source of the arsenic were the bottle of saturated42 solution, No. 10 in the Police List, and the bottle of solid arsenic, No. 11 in the Police List.

It may be observed that if all the arsenic or “traces” of the same, with which various[274] things were said to be infected, were collected together, it would not constitute a fatal dose, the smallest fatal dose recorded being two grains, and this in the case of a woman, and surely not in the case of a person addicted43 to large doses of arsenic.

At the inquest Mr. Davies defined what he meant by the word “trace.” He said:

“It means something under 1/100 part of a grain. It does not mean something which I could not weigh, but something which I could not guarantee to be absolutely free from other things; but anything under 1/100 part of a grain I should not consider satisfactory. If I said distinct traces, I should say it meant something between 1/100 and 1/1000 part of a grain, while a minute trace is less than 1/1000 part of a grain.”

In reference to Reinsch’s test which Mr. Davies used in these experiments, this passage occurs in Taylor’s “Medical Jurisprudence,” vol. i., p. 268: “The mere10 presence of a gray deposit on pure copper44 affords no absolute proof of the presence of arsenic.[275] Bismuth, antimony, and mercury all yield deposits with Reinsch’s test. The gray deposit of bismuth may easily be taken for arsenic.” And again: “The errors into which the faulty methods of applying Reinsch’s test lead have led its reliability45 to be much discredited46, and, although in skilful47 hands the results are trustworthy, it would be perhaps unsafe to rely upon it in an important criminal investigation48.”

It is submitted that the evidence relating to the articles which Mr. Davies said were infected with arsenic only to the extent of an unweighable trace could not and ought not to be regarded as proof that any arsenic at all was there, or as being anything more than a suspicion upon this analyst’s mind that what he saw was arsenic, and that it was a misdirection on the part of Mr. Justice Stephen to treat a mere expression of opinion of that kind as proof of the presence of arsenic.

Misdirection as to Arsenic in Solution

It will be observed that the only things of which James Maybrick could have partaken [but did not], in which arsenic in a weighable form was present, were the bottle of Valentine’s meat juice and the pot of glycerin, and that the arsenic found in them was found in a state of solution.

As regards the half grain of arsenic found in the meat juice, scientific evidence will be forthcoming that it is a physical impossibility for any person to dissolve half a grain of solid arsenic in 411 grains of Valentine’s meat juice, which is all the liquid that was in the bottle when it was handed to Mr. Davies.

Mr. Davies, moreover, found that (although he used very loose and unscientific language in his evidence) the specific gravity of the meat juice was considerably49 reduced, thereby50 showing that the half grain of arsenic found in it had been introduced in the form of arsenic in solution.

It will now be observed that the only arsenic in solution which was available, among the stores of arsenic found in the house, was the bottle No. 10 in the police list, and it is submitted that bottle No. 11 (solid arsenic) must, like the black solutions, be eliminated from any store of arsenic which Mrs. Maybrick, whether she had access to it or not, could have employed for the purpose of infecting any of the things found in the house to be infected.

Mr. Davies described the bottle No. 10 as a saturated solution of white arsenic, and he stated that it had been dissolved with water, some of the crystals remaining at the bottom undissolved.

At the inquest he stated, in reply to a question by the coroner: “The bottle No. 10, which was also in the box, contained a saturated solution of arsenic and solid arsenic at the bottom. There was no label on it. It contained, solid and liquid, perhaps two grains—a grain at all events.”

So it is evident that there was not a fatal[278] dose even in the stores which Mrs. Maybrick could have used had she had access to it.

As regards this bottle, Mr. Justice Stephen told the jury: “A saturated solution is a solution which has taken up as much arsenic as it can, the water becoming saturated with arsenic; the remainder of the arsenic is found at the bottom. In this case there was a saturated solution of arsenic in the water and a small portion of arsenic at the bottom. With regard to that these questions arise: What was it for? Who is wanting such a quantity of strong solution of arsenic? Who has put it there and how is it to be used? These are the questions, in the solution of which I can not help you. There is nothing definite about it to connect Mr. Maybrick with it certainly.[7] If he was in the habit of arsenic eating he would not keep it saturated in[279] water in quantities he could not possibly use.”

Mr. Davies found that this bottle “contained in solid and liquid perhaps two grains—a grain at all events.” Now arsenic can be dissolved in water by two processes. In cold water by shaking it constantly for several hours (and the strongest solution that can be obtained by the cold-water process is a one-per-cent. solution, which is no stronger than the ordinary Fowler’s solution as sold in the shops). That is called a “saturated solution” by the cold-water process. A solution of three or even four per cent. can be obtained with boiling water, but only when the water is kept on the constant boil for several hours; and that is also called a “saturated solution,” so that the phrase “saturated solution” may mean either a weak solution of one per cent., such as is gained by the cold-water process, or a stronger solution of three per cent. by the boiling-water process, and Mr. Justice Stephen[280] misdirected the jury as to the meaning of the phrase “saturated solution.” He should have told them that a “saturated solution” of arsenic is one which has by any particular process taken up as much arsenic and retained it in solution as is possible by that particular process, and that it might consequently be either a weak or a stronger solution, according as it has been dissolved by the cold-water or boiling-water process, by shaking for hours or boiling for hours.

The questions put to the jury by Mr. Justice Stephen upon the interpretation51 of the phrase “saturated solution” which he gave, namely, “How is it to be used?” “Who is wanting such a quantity of strong solution of arsenic?” are misdirections.
Mr. Clayton’s Experiments

Counsel are referred to experiments made with solutions of arsenic by Mr. E. Godwin Clayton, of the firm of Hassall &[281] Clayton. From these it will be seen that by the experiment there marked B, where the arsenic was shaken at intervals53 of twenty minutes for six hours, the result shows that it would require 186? grains of water to carry half a grain of arsenic. And that by experiment C, which is the strongest possible solution by the cold-water process, namely, one-per-cent. strength (equal to Fowler’s solution), it would require 50 grains of water to carry half a grain, but to obtain this the arsenic has to be shaken with cold water at frequent intervals for four days.

Mr. Godwin Clayton, in his report as to these experiments, remarks: “I think, however, that as few people outside a chemical laboratory would have the patience or opportunity to make a solution by shaking it at short intervals during four days, the solution obtained in experiment B—namely, an arsenical strength of 0.268 per cent.—might be described in a popular[282] sense, though not with strict scientific accuracy, as ‘saturated solution of arsenic.’” But then if that be so, that is only about a quarter of the strength of Fowler’s solution! The evidence of Mr. Davies as to the specific gravity of the meat juice being considerably reduced ought, it is submitted, not to have been received as scientific evidence, and it was a misdirection to treat it as such, because without the slightest difficulty, as will be seen by a reference to Mr. Godwin Clayton’s experiments, Mr. Davies’s evidence ought to have been scientifically exact, because he could have shown that (for example) if a solution of the strength of experiment B had been used, the 411 grains of liquid would have contained 186? of solution of arsenic and 244? grains of meat juice; and, further, that the specific gravity of the meat juice would, in that case, have been lowered from 1.2143 to 1.1263; and it was, therefore, not only possible, but the duty of Mr. Davies, as an expert, to have shown, by[283] comparing the specific gravity of the bottle No. 10 and the specific gravity of Valentine’s meat juice, that the “arsenic in solution” which had been introduced into it had been introduced into it out of that particular bottle, No. 10.

Then, again, it will be seen from these experiments of Mr. Godwin Clayton that if the solution in bottle No. 10 had been a strong hot-water solution of three per cent., the specific gravity would not have been considerably reduced, because the meat juice would in that case have contained only 15? grains of arsenical solution. To have obtained such a solution, the “arsenic powder” must have been boiled with distilled54 water for four hours; and it is submitted that it would have been impossible, in the first place, for Mrs. Maybrick, or any person outside a laboratory, to have adopted such a process of dissolving arsenic without the knowledge of the servants or anybody else; and, further, that even if she could have done this, she could not have possibly[284] weighed out exactly half a grain of it, which is what Mr. Davies found; and it is suggested that the only way in which that half grain of arsenic could possibly have been measured into that bottle, must have been by introducing Fowler’s solution, and no Fowler’s solution was found in the house—and in no way was it suggested that Mrs. Maybrick had any access to any, though others in that house may have been able to procure27 such a medicinal dose of it.
Misdirection as to Arsenic in Glycerin

As regards the glycerin, Inspector55 Baxendale said he found this bottle in the lavatory56 on the 18th of May. There was no evidence that this bottle had ever been in Mrs. Maybrick’s hands, and there was no evidence that any part of it had been used by James Maybrick. There was evidence that it was a freshly opened bottle. Scientific evidence will be forthcoming that it is[285] an absolute impossibility for any person to distribute arsenic evenly through a pound of glycerin.

It is suggested that there is no possible means by which that glycerin could have been administered with a felonious intent to James Maybrick; the mere moistening the lips with small quantities of it could not have operated in that way.

Scientific evidence will be forthcoming that glycerin, when kept in glass bottles, generally does contain arsenic, which it extracts from the glass of the bottle.

In 1888 Jahns drew attention to arsenic being present in glycerin—Chemische Zeitung.

In 1889 Vulpius also drew attention to it—Apotheker Zeitung.

Siebold (see Pharmaceutical57 Journal, 5th October, 1889) said, at the Pharmaceutical Conference, on the 11th September, 1889, that his experiments were made with toilet and pharmaceutical glycerin, and that the majority showed presence of arsenious[286] acid, varying from 1 grain in 4,000 to 1 grain in 5,000.

It may be pointed out that this is a larger quantity than Mr. Davies found, which was only “about 1/10 of a grain in 1,000 grains.”

The evidence relating to the administration of glycerin was that of Nurse Gore58 and Nurse Callery, and was to the effect that on Thursday night they refreshed James Maybrick’s mouth with glycerin and borax mixed in a saucer that was on the table in the sick-room, and that Mrs. Maybrick had brought the glycerin that was used either from the medicine cupboard in her room or from the washstand drawer.

The attention of counsel is called to the fact that this saucer of mixed glycerin and borax which was actually used was not produced at the trial, but Justice Stephen, when summing up to the jury, said: “Then you get the blue bottle which contained Price’s glycerin. Here is the bottle, which there is no evidence to show that[287] Mrs. Maybrick had even seen or touched; a considerable portion is still left. That glycerin was found in the lavatory outside, and if the bottle were filled and the same proportion of arsenic added, there would be two-thirds of a grain of arsenic in it. You have heard already that his mouth was moistened with glycerin and borax apparently59 the night before he died. If that be so, and the glycerin be really poison, it is certainly a very shocking result to arrive at.” Sir Charles Russell: “I think the evidence of Nurse Gore is that the bottle that was used the night before was taken, not from the lavatory, but from the cupboard of the washstand.” His Lordship: “It does not follow that that was the same bottle. One does not know the history of that bottle or where it went to. It may or may not have been the glycerin which was used for the purpose I have mentioned, namely, for moistening the lips. But it does appear in the case that a bottle was found in the lavatory, and that it contained[288] a grain of arsenic, and that his mouth was moistened with glycerin and borax during the night in question; but the identity between that bottle and the bottle which contained the glycerin is not established and not proved.”

It is submitted that the above was an unfair and inflammatory suggestion, and amounts to a gross MISDIRECTION, especially after all the evidence about the condition of deceased’s tongue and his complaining of a sensation as of a hair in his throat.

This concludes the whole of the evidence to any articles containing arsenic which were found in the house, in which the arsenic was present in anything except as unweighable “traces.”
Misdirection as to Evidence of Physicians

Justice Stephen further summed up: “The witness (Dr. Stevenson) stated: ‘I should say more arsenic was administered[289] on the 3d of May.’” It will be seen, by a reference to Dr. Stevenson’s evidence, that Dr. Stevenson did not say this.

Copyright, 1904, by Pach Bros., New York.

HON. JOHN HAY,
American Secretary of State, 1898—

Dr. Humphreys was the only medical man in attendance at that time. The only symptoms on Friday, the 3d, were that he had “vomited twice.” At the inquest Dr. Humphreys said as to this:

Q. “Did he say anything about his lunch on the previous day, Thursday, the 2d?”

A. “Yes; he said some inferior sherry had been put into it, and that it had made him as bad as ever again.”

And that also appears in Dr. Stevenson’s evidence at the trial:

“He told the doctor he had not been well since the previous day, when I learn he had his lunch at the office.”

It can not be suggested that the fact that the man vomited twice on Friday night was attributable to any arsenic taken at midday on Thursday, for Dr. Stevenson testified that the vomiting, which is a[290] symptom of arsenic, usually follows the administration in about half an hour.

Dr. Carter, who was not called in to the patient until Tuesday, May 7th, in his evidence, however, suggested that:

“I judge that the fatal dose must have been given on Friday, the 3d, but a dose might have been given after that. When he was so violently ill on the Friday, I thought it would be from the effects of the fatal dose, but there might have been subsequent doses”; and in cross-examination he explained that he had made this suggestion about the fatal dose because: “I was told he was unable to retain anything on his stomach for several days.”

It is submitted that the judge, when summing up, MISDIRECTED the jury by ignoring entirely61 the evidence and substituting for it this reckless suggestion of Dr. Carter’s.

Misdirection as to Times When Arsenic May Have Been Administered

The only occasions on which it was possible to suggest any act of administration of arsenic were the medicine on the 27th of April and the food at the office on May 1st and May 2d; and the judge told the jury:

“The argument that the prisoner administered the arsenic is an argument depending upon the combination of a great variety of circumstances of suspicion. The theory is that there was poisoning by successive doses, and it is rather suggested that there may have been several doses. But I do not know that there was any effort made to point out the precise times at which doses may have been administered.”

Under such circumstances it is submitted that the statement of the judge as to the medicine on the 27th of April, and as to the food at office, and as to the statement that “Friday (3d May) was the day[292] on which began the symptoms of what may be called the fatal dose,” are misdirections of vital importance to this case, and such as to entitle Mrs. Maybrick to have the verdict set aside and have a new trial ordered.
Misdirection as to Mrs. Maybrick’s Changing Medicine Bottles

As regards the question of attempts to administer arsenic, the occasions upon which such conduct was imputed62 are changing medicine from one bottle into another and the Valentine’s meat juice. As regards the changing the bottle, there were two occasions when evidence was given as to Mrs. Maybrick’s doing this. The first was on the 7th of May, when Alice Yapp said that some of the medicines were kept on a table near the bedroom door and some in the bedroom, and that on Tuesday, 7th of May, she saw Mrs. Maybrick on the landing near the bedroom door, and what was she doing? She was[293] apparently pouring something out of one bottle into another. They were medicine bottles.

That is the whole evidence as to the incident, and as all the bottles in the house were analyzed63, and none found to contain even a trace of arsenic except the Clay and Abraham’s bottle—which James Maybrick was not taking at that time—the judge could not properly direct the jury to regard it as a matter of suspicion; but he did do so. He referred to this incident thus:

“On the 28th April (the day after the Wirrall Races) Mrs. Maybrick sent for Dr. Humphreys, and afterward she was seen pouring medicine from one bottle into another.”

It is submitted that this was a serious misdirection.

The other occasion was on Friday, the 10th of May, when Michael Maybrick, seeing Mrs. Maybrick changing a medicine from one bottle to another in the bedroom, took the bottles away and had the prescription64[294] made up again, saying: “Florrie, how dare you tamper65 with the medicine?” Mrs. Maybrick explained that she was only putting the medicine into a larger bottle because there was so much sediment66. Nurse Callery was present and there was no concealment67 about what she was doing, and the bullying68 conduct of Michael was absolutely without any sort of justification69. These bottles were analyzed and found to be harmless.

Mr. Justice Stephen turned this incident, which occurred on the afternoon before death, and after she had been prevented from attending on her husband, against Mrs. Maybrick, thus—quoting Michael’s evidence: “In the bedroom I found Mrs. Maybrick pouring from one bottle into another and changing the labels, and I said, ‘Florrie, how dare you tamper with the medicine?’” And Justice Stephen continued: “Verily, this was a strange—I don’t say strange considering the circumstances—but dreadfully unwelcome remark to[295] make to a lady in her own house, when she was in attendance on her husband, and something which showed the state of feeling in his mind, and must have attracted her attention.” It is submitted that this was a misdirection.
Misdirection as to Administration With Intent to Kill

There was also an attempt by the prosecution70 to suggest an attempt to administer medicine, arising out of an occasion when James Maybrick said to her, “You have given me the wrong medicine again,” from which it appears that on the Friday, the day before death, Mrs. Maybrick was not giving him anything at all, but was trying to get him to take some medicine from Nurse Callery, who was endeavoring to induce him to take it. This was one of the medicines ordered by Dr. Humphreys, and was found free from arsenic. The [296]judge did not refer to this in his summing-up,
but reference to it is introduced here
because it exhausts the whole evidence, with the exception of the Valentine’s meat juice incident, as to any suggestions or even of any occasions of attempt to administer, while Mr. Matthews advised the Queen that “the evidence leads clearly to the conclusion that the prisoner administered and attempted to administer arsenic to her husband with intent to murder,” which formed his ground for consigning71 this woman to penal72 servitude for life. No evidence, either of any act of administration or of any act of attempt to administer either with or without felonious attempt, was given at the trial, which possibly could have led any person to any such conclusion, with the single exception of the Valentine’s meat juice; and as none of that was administered after it had been in Mrs. Maybrick’s hands, the utmost that could be said of it (assuming that she did put any arsenic into it) is that it was an attempt to administer, either feloniously or otherwise.[297] It is submitted that the judge misdirected the jury as to this incident, in that he did not tell them that the mere evidence of an attempt to administer arsenic was not sufficient—that they must be satisfied that the attempt to administer was with a mens rea and with an intent to murder.
Exclusion73 of Prisoner’s Testimony

Mrs. Maybrick voluntarily told her solicitors74, Mr. Arnold and Mr. Richard Cleaver75, directly she was arrested and even before the inquest, that she had, at her husband’s urgent request, put a powder into a bottle of Valentine’s meat juice, but that she did not know, until Mrs. Briggs informed her that arsenic had been found in a bottle of meat juice, that the powder she had put in was assumably arsenic. [At the trial both Mr. Richard and Mr. Arnold Cleaver, her solicitors, offered to give evidence to this effect, but Justice Stephen refused to admit it.] She also tried to tell[298] Mrs. Briggs the same thing, but the policeman stopped the conversation; and she also told it to her mother on her arrival. Mrs. Maybrick made no attempt at concealment about having put this powder in, although no one had seen her do it, and her solicitors, instead of relying as a line of defense on showing there was no “mens rea” in what she had done, kept back her account of what she had done. At the trial, however, after all the evidence for the prosecution had been concluded without a single witness speaking of her having put anything into anything, she insisted on telling the jury, as she had told her solicitors, that she did put a powder into a bottle of meat juice, in accordance with an urgent request of her husband’s, but that she did not know it was arsenic. If she did not know, there was no “mens rea.” Upon that evidence, and upon certain suspicious circumstances connected with her conduct in taking the meat juice into the dressing-room and replacing it in the bedroom, the[299] judge, as it is submitted, misdirected the jury in the following passage:

“Mr. Michael Maybrick says: ‘Nothing was given to my brother out of that.’ That is to say, nothing was given to him out of the bottle of Valentine’s meat juice, which undoubtedly had arsenic in it. Its presence was detected, but of that bottle which was poisoned he certainly had none. He had a small taste of it before it was poisoned, given him by Nurse Gore.”

It is submitted that the words “before it was poisoned” is a gross misdirection.
Misdirection as to Identity of Meat-Juice Bottle

It may be convenient here to interpose the following remarks on the subject of the identity of the bottle. Counsel will observe that the judge referred to the evidence at the inquest and at the magisterial76 inquiry77, which, it is suggested, enables a reference to any discrepancies78 in the evidence[300] of the witnesses on the three occasions—inquest, magisterial inquiry, and trial.

The identity of the half-used bottle, which was found to contain “half a grain of arsenic in solution,” with the bottle which Mrs. Maybrick took into the dressing-room, was not proved. It was assumed alike by the prosecution and the defense, and by Mrs. Maybrick herself, but it was not proved. It was proved that there was another half-used bottle, of which James Maybrick had partaken on Monday, 6th of May, when Dr. Humphreys said:

“Some of the Valentine’s meat juice had been taken, but it did not agree with the deceased and made him vomit19. Witness did not remember him vomiting in his presence, but he complained of it. Witness told deceased to stop the Valentine’s meat juice, and said he was not surprised at it making Mr. Maybrick sick, as it made many people sick.”

There was, therefore, another half-used[301] bottle. The attention of counsel is strongly directed to the question of the identity of this half-used bottle.

Besides the one in which the arsenic was detected, there was another half-used bottle produced at the trial, which was found by Mrs. Briggs after death in one of James Maybrick’s hatboxes in the dressing-room, together with the black solutions and white solutions of arsenic, and this bottle was found free of arsenic.

As to the bottle which Mrs. Maybrick had in her hands on the night of the 9th-10th of May, and which she took into the dressing-room, and as to which she volunteered the statement that she had put a powder in, as to which evidence was given by Nurse Gore, was thus voluntarily corroborated80 by Mrs. Maybrick in her statement to the jury. From this it appears that Nurse Gore, on her arrival for duty on Thursday night, opened a fresh bottle of meat juice, which had been given to her the night before by Edwin Maybrick, and[302] gave the patient one or two spoonfuls, and then placed it on the table, from which she shortly afterward saw Mrs. Maybrick remove it and take it into the dressing-room, the door of which was not shut, and then return with it into the bedroom and replace it on the table. Nurse Gore thought she did this in a stealthy way. It must be remembered that Nurse Gore was naturally suspicious, as is shown by the fact that on two previous occasions she suggested suspicions with regard to changes in medicines by Mrs. Maybrick, which on analysis were proved to be free from arsenic. When the patient, a short time afterward, awoke, Mrs. Maybrick came into the bedroom again and removed the bottle from the table and placed it on the washstand, where there were only the ordinary jugs81 and basins, and there left it. Nurse Gore’s usual suspicions were aroused and she gave the patient none of it, nor did Mrs. Maybrick ask her to give him any. When Nurse Gore was relieved by Nurse Callery the[303] next morning (Friday, the 10th), at 11 o’clock, she called her attention to it and asked her to take a sample of it, which Callery did, and put it into an ordinary medicine bottle, which Nurse Gore gave her for the purpose. Nurse Gore left the bottle on the washstand where Mrs. Maybrick had placed it. Nurse Gore did not mention the circumstance to Dr. Humphreys when he came to see the patient at 8:30 A.M., nor to Michael Maybrick, whose attention she directed to a bottle of brandy instead, which on analysis was found harmless; and she then went into Liverpool and saw the matron, and on her return to the house at 2 o’clock told Callery to throw away the sample in accordance with the matron’s orders, which Callery did. The bottle in which that sample was taken was not specially60 identified, though it must have remained on the premises82. It ought to have been produced, because, if arsenic was detected in the sample, the bottle of Valentine’s meat juice would have been[304] identified by that means, and it would have been shown that the arsenic was in the meat juice which Mrs. Maybrick had taken into the dressing-room. On the other hand, as all the bottles which were in the house were analyzed and found free of arsenic, there is negative evidence that there was no arsenic in the sample taken.
Misdirection in Excluding Corroboration83 of Prisoner’s Statement

Now the serious, most serious, consideration of counsel is asked for in comparing the evidence of these three witnesses—Gore, Callery, and Michael Maybrick—as given at the coroner’s inquest, as it appears in the coroner’s depositions84, at the magisterial inquiry, as it appears in the magistrates85’ depositions, and as given at the trial. It will be seen that there are great discrepancies as to the place in the room from which Michael Maybrick took the half-used bottle in which Mr. Davies, the analyst,[305] subsequently detected one-tenth of a grain of arsenic in solution. It is suggested that Mr. Michael’s evidence at the inquest is the true account of where he got the bottle, and that his evidence at the trial is cooked, to suit the evidence of Gore, and that the identity of the bottle is not established. The statement, which in her statement to the jury Mrs. Maybrick said she was prevented by the policeman from making to Mrs. Briggs, the moment that person told her about arsenic being found in the meat juice, was communicated by Mrs. Maybrick at once to her solicitors, Mr. Arnold and Richard Cleaver; and it is submitted that it was a misdirection of the judge to exclude their evidence in corroboration of such a material and important fact in her favor, and a misdirection in refusing to allow corroboration in that way of what was in evidence, and did corroborate79 it—thereby constituting a matter which the jury should have had before them, as having a bearing on her statement.

Misdirections to Jury to Draw Illegal Inferences

The judge referred to the Valentine’s meat-juice incident, the most vital point in the trial, in the following extraordinary manner at the end of his summing-up:

“I may say this, however: supposing you find a man dying of arsenic, and it is proved that a person put arsenic in his plate, and if he gives an explanation which you do not consider satisfactory—that is a very strong question to be considered—how far it goes, what its logical value is, I am not prepared to say—I could not say, and unless I had to write my verdict I should not say how I should deal with the verdict; but being no juryman, but only a judge, I can only say this, it is a matter for your serious consideration.”

It is submitted that this was a gross misdirection and a cruel taunt87 to drive the jury into finding a verdict against the prisoner[307] upon that ground, and it is submitted that so monstrously88 unfair an utterance89 can not be found in the reports of any summing-up by any judge in any criminal case. See also another misdirection where the judge read the examination of Nurse Gore and omitted reference to the sample, but said of the bottle, “In point of fact, it remained where it was until taken away by Mr. Michael Maybrick,” when it is in evidence that Nurse Callery had taken a sample of it during the eighteen hours it remained on the washstand, and that others beside Mrs. Maybrick had access to it.

It is submitted that, apart from the question of the identity of the bottle, there was no evidence, except Mrs. Maybrick’s statement, that she had put anything into the bottle, which justified90 Mr. Justice Stephen in using the words, “He had a small taste of it before it was poisoned,” inasmuch as, except Mrs. Maybrick’s own voluntary statement that she had put a powder into a bottle of meat juice, there was nothing to[308] show that the arsenic, detected by Mr. Davies in the bottle he analyzed, had not been in the bottle when Edwin Maybrick gave it to Nurse Gore and which she opened when she gave the patient “one or two spoonfuls.”

Another misdirection in reference to the meat-juice incident will be found in the summing-up in the words:

“It has a sort of very remote bearing upon the statement which she made on Monday.”

Instead of “a sort of very remote bearing,” it was a matter of the greatest importance that it should be shown that at the very instant she heard that arsenic had been found in some meat juice, before even the inquest, and before any arsenic had been found in the body, she should have attempted to tell Mrs. Briggs that she had put a powder into some meat juice, but did not know what it was; and, in connection with this, the attention of counsel is called to the fact that Mr. Justice[309] Stephen refused to allow evidence showing that she had made this statement from the very first.
Misdirections Regarding the Medical Testimony

As to the cause of James Maybrick’s death, there was a most remarkable conflict of medical opinion. It was not until the post-mortem examination, held on Monday, the 13th of May, by Drs. Carter and Humphreys (the medical men who had attended the deceased during his illness), and Dr. Barron, that the cause of death was ascertained91, and it was then found to be exhaustion93, caused by gastro-enteritis or acute inflammation of the stomach and intestines94, which, in their opinion, had been set up by an irritant poison, but might have been set up by his getting wet through.

These doctors agreed that by the phrase “irritant poison” they meant any unwholesome food or drink.

Up to the time of death the doctors, Messrs. Humphreys and Carter, had supposed and treated the patient for dyspepsia, notwithstanding that suggestions had been made to them by Michael Maybrick that the patient was being poisoned; and they said in their evidence that but for the discovery of arsenic on the premises, they would have given a certificate of death from natural causes.

At the post-mortem examination they selected such portions of the body for analysis as they considered necessary, including, among other things, the stomach and its contents; and the analyst employed by the police (Mr. Davies) found no arsenic in the stomach or its contents, and was unable to discover any weighable traces of arsenic in any other portions of the body.

About three weeks afterward the body was, by order of the Home Secretary, exhumed95, and fresh portions of it were taken for analysis, some of which were examined by Mr. Davies and other parts[311] by Dr. Stevenson, one of the Crown analysts96.

In those portions taken at the exhumation97, the total result of the search for arsenic in the body was that Mr. Davies actually found unweighable arsenic, 2/100 of a grain, in the liver, and Dr. Stevenson 76/1000 of a grain in the liver and 15/1000 in the intestines, making, when all added together, the total amount as found by Mr. Davies and Dr. Stevenson about one-tenth of a grain, made up of minute fractional portions of one-hundredths and one-thousandths.

It was shown in evidence that the smallest fatal dose of arsenic ever recorded was two grains, which was in the case of a woman, and who presumably was not an arsenic-eater.

It was shown in evidence that in the year 1888 Mrs. Maybrick had asked Dr. Hopper (who was at that time, and had been for many years, their regular medical attendant) to speak to Mr. Maybrick and prevent him taking certain medicines, which were[312] doing him harm; that early in March she made the same appeal to Dr. Humphreys, suggesting at the time that Mr. Maybrick was taking a white powder, which she thought was strychnin.

At the magisterial inquiry Dr. Humphreys stated that Mrs. Maybrick had, on the occasion of his being called in to the patient on the 28th of April, also spoken to him about her husband taking this white powder, and that in consequence of this he asked Mr. Maybrick about taking strychnin and nux vomica.

Counsel will find proof, in the evidence given at the trial by Dr. Hopper, Mr. Heaton, Nicholas Bateson, Esq., Capt. Richard Thompson, Thomas Stansell, and Sir James Poole, ex-Mayor of Liverpool, as to the arsenic habit of James Maybrick and his opportunities for obtaining the drug. [To which must now be added the statutory declaration of Valentine Charles Blake, son of the late Sir Valentine Blake, M.P., that he, about two months prior to Mr.[313] Maybrick’s death, had procured him 150 grains of arsenic.] It may be stated here that from the appearance of the little bottles in which the white arsenic was found, they had been in use for a long time and were such as would be found as sample bottles in the offices of business houses to which it is unlikely Mrs. Maybrick would have access.

It is submitted that the discovery of such a tiny quantity of arsenic in the body of a man addicted to such extraordinary habits might reasonably be accounted for by those habits.
Conflict of Medical Opinion

The conflict of medical opinion which was exhibited on this trial arose upon the point as to whether arsenic had been the cause of the gastro-enteritis, of which it was admitted that the man died.

There was no conflict of medical opinion on the facts that the quantity found in the[314] body was insufficient99 to cause death, nor that gastro-enteritis might be set up by a vast variety of things besides arsenic—in fact, by any impure100 food or by excessive alcohol or by getting wet through. It was shown in evidence that Mr. Maybrick got wet through at the Wirrall Races on the 27th of April, and that he afterward went in his wet clothes to dinner at a friend’s on the other side of the Mersey.

The conflict of medical opinion amounted to this, that the Crown called Drs. Carter and Humphreys, who both admitted that they had never previously101 attended a case of arsenical poisoning, nor had ever before attended a post-mortem examination of a person whose death had been attributed to arsenic—in short, that they had had no experience whatever. The Crown also called Dr. Stevenson (who had not attended the deceased, but had conducted the analysis of parts of the body) as an expert in poisoning, and he said, as to the symptoms during life: “There is no distinctive102 diagnostic[315] symptom of arsenical poisoning. The diagnostic thing is finding the arsenic.”

The Crown also had Dr. Barron, who had attended the post-mortem, and who expressed himself unable to say that arsenic was the cause of the gastro-enteritis.

These witnesses, it may be observed, gave their evidence both as to the symptoms during life and as to the appearances at the post-mortem before the medical evidence for the defense had been called.

The witnesses called for the defense had none of them attended the deceased, but were called as experts in poisoning, viz., Dr. Tidy, a Crown analyst, Dr. Macnamara, and Professor Paul, who all gave positive evidence that neither the symptoms during life nor the appearance after death were such as could be attributed to arsenical poisoning; that, in fact, they pointed away from, instead of toward, arsenic being the cause of death.

The evidence of these witnesses was[316] summarized very fairly by Mr. Justice Stephen.

In the face of such a conflict of medical opinion, it is submitted that Mr. Justice Stephen should have refused to allow the jury to return any verdict of guilty at all.
Misdirections as to Cause of Death

On the first day of his summing-up, however, Mr. Justice Stephen told the jury as to the law under which they were to return their verdict: “You have been told that if you are not satisfied in your minds about poisoning—if you think he died from some other disease—then the case is not made out against the prisoner. It is a necessary step—it is essential to this charge—that the man died of poison, and the poison suggested is arsenic. This is the question you have to consider, and it must be the foundation of a judgment103 unfavorable to the prisoner that he died of arsenic.”

It is submitted that Mr. Justice Stephen misdirected the jury when he told them to satisfy their minds whether he died from any other disease, inasmuch as the only question before the jury was whether the cause of death was arsenic.

“The question for you is by what the illness was caused. Was it caused by arsenic or by some other means?”

It is submitted that that is a misdirection. It might have been put to a coroner’s jury, but it was not a question which should have been put to a jury at a criminal trial.

It is submitted that he misdirected the jury in not also telling them that it was essential to a verdict unfavorable to the prisoner that the arsenic of which he died had been administered by her, and also in not telling the jury that it was essential to a verdict unfavorable to the prisoner that, if she had administered any, she had done it with intent to destroy life.

Misdirection to Ignore Medical Testimony

Mr. Justice Stephen then proceeded: “Now, let us see what the doctors say. Some say death was caused by arsenic, and others that it was not by arsenic—that he died of gastro-enteritis”; and he spoke98 of the medical evidence in a way which amounted to a direction to the jury that they were to treat it as tainted104 with subtle partisanship105, and as evidence to which it was not necessary for them to attach serious importance. He, in fact, stated, and in so doing misdirected the jury, that though it was essential to a verdict unfavorable to the prisoner that he died of arsenic, that question was one which they, the jury, could come to their own opinion about, without taking into consideration the opinion of the medical experts, who had positively106 stated that arsenic was not the cause of death. In other words, he directed the jury that, as the medical experts could not[319] agree that the cause of death was arsenical poisoning, it was for them to decide that question from their own “knowledge of human nature.”

On the second day of the summing-up the judge told the jury (and it is submitted that it contains gross misdirections): “You must consider the case as a mere medical case, in which you are to decide whether the man did or did not die of arsenic according to the medical evidence. You must not consider it as a mere chemical case, in which you decide whether the man died from arsenic which was discovered as the result of a chemical analysis. You must decide it as a great, high, and important case, involving in itself not only medical and chemical questions, but embodying107 in itself a most highly important moral question—and by that term, moral question, I do not mean a question of what is right and wrong in a moral point of view, but questions in which human nature enters and in which you must rely on your knowledge[320] of human nature in determining the resolution you arrive at.

“You have, in the first place, to consider—far be it from me to exclude or try to get others to exclude from their own minds what I must feel myself vividly108 conscious of—the evidence in this matter. I think every human being in this case must feel vividly conscious of what you have to consider, but I had almost better say you ought not to consider, for fear you might consider it too much, the horrible nature of the inquiry in which you are engaged. I feel that it is a dreadful thing that you are deliberately109 considering whether you are to convict that woman of really as horribly dreadful a crime as ever any poor wretch110 who stood in the dock was accused of. If she is guilty—I am saying if my object is rather to heighten your feeling of the solemnity of the circumstances, and in no way to prevent you from feeling as you do feel, and as you ought to feel. I could say a good many other things about the[321] awful nature of the charge, but I do not think it will be necessary to do any one thing. Your own hearts must tell you what it is for a person to go on administering poison to a helpless, sick man, upon whom she has already inflicted111 a dreadful injury—an injury fatal to married life; the person who could do such a thing as that must be destitute112 of the least trace of human feeling.” And further on: “We have to consider this not in an unfeeling spirit—far from it—but in the spirit of people resolved to solve by intellectual means an intellectual problem of great difficulty.”

Copyright by G. G. Rockwood, New York.

HON. JOSEPH H. CHOATE,
American Ambassador at the Court of St. James, 1899—

Mr. Justice Stephen, in short, instead of putting to the jury for separate answers each of the following three questions:

1. Did this man die of arsenic?

2. Did Mrs. Maybrick administer that arsenic?

3. Did she do it feloniously?

invited them to return a verdict of “guilty” or “not guilty” upon a direction of law, wherein he told them that they[322] were to decide it as an intellectual problem, on the question which, it is submitted, can be formulated113 thus:

“Might this man have died of arsenic notwithstanding the opinion of the medical experts that he did not die of arsenic?” And the jury answered “Yes.”

It is submitted that this was a gross misdirection.

It may be interesting and applicable to quote from a paper read by Sir Fitzjames Stephen himself at the Science Association in 1884: “It is not to be denied that, so long as great ignorance exists on matters of physical and medical science in all classes, physicians will occasionally have to submit to the mortification114 of seeing not only the jury, but the bar and bench itself, receive with scornful incredulity or with self-satisfied ignorance evidence which ought to be received with respect and attention.” How prophetic this was as exemplified by his own attitude in this trial need not be pointed out.

Misreception of Evidence

Under the head of Misreception of Evidence may be classed the observations of the judge, where, apparently in order to prevent the jury from being influenced in favor of the prisoner, owing to the small quantity of arsenic found in the body of the deceased, he mentioned an instance of a dog being poisoned, in the body of which, though it had taken a large number of grains of arsenic, no arsenic was found after its death. The judge, in other words, turned himself into a witness for the prosecution. The unfairness to the prisoner of such a course is obvious. Had the judge been an ordinary witness he might have been cross-examined to show, e.g., that arsenic passes away from the body of a dog much more quickly than from that of a man, or that the circumstances as to time and quantity taken were such as to prove that there was no analogy between the two cases. As the matter stands, the judge[324]’s recollection of an experiment on a dog, which had been made many years before, was meant to rebut115 a proposition much relied on by the defense, viz., that the small quantity of arsenic found in the body of the deceased was consistent with the view that he was in the habit of taking arsenic, rather than with the case for the Crown that he had been intentionally116 poisoned.
Cruel Misstatement by the Coroner

The inquest was formally opened by taking the evidence of the identification of the deceased by his brother, Michael Maybrick, and then adjourned117 for a fortnight, the coroner announcing that there had been a post-mortem examination by Dr. Humphreys, and that the result of that examination was that poison was found in the stomach of the deceased in such quantities as to justify further examination; that the stomach of the deceased, and its contents, would meanwhile be chemically analyzed,[325] and on the result of that analysis would depend the question whether or not criminal proceedings118 against some person would follow. Now the announcement that “poison had been found in the stomach of the deceased” was contrary to fact, and in consequence of this cruel misstatement the proceedings caused an immense amount of popular excitement and prejudice against the accused, who, being too ill to be removed, remained at Battlecrease House, in charge of the police, till the following Saturday morning, the 18th May, when a sort of court inquiry was opened in Mrs. Maybrick’s bedroom by Colonel Bidwell, one of the county magistrates.
Medical Evidence for the Prosecution

The evidence of Dr. Arthur Richard Hopper, who had been Mr. and Mrs. Maybrick’s medical adviser119 for about seven years, was taken. He had not attended Mr. Maybrick during his last illness, but[326] spoke about Mrs. Maybrick having asked him the year before to check her husband from taking dangerous drugs, and that Mr. Maybrick had admitted to him that he used to dose himself with anything his friends recommended, and that he was used to the taking of arsenic.

Dr. Richard Humphreys spoke as to the symptoms of the illness and his prescriptions120, and that he had not suspected poisoning until it was suggested to him and his colleague, Dr. Carter, and that he had himself administered arsenic to the deceased, in the form of Fowler’s solution, on the Sunday or Monday before death, and that he refused a certificate of death only because arsenic had been found on the premises.

Dr. William Carter spoke of being called the Tuesday before death, and he agreed with Dr. Humphreys that an irritant poison, most probably arsenic, was the cause of death.

Dr. Alexander Barron gave evidence to[327] the effect that he was unable to ascertain92 any particular poison.

Mr. Edward Davies, the analyst, was called, and gave evidence to the effect that he had found no weighable arsenic in the portions of the body selected at the post-mortem, but that he had subsequently found one fiftieth of a grain of arsenic in a part of the liver, nothing in the stomach or its contents, but traces, not weighable, in the intestines, and that he had found arsenic in some of the bottles and things found in the house after death and in the Valentine’s meat juice.

The first issue which the jury at the trial had to determine was whether it was proved beyond reasonable doubt that the deceased died from arsenical poisoning.

Mr. Justice Stephen, in his summing-up, put this issue to the jury in the following words:

“It is essential to this charge that the man died of arsenic. This question must be the foundation of a verdict unfavorable[328] to the prisoner, that he died of arsenic.”

It must be assumed that this was a question exclusively for medical experts, notwithstanding which the judge, in summing up, told the jury:

“You must not consider this as a mere medical case, in which you are to decide whether the man did or did not die of arsenic poisoning according to the medical evidence. You must not consider it as a mere chemical case, in which you decide whether the man died from arsenic which was discovered as the result of a chemical analysis. You must decide it as a great and highly important case, involving in itself not only medical and chemical questions, but involving in itself a most highly important moral question.”
Maybrick Died a Natural Death

Dr. Humphreys gave it as his opinion that the appearances at the post-mortem were consistent with congestion121 of the stomach[329] not necessarily caused by an irritant poison, and that the symptoms during life were also consistent with congestion not caused by an irritant poison, but with acute inflammation of the stomach and intestines, produced by any cause whatever, and which would produce similar pathological results. He thought death was caused by some irritant poison, most likely arsenic, but he would not like to swear that it was. Dr. Humphreys’ evidence, therefore, amounted to this, that the deceased died from gastro-enteritis, a natural disease, attributable to a variety of causes, and that, apart from the suggestions already referred to, he would have certified122 accordingly.

Dr. Humphreys’ evidence was confirmed by that of Dr. Carter, who stated he came to the same conclusion as Dr. Humphreys, “but in a more positive manner.” Dr. Carter had assisted at the post-mortem examination, besides being in close attendance on the deceased for the five days preceding his death, which he attributed to[330] taking some irritant wine or decomposed123 meat, or to some grave error of diet; and when pressed as to whether he had any reason to suppose the article taken was poison, he explained that he did, but that by poison he meant something that was bad—it might be tinned meat, which the deceased had partaken of at the race dinner, or wine, or something which had set up gastritis. This witness’s account of the post-mortem was that they found no arsenic, but merely evidence of an irritant poison in the stomach and intestines, probably arsenic. Dr. Carter’s evidence was therefore against poisoning by arsenic being conclusively accepted as the cause of death, although subsequently he said he had no doubt it was arsenic.

Dr. Barron’s evidence as to the cause of death was that he considered from the post-mortem appearances that death was due to inflammation of the stomach and bowels124, due to some irritant poison, but that he was unable to point to the particular poison,[331] apart from what he heard; and, pressed as to what he meant by poison, the witness stated that poison might be bad tinned meat, bad fish, mussels, or generally bad food of any kind, or alcohol taken in excess.
The Chief Witness for the Prosecution

Dr. Stevenson expressed his opinion that the deceased died from arsenic poisoning, giving as his reasons that the main symptoms were those attributable to an irritant poison, and that they more closely resembled those of arsenic than of any other irritant of which he knew. He stated that he had known a great number of cases of poisoning by arsenic in every shape, and that he acted officially for the Home Office and Treasury125 in such cases. Dr. Stevenson was the witness of the prosecution, and gave his evidence before he had heard the evidence for the defense.

Dr. Stevenson also stated that the general[332] symptoms of arsenic poisoning appeared within half an hour of taking some article of food or medicine, and were nausea126, with a sinking sensation of the stomach; vomiting, which, unlike that produced by any ordinary article of food or drink that disagrees, afforded as a rule no relief and often came on again; that there was most commonly pain in the stomach, diarrhea; after a time the region of the stomach becomes tender under pressure, the patient becomes restless, often bathed in perspiration127; the throat is complained of; pain in the throat, extending down to the stomach; the tongue becomes very foul128 in appearance and furred. There is not a bad smell as in the ordinary dyspeptic tongue, a rapid and feeble pulse, thirst, great straining at stool, vomits129 and evacuations frequently stained with blood. Of fourteen symptoms of arsenic poisoning named by Dr. Stevenson, Mr. Maybrick exhibited only one, according to the testimony of Dr. Stevenson. With the exception of the foul[333] tongue with malodorous breath, none of these symptoms coincided with those given by Drs. Humphreys and Carter, who were in attendance on the patient, while Dr. Stevenson never saw him.
Medical Evidence for Defense

Then came the evidence for the defense, rebutting130 the presumption131 that death was caused by arsenic. First in order being Dr. Tidy, the examiner for forensic132 medicine at the London Hospital, and also, like Dr. Stevenson, employed as an analyst by the Home Office. This witness stated that, within a few years, close upon forty cases of arsenical poisoning had come before him, which enabled him to indicate the recurring133 and distinctive indications formed in such cases.

Dr. Tidy describes the symptoms of arsenic poisoning as purging134 and vomiting in a very excessive degree; a burning pain in the abdomen135, more marked in the pit of[334] the stomach, and increased considerably by pressure, usually associated with pain in the calves136 of the legs; then, after a certain interval52, suffusion137 of the eyes—the eyes fill with tears; great irritability138 about the eyelids139; frequent intolerance of light.

Dr. Tidy added that there were three symptoms, such as cramps140, tenesmus, straining, more or less present, but the prominent symptoms were those he had mentioned, especially the sickness, violent, incessant141 sickness, and that poisoning by arsenic was extremely simple to detect. Further, that he (Dr. Tidy) had known cases where one or more of the four symptoms mentioned had been absent, but he had never known a case in which all four symptoms were absent; and stated that he had followed every detail of the Maybrick case so far as he could, and had read all the depositions before the coroner and magistrate86, and the account of the vomiting did not agree with his description of excessive and persistent142 vomiting, and was certainly[335] not that kind of vomiting that takes place in a typical case of arsenical poisoning.

Dr. Tidy further stated that, taking the whole of the symptoms, they undoubtedly were not those of arsenical poisoning, nor did they point to such, but were perfectly143 consistent with death from gastro-enteritis, not caused by arsenical poisoning at all; and that, had he been called upon to advise, he should have said it was undoubtedly not arsenical poisoning, and that his view had been very much strengthened, to use his own words, by the result of the post-mortem, which distinctly pointed away from arsenic.

Then there was the evidence, in the same direction, of Dr. Macnamara, the president of the Royal College of Surgeons, and its representative on the General Medical Council of the Kingdom, which is summed up in the general question put to him and his answer:

Question: Now, bringing your best judgment to bear on the matter—you having[336] been present at the whole of this trial and heard the evidence—in your opinion, was this death from arsenical poisoning?

Answer: Certainly not.

In cross-examination Dr. Macnamara stated that, to the best of his judgment, Mr. Maybrick died of gastro-enteritis, not connected with arsenical poisoning, and which might have been caused by the wetting at the Wirrall races.

Dr. Paul, professor of medical jurisprudence at University College, Liverpool, and pathologist at the Royal Infirmary, stated he had made and assisted at something like three or four thousand post-mortem examinations, and that the symptoms in the present case agreed with cases of gastro-enteritis pure and simple; that the finding of the arsenic in the body, in the quantity mentioned in the evidence, was quite consistent with the case of a man who had taken arsenic medicinally, but who had left it off for some time, even for several months.

A Toxicological Study

So positive were Dr. Tidy and Dr. Macnamara of their position as to the effect of arsenic on the human system, that they subsequently published “A Toxicological Study of the Maybrick Case,” thus challenging medical critics the world over to refute them. From this study the following, in tabular form, is taken, in order to contrast the symptoms from which Mr. Maybrick suffered with those which, it will be generally admitted, are the usual symptoms of arsenical poisoning:
Arsenical Poisoning     Mr. Maybrick’s Case
Countenance144 tells of severe suffering.     Not so described.
Very great depression an early symptom.     Not present until toward the end.
Fire-burning pain in stomach.     Not present.
Pain in stomach increased on pressure.     Pressure produced no pain.
Violent and uncontrollable vomiting independent of ingesta.     “Hawking rather than vomiting;” irritability of stomach increased by ingesta.
Vomiting not relieved by such treatment as was used in Mr. Maybrick’s case.     Vomiting controlled by treatment.
During vomiting burning heat and constriction145 felt in throat.     Not present.
Blood frequently present in vomited and purged146 matter.     Not present.
Intensely painful cramps in calves of the legs.     Not present.
Pain in urinating.     Not present.
Purging and tenesmus an early symptom.     Not present until twelfth day of illness, and then once only.
Great intolerance of light.     Not present.
Eyes suffused147 and smarting.     Not present.
Eyeballs inflamed148 and reddened.     Not present.
Eyelids intensely itchy.     Not present.
Rapid and painful respiration149 an early symptom.     Not present.
Pulse small, frequent, irregular, and imperceptible from the outset.     Not so described until approach of death.
Arsenic easily detected in urine and f?ces.     Not detected, although looked for.
Tongue fiery150 red in its entirety, or fiery red at tip and margins151 and foul toward base.     Tongue not red; “simply filthy152.”
Early and remarkable reduction of temperature generally.     Temperature normal up to day preceding death.

“Maybrick’s symptoms are as unlike poisoning by arsenic as it is possible for a case of dyspepsia to be. Everything distinctive of arsenic is absent. The urine contained no arsenic. The symptoms are not even consistent with arsenical poisoning.

“Regarding the treatment adopted by[339] the medical men, and more especially Dr. Carter’s action with regard to the meat juice, we are justified in assuming that the doctors themselves, even after a certain suggestion had been made to them, did not come to the conclusion that the illness of Maybrick was the result of arsenic.

“It is noteworthy (1) that none was found in the stomach; (2) that Maybrick was in the habit of taking drugs, and among them arsenic.

“Thus two conclusions are forced upon us:

“(1) That the arsenic found in Maybrick’s body may have been taken in merely medicinal doses, and that probably it was so taken.

“(2) That the arsenic may have been taken a considerable time before either his death or illness, and that probably it was so taken.

“Our toxicological studies have led us to the three following conclusions:

“(1) That the symptoms from which Maybrick suffered are consistent with any form of acute dyspepsia, but that they point away from, rather than toward, arsenic[340] as the cause of such dyspeptic condition.

“(2) That the post-mortem appearances are indicative of inflammation, but that they emphatically point away from arsenic as the cause of death.

“(3) That the analysis fails to find more than one-twentieth part of a fatal dose of arsenic, and that the quantity so found is perfectly consistent with its medicinal ingestion.”
The Medical Weakness of the Prosecution

Such was the complete evidence of the cause of death. The quantity of arsenic found in the body was one-tenth of a grain, and upon this evidence rests the first issue the jury had to consider, namely, whether it was proved beyond reasonable doubt that the deceased died from arsenical poisoning.

As to the value of the medical testimony on both sides, Dr. Humphreys admitted that he never attended a case of arsenical[341] poisoning in his life, nor of any irritant poison, and that he would have given a certificate of death from natural causes had he not been told of arsenic found in the meat juice.

Dr. Carter laid no claim to any previous experience of poisoning by arsenic, and was unable to say from the post-mortem examination that arsenic was the cause of death, which he could only attribute to an irritant of some kind, and he admitted that it was the evidence of Mr. Davies, as to the finding of arsenic in the body, which led him to the conclusion that arsenical poisoning had taken place.

Dr. Barron did not see the patient, but assisted at the post-mortem examination, and stated that, judging by the appearances and apart from what he had heard, he was unable to identify arsenic as the particular poison which had set up the inflammation.

Now, assuming for a moment that this issue as to the cause of death rested entirely[342] upon the uncontradicted testimony of these three doctors called for the prosecution, Humphreys, Carter, and Barron, the jury would not have been justified in coming to the conclusion that there was no reasonable doubt that arsenic poisoning was the cause of death. The doctors themselves had admitted that they were unable to arrive at that conclusion, apart from the evidence that arsenic was found in the body. The idea of arsenical poisoning never occurred to them from the symptoms, until the use of arsenic was first suggested.

The doctors could not say that death resulted from arsenic poisoning, and yet the jury have actually found that it did, in the face of the opinions of three eminent medical experts, who say it did not.

Even if these doctors had never been called at all for the defense, the jury were yet not justified in taking the evidence of Drs. Humphreys, Carter, and Barron, in the terms which they themselves never intended[343] to pledge themselves to, namely, to exclude a reasonable doubt that death was due to arsenic.

Let us consider the position of the medical men called for the defense: Drs. Tidy, Macnamara, and Paul are the highest authorities on medical and chemical jurisprudence in Great Britain. No sort of hesitation153 or doubt attached to the opinions of any of them, and their experience of post-mortem examinations was referred to, as including in the practise of Dr. Tidy, the Crown analyst, some forty cases of arsenic poisoning alone. Dr. Macnamara indorsed the opinion of Dr. Tidy. In addition to that, there was on the same side the evidence of Dr. Paul, professor of medical jurisprudence and toxicology at University College, Liverpool, with an experience of three or four thousand post-mortem examinations. It is impossible to conjecture154 by what process of reasoning the jury could have come to the conclusion, upon the evidence before them, that it was beyond a[344] reasonable doubt that Mr. Maybrick had met his death by arsenical poisoning.

This volume of evidence before the jury pointed not only to a doubt as to the cause of death, but to a reasonable conclusion that it was not due to arsenical poisoning. It is inconceivable that the jury should have found as they did, except under the mandatory155 direction of the judge, which left them apparently no alternative but to substitute his opinions and judgment for their own, so that on that issue the finding was not so much the finding of the jury, to which the prisoner was by law entitled, but the finding of the judge, of whom the jury, abrogating156 their own functions, became the mere mouthpieces.
The Administration Of Arsenic

The consideration of the facts as given in evidence also covers the second issue which the jury had to determine, namely, whether, if arsenic poisoning was the cause of death, it was the prisoner who administered[345] it with criminal intent. The evidence on this point was most inconclusive.

No one saw the prisoner administer arsenic to her husband.

She had no opportunity of giving her husband anything since one or two o’clock on Wednesday afternoon (8th of May), after which she was closely watched by the nurses. It was not shown that any food or drink administered to the deceased by the prisoner contained arsenic. It was not shown that the prisoner had placed arsenic in any food or drink intended for her husband’s use. Nor, in fact, was any found, although searched for, in any food or medicine of which Mr. Maybrick partook during his illness, except the arsenic in Fowler’s solution, prescribed and administered by Dr. Humphreys himself.
The Fly-paper Episode

The episode of the fly-papers may be considered as one of the most important factors in the whole case. It supplies, so[346] to speak, the only link between Mrs. Maybrick and arsenic, which, it is well known, forms their chief ingredient. It was proved she had purchased the fly-papers without any attempt at concealment, and, while soaking, they were exposed to everybody’s view, quite openly, in a room accessible to every inmate157 of the house. It was not suggested that Mrs. Maybrick bought the other large quantity of arsenic, between seventy and eighty grains, found in the house after death, and no one came forward to speak to any such purchase. It was found in the most unlikely places for Mrs. Maybrick to have selected, if she had intended to use it, and the evidence against her on this point is of a particularly vague and indefinite character. [Justice Stephen, commenting on the quantity of arsenic found on the premises, himself observed that it was a remarkable fact in the case, and which, it appeared to him, told most favorably than otherwise for the prisoner, as in the whole case, from first to last, there[347] was no evidence at all that she had bought any poison, or had anything to do with the procuring of any, with the exception of those fly-papers.] The accusation158 rests entirely on suspicion, insinuation, and circumstantial suggestions; not one tittle of evidence was adduced in support of it, and yet the jury came to the conclusion, without allowing of any doubt in the matter, that it was her hand which administered the poison.
How Mrs. Maybrick Accounts for The Fly-Papers

On this question the prisoner made a statement. She accounted for the soaking of the fly-papers upon grounds which were not only probable, but were corroborated by other incidents. That she was in the habit of using arsenic as a face wash is shown by the prescription in 1878, before her marriage, and of which the chemist made an entry in his books, which came to[348] light, after the trial, under the following circumstances:

Among the few articles which Mr. Maybrick’s brothers allowed to be taken from the house, they being the legatees of the deceased, was a Bible which had belonged to Mrs. Maybrick’s father, and which, with some other relics159, came into the hands of Mrs. Maybrick’s mother, the Baroness160 von Roques, who, months afterward, happening to turn over the leaves of the Bible, came across a small piece of printed paper, evidently mislaid there, being a New York chemist’s label, with a New York doctor’s prescription written on the back, for an arsenical face wash “for external use, to be applied161 with a sponge twice a day.”

This prescription contained Fowler’s solution of arsenic, chlorate of potash, rose-water, and rectified162 spirits; and was again made up, on the 17th of July, 1878, by a French chemist, Mr. L. Brouant, 81 Avenue D’Eylau, Paris. It corroborates163 Mrs. Maybrick’s statement at the trial[349] that the fly-papers were being soaked for the purpose alleged by her. If Mrs. Maybrick had obtained or purchased the seventy or eighty grains of arsenic found in the house after the death, it is inconceivable that she should have openly manufactured more arsenic with the fly-papers. At the time she prepared the statement she had reason to believe that the prescription had been lost. She knew, therefore, it would be impossible for her to corroborate her story about the face wash, and she could have omitted that incident altogether, and contented164 herself by saying that she learned the preparation while at school in Germany.

[In further explanation I desire to state that during my girlhood, as well as subsequently, I suffered occasionally, due to gastric165 causes, from an irritation166 of the skin. One of my schoolmates, observing that it troubled me a good deal, offered me a face lotion167 of her own preparation, explaining that it was much more difficult to obtain[350] an arsenical ingredient abroad than in America, and to avoid any consequent annoyance168 she extracted the necessary small quantity of arsenic by the soaking of fly-papers. I had never had occasion to do so myself, as I had a prescription from Dr. Bay; but when I discovered that I had mislaid or lost this, I recalled the method of my friend, being, however, wholly ignorant of what quantity might be required. The reason why I wanted a cosmetic at this time was that I was going to a fancy dress ball with my husband’s brother, and that my face was at that time in an uncomfortable state of irritation.—F. E. M.]
Administration of Arsenic not Proved

Dealing169 with the question, did Mrs. Maybrick administer the arsenic, there is absolutely no evidence that she did. It was not for the prisoner to prove her innocence. She was seen neither to administer the arsenic nor to put it in the food or[351] drink taken by the deceased, and this issue was found against her in the absence of any evidence in support.
Intent to Murder not Proved

Mrs. Maybrick’s statement also bears strongly upon the question of administering with intent to murder. It is equally inconceivable that a guilty woman would have said anything about the white powder in the meat juice. She had nothing to gain by making such a statement, which could only land her in the sea of difficulties without any possible benefit, and here again the probabilities are entirely in her favor. It is beyond a doubt that Mr. Maybrick was in the habit, or had at some time or other been in the habit, of drugging himself with all sorts of medicines, including arsenic, and assumably he had obtained relief from it, or he would not have continued the practise.

Mr. Justice Stephen, in his summing-up,[352] animadverted in very strong terms on the testimony of arsenic being used for cosmetic purposes, although expert chemists had certified to large use of arsenic for such a purpose. An immense degree of speculation170 must have entered the minds of the jury before they could find as they did, and bridge the gulf171 between the soaking of the fly-papers and the death of Mr. Maybrick, for it is quite evident that the soaking of the fly-papers was the one connection between the arsenic and the prisoner upon which all the subsequent events turned; and, if that be so, the importance is seen at once of the statement she made regarding that incident, and conclusive39 evidence as to which was subsequently found in the providentially recovered prescription.

SAMUEL V. HAYDEN,
Of Hayden & Yarrell, American counsel of Mrs. Maybrick.
Absence of Concealment by Prisoner

Another remarkable circumstance is the absence of any attempt at concealment on the prisoner’s part. The fly-papers were[353] purchased openly from chemists who knew the Maybricks well, and they were left soaking in such a manner as at once to refute any suggestion of secrecy172; and her voluntary statement about the white powder which she placed in the meat juice, as to which there was absolutely no evidence to connect her with its presence there, seems inconsistent with the theory the prosecution attempted to build upon a number of assumptions of which the accuracy was not proved.

The question of the prisoner’s guilt was not capable of being reduced to any issue upon which the prosecution could bring to bear direct evidence; the most they were capable of doing was to show that the prisoner had opportunities of administering poison, which she shared with every individual in the house; further, that she had arsenic in her possession (and this was an open secret, as we have already explained with reference to the fly-papers); and, lastly, that she had the possibility of extracting[354] arsenic in sufficient quantities to cause death, which was, however, extremely doubtful; and then the prosecution tried to complete this indirect evidence by proving that Mr. Maybrick died from arsenic poisoning, which they signally failed to do. The strong point of the prosecution, as they alleged, was that a bottle of Valentine’s meat juice had been seen in her hands on the night of Thursday, the 9th of May, and she replaced it in the bedroom, where it was afterward found by Michael Maybrick, and analyzed by Mr. Davis, who found half a grain of “arsenic in solution”; but there was no direct proof, such as is absolutely necessary to a conviction in a criminal case, of the identity of the bottle seen in Mrs. Maybrick’s hands and that given to the analyst, and there was evidence that it had remained in the bedroom within reach of anybody, Mr. Maybrick himself included, for eighteen hours, and did not until the next day reach the hands of the analyst. These bottles are all alike in appearance,[355] of similar turnip-like shape as the bovril bottles now sold, and it is clear there was more than one, because Dr. Humphreys says in his evidence that on visiting his patient on the 6th of May he found some of the Valentine’s meat extract had made Mr. Maybrick sick, which he was not surprised at, as it often made people sick; while Nurse Gore, speaking of the bottle seen in the hands of Mrs. Maybrick, said it was a fresh, unused bottle, which she had herself opened only an hour before.

No evidence was given of what became of the opened bottle, and the presence of the arsenic having already been accounted for, and the fact recorded that the meat juice was not given to Mr. Maybrick, there is nothing to add to what has already been said, except that the account exactly dovetails with the prisoner’s own voluntary statement.

Can any one, closely following the evidence throughout, fail to be impressed with the inconsistency of Mrs. Maybrick’s conduct[356] in relation to her husband’s illness with a desire to murder him? In all recorded cases of poisoning, the utmost precautions to screen the victim from observation have been observed. In the present instance it would seem as if just the reverse object had been aimed at. We find the prisoner first giving the alarm about the attack of illness; first sending for the doctors, brothers, and friends; first suggesting that something taken by her husband, some drug or medicine, was at the bottom of the mischief173. We find the very first thing she does is to administer a mustard emetic—the last thing one would have expected if there had been a desire to poison him. If the prisoner had wished to put everybody in the house, and the doctors themselves, on the scent174 of poison, she could not have acted differently.

[See also “Mrs. Maybrick’s Own Analysis of the Meat-Juice Incident,” page 366.]

Some Important Deductions175 from Medical Testimony

From Dr. Humphreys’ testimony it appears that, after the days when he was away from the patient, and when Mrs. Maybrick had undisturbed access to her husband, no symptoms whatever of arsenical poisoning appeared. If, then, arsenic was administered by Mrs. Maybrick under the doctors’ eyes, without their detecting it, what value can attach to the testimony of the medical attendants as to the cause of death, apart from the post-mortem examination, by which they practically admit they allowed their judgment to be governed?

Does not the only alternative present itself that Drs. Humphreys and Carter are driven to the admission: “That the deceased died of arsenical poisoning we deduce, not from the symptoms during life, but from the fact that arsenic was found in the body after death”?

Symptoms Due to Poisonous Drugs

From the medical testimony it appears that the following list of poisonous drugs was prescribed and administered to Mr. Maybrick shortly before his death:

April 28, 1899, diluted177 prussic acid; April 29, Papaine’s iridin; May 3, morphia suppository; May 4, ipecacuanha; May 5, prussic acid; May 6, Fowler’s solution of arsenic; May 7, jaborandi tincture and antipyrin; May 10, sulfonal, cocain, and phosphoric acid.

Also, during the same period, the following were prescribed: bismuth, double doses; nitro-glycerin; cascara; nitro-hydrochloric acid (composed of nux vomica, strychnin, and brucine); Plummer’s pills (containing antimony and calomel); bromide of potassium; tincture of hyoscyamus; tincture of henbane; chlorin.

Now it will be observed that up to May 6, when Fowler’s solution of arsenic was administered, no symptom whatever had[359] been observed at all compatible with the effects of arsenic.

The sickness produced by the morphia continued after the taking of arsenic, and down the unfortunate man’s throat prussic acid, papaine, iridin, morphia, ipecacuanha, and arsenic, some of the most powerful drugs known to the pharmacop?ia, had found their way by the advice of Dr. Humphreys, in less than a week, while he was told to eat nothing, and allay178 his thirst with a damp cloth; and the charge of poisoning is made against the prisoner because he is suggested to have had an irritant poison in his stomach, and minute traces of arsenic in some other organs, within five days afterward.
Death from Natural Causes

The whole history of the case, from its medical aspect, is consistent with the small quantity of arsenic found in the body being part of that prescribed by Dr. Humphreys,[360] or the remains179 of that taken by the deceased himself, there being no particle of evidence to show that he discontinued the habit of drugging himself almost up to the day of his death. This is also in accord with the evidence of Dr. Carter, who attended at a later period, and, taken as a whole, the evidence of both of these doctors, as well as their treatment of the deceased, points to death from natural causes.
Prosecution’s Deductions from Post-mortem Analysis Misleading

The evidence of the prosecution in connection with the analysis was thoroughly180 unreliable and misleading. Dr. Stevenson’s difficulty was that, while two grains of arsenic was the smallest quantity capable of killing181, the analyst had found only one-tenth of a grain, or the twentieth part of the smallest fatal dose, and, in substance, Dr. Stevenson proceeds to argue as follows:

(a) I found 0.015 grain of arsenic in 8 ounces of intestines. (There is no record as to what part of the intestines he examined.) I have weighed the intestines of some other person (not Mr. Maybrick), and find their entire weight to be so much. If, then, 8 ounces of Mr. Maybrick’s intestines yield 0.015 grain, the entire intestines (calculated from the weight of some one else’s intestines), had I analyzed them, would have yielded one-eleventh of a grain.

(b) Dr. Stevenson then proceeds to argue: “I found 0.026 grain of arsenic in 4 ounces of liver. The entire liver weighed 48 ounces, therefore the entire liver contained 0.32 grain of arsenic.”

(c) Dr. Stevenson argues further: “The intestines and liver, therefore, may be taken to contain together four-tenths of a grain of arsenic, and, having found four-tenths of a grain, I assume that the body at the time of death probably contained a fatal dose of arsenic.”

Such was the deduction176 Dr. Stevenson[362] arrived at, necessitating182 the assumption that arsenic was equally distributed in the intestines and liver, whereas it is within the personal knowledge of eminent men (such as Drs. Tidy and Macnamara) that arsenic may be found after death in one portion of the intestines, and not a trace of it in any other part. That in arsenical poisoning the arsenic may be found in the rectum and in the duodenum, and in no other part, is beyond dispute, and the fallacy of Dr. Stevenson’s process must be self-evident.

The witnesses for the prosecution themselves supply the proof of the unequal distribution of the arsenic in the liver.

Mr. Davies calculates the quantity in the whole liver as 0.130 grain.

Dr. Stevenson, in his first experiment, puts it at 0.312 grain, and in his second experiment at 0.278 grain; in other words, Dr. Stevenson finds double in one experiment and considerably more than double in another experiment, the quantity found by Mr. Davies, and it is upon this glaring[363] miscalculation and discrepancy183 that the case for the prosecution was made to rest, and Mrs. Maybrick was convicted.

But with all this miscalculation the approximate amount of arsenic can only be swelled184 up to four-tenths of a grain, less than one-fourth of a fatal dose, and it was demonstrated that every other part of the body, urine, bile, stomach, contents of stomach, heart, lungs, spleen, fluid from mouth, and even bones, were all found to be free from arsenic.
Recapitulation Of Legal Points

The legal points of the case may thus conveniently be recapitulated185 under the following short heads:

There was no conclusive evidence that Mr. Maybrick died from other than natural causes (the word “conclusive” being used in the sense of free from doubt).

There was no conclusive evidence that he died from arsenical poisoning.

There was no evidence that the prisoner administered or attempted to administer arsenic to him.

There was no evidence that the prisoner, if she did administer or attempt to administer arsenic, did so with intent to murder.

The judge, while engaged in his summing-up, placed himself in a position where his mind was open to the influence of public discussion and prejudice, to which was probably attributable the evident change in his summing-up between the first and second days; and he also assumed facts against the prisoner which were not proved.

The jury were allowed to separate and frequent places of public resort and entertainment during such summing-up.

The verdict was against the weight of evidence.

The jury did not give the prisoner the benefit of the doubt suggested by the disagreement of expert witnesses on a material issue in the case.

The Home Secretary should have remitted186 the entire sentence by reason of his being satisfied that there existed a reasonable doubt of her guilt, which, had it been taken into consideration at the time, would have entitled her to an acquittal.

The indictment contained no specific account of felonious administration of poison, and consequently the jury found the prisoner guilty of an offense187 for which she was never tried.

点击收听单词发音收听单词发音  

1 submission lUVzr     
n.服从,投降;温顺,谦虚;提出
参考例句:
  • The defeated general showed his submission by giving up his sword.战败将军缴剑表示投降。
  • No enemy can frighten us into submission.任何敌人的恐吓都不能使我们屈服。
2 subscription qH8zt     
n.预订,预订费,亲笔签名,调配法,下标(处方)
参考例句:
  • We paid a subscription of 5 pounds yearly.我们按年度缴纳5英镑的订阅费。
  • Subscription selling bloomed splendidly.订阅销售量激增。
3 eminent dpRxn     
adj.显赫的,杰出的,有名的,优良的
参考例句:
  • We are expecting the arrival of an eminent scientist.我们正期待一位著名科学家的来访。
  • He is an eminent citizen of China.他是一个杰出的中国公民。
4 innocence ZbizC     
n.无罪;天真;无害
参考例句:
  • There was a touching air of innocence about the boy.这个男孩有一种令人感动的天真神情。
  • The accused man proved his innocence of the crime.被告人经证实无罪。
5 guilt 9e6xr     
n.犯罪;内疚;过失,罪责
参考例句:
  • She tried to cover up her guilt by lying.她企图用谎言掩饰自己的罪行。
  • Don't lay a guilt trip on your child about schoolwork.别因为功课责备孩子而使他觉得很内疚。
6 den 5w9xk     
n.兽穴;秘密地方;安静的小房间,私室
参考例句:
  • There is a big fox den on the back hill.后山有一个很大的狐狸窝。
  • The only way to catch tiger cubs is to go into tiger's den.不入虎穴焉得虎子。
7 procuring 1d7f440d0ca1006a2578d7800f8213b2     
v.(努力)取得, (设法)获得( procure的现在分词 );拉皮条
参考例句:
  • He was accused of procuring women for his business associates. 他被指控为其生意合伙人招妓。 来自辞典例句
  • She had particular pleasure, in procuring him the proper invitation. 她特别高兴为他争得这份体面的邀请。 来自辞典例句
8 indictment ybdzt     
n.起诉;诉状
参考例句:
  • He handed up the indictment to the supreme court.他把起诉书送交最高法院。
  • They issued an indictment against them.他们起诉了他们。
9 transpired eb74de9fe1bf6f220d412ce7c111e413     
(事实,秘密等)被人知道( transpire的过去式和过去分词 ); 泄露; 显露; 发生
参考例句:
  • It transpired that the gang had had a contact inside the bank. 据报这伙歹徒在银行里有内应。
  • It later transpired that he hadn't been telling the truth. 他当时没说真话,这在后来显露出来了。
10 mere rC1xE     
adj.纯粹的;仅仅,只不过
参考例句:
  • That is a mere repetition of what you said before.那不过是重复了你以前讲的话。
  • It's a mere waste of time waiting any longer.再等下去纯粹是浪费时间。
11 arsenic 2vSz4     
n.砒霜,砷;adj.砷的
参考例句:
  • His wife poisoned him with arsenic.他的妻子用砒霜把他毒死了。
  • Arsenic is a poison.砒霜是毒药。
12 perusal mM5xT     
n.细读,熟读;目测
参考例句:
  • Peter Cooke undertook to send each of us a sample contract for perusal.彼得·库克答应给我们每人寄送一份合同样本供阅读。
  • A perusal of the letters which we have published has satisfied him of the reality of our claim.读了我们的公开信后,他终于相信我们的要求的确是真的。
13 defense AxbxB     
n.防御,保卫;[pl.]防务工事;辩护,答辩
参考例句:
  • The accused has the right to defense.被告人有权获得辩护。
  • The war has impacted the area with military and defense workers.战争使那个地区挤满了军队和防御工程人员。
14 alleged gzaz3i     
a.被指控的,嫌疑的
参考例句:
  • It was alleged that he had taken bribes while in office. 他被指称在任时收受贿赂。
  • alleged irregularities in the election campaign 被指称竞选运动中的不正当行为
15 swoops 34cb21d205ccf6df9390b85e36d2b05a     
猛扑,突然下降( swoop的名词复数 )
参考例句:
  • He fixes his eyes on the greyish spine of the old wolf as he swoops down. 他两眼死死盯住老狼灰黑的脊背。 来自汉英文学 - 现代散文
  • An owl swoops from the ridge top, noiseless but as flame. 蓦地,山脊上一只夜枭飞扑直下,悄无声响而赫然如一道火光。
16 pointed Il8zB4     
adj.尖的,直截了当的
参考例句:
  • He gave me a very sharp pointed pencil.他给我一支削得非常尖的铅笔。
  • She wished to show Mrs.John Dashwood by this pointed invitation to her brother.她想通过对达茨伍德夫人提出直截了当的邀请向她的哥哥表示出来。
17 remarkable 8Vbx6     
adj.显著的,异常的,非凡的,值得注意的
参考例句:
  • She has made remarkable headway in her writing skills.她在写作技巧方面有了长足进步。
  • These cars are remarkable for the quietness of their engines.这些汽车因发动机没有噪音而不同凡响。
18 testimony zpbwO     
n.证词;见证,证明
参考例句:
  • The testimony given by him is dubious.他所作的证据是可疑的。
  • He was called in to bear testimony to what the police officer said.他被传入为警官所说的话作证。
19 vomit TL9zV     
v.呕吐,作呕;n.呕吐物,吐出物
参考例句:
  • They gave her salty water to make her vomit.他们给她喝盐水好让她吐出来。
  • She was stricken by pain and began to vomit.她感到一阵疼痛,开始呕吐起来。
20 vomiting 7ed7266d85c55ba00ffa41473cf6744f     
参考例句:
  • Symptoms include diarrhoea and vomiting. 症状有腹泻和呕吐。
  • Especially when I feel seasick, I can't stand watching someone else vomiting." 尤其晕船的时候,看不得人家呕。”
21 numbness BmTzzc     
n.无感觉,麻木,惊呆
参考例句:
  • She was fighting off the numbness of frostbite. 她在竭力摆脱冻僵的感觉。 来自《简明英汉词典》
  • Sometimes they stay dead, causing' only numbness. 有时,它们没有任何反应,只会造成麻木。 来自时文部分
22 retired Njhzyv     
adj.隐退的,退休的,退役的
参考例句:
  • The old man retired to the country for rest.这位老人下乡休息去了。
  • Many retired people take up gardening as a hobby.许多退休的人都以从事园艺为嗜好。
23 vomited 23632f2de1c0dc958c22b917c3cdd795     
参考例句:
  • Corbett leaned against the wall and promptly vomited. 科比特倚在墙边,马上呕吐了起来。
  • She leant forward and vomited copiously on the floor. 她向前一俯,哇的一声吐了一地。 来自英汉文学
24 improper b9txi     
adj.不适当的,不合适的,不正确的,不合礼仪的
参考例句:
  • Short trousers are improper at a dance.舞会上穿短裤不成体统。
  • Laughing and joking are improper at a funeral.葬礼时大笑和开玩笑是不合适的。
25 undoubtedly Mfjz6l     
adv.确实地,无疑地
参考例句:
  • It is undoubtedly she who has said that.这话明明是她说的。
  • He is undoubtedly the pride of China.毫无疑问他是中国的骄傲。
26 justify j3DxR     
vt.证明…正当(或有理),为…辩护
参考例句:
  • He tried to justify his absence with lame excuses.他想用站不住脚的借口为自己的缺席辩解。
  • Can you justify your rude behavior to me?你能向我证明你的粗野行为是有道理的吗?
27 procure A1GzN     
vt.获得,取得,促成;vi.拉皮条
参考例句:
  • Can you procure some specimens for me?你能替我弄到一些标本吗?
  • I'll try my best to procure you that original French novel.我将尽全力给你搞到那本原版法国小说。
28 procured 493ee52a2e975a52c94933bb12ecc52b     
v.(努力)取得, (设法)获得( procure的过去式和过去分词 );拉皮条
参考例句:
  • These cars are to be procured through open tender. 这些汽车要用公开招标的办法购买。 来自《现代汉英综合大词典》
  • A friend procured a position in the bank for my big brother. 一位朋友为我哥哥谋得了一个银行的职位。 来自《用法词典》
29 charcoal prgzJ     
n.炭,木炭,生物炭
参考例句:
  • We need to get some more charcoal for the barbecue.我们烧烤需要更多的碳。
  • Charcoal is used to filter water.木炭是用来过滤水的。
30 analyst gw7zn     
n.分析家,化验员;心理分析学家
参考例句:
  • What can you contribute to the position of a market analyst?你有什么技能可有助于市场分析员的职务?
  • The analyst is required to interpolate values between standards.分析人员需要在这些标准中插入一些值。
31 analyzing be408cc8d92ec310bb6260bc127c162b     
v.分析;分析( analyze的现在分词 );分解;解释;对…进行心理分析n.分析
参考例句:
  • Analyzing the date of some socialist countries presents even greater problem s. 分析某些社会主义国家的统计数据,暴露出的问题甚至更大。 来自辞典例句
  • He undoubtedly was not far off the mark in analyzing its predictions. 当然,他对其预测所作的分析倒也八九不离十。 来自辞典例句
32 diligently gueze5     
ad.industriously;carefully
参考例句:
  • He applied himself diligently to learning French. 他孜孜不倦地学法语。
  • He had studied diligently at college. 他在大学里勤奋学习。
33 microscopically b95eb0161484f1e40de775b8b54c545f     
显微镜下
参考例句:
  • Microscopically the ores are medium grained to amorphous. 显微镜下,矿石为中粒至非晶质。 来自辞典例句
  • He studied microscopically the statistics of trade. 他极仔细地研究了贸易统计数字。 来自辞典例句
34 stringent gq4yz     
adj.严厉的;令人信服的;银根紧的
参考例句:
  • Financiers are calling for a relaxation of these stringent measures.金融家呼吁对这些严厉的措施予以放宽。
  • Some of the conditions in the contract are too stringent.合同中有几项条件太苛刻。
35 restrictions 81e12dac658cfd4c590486dd6f7523cf     
约束( restriction的名词复数 ); 管制; 制约因素; 带限制性的条件(或规则)
参考例句:
  • I found the restrictions irksome. 我对那些限制感到很烦。
  • a snaggle of restrictions 杂乱无章的种种限制
36 wholesale Ig9wL     
n.批发;adv.以批发方式;vt.批发,成批出售
参考例句:
  • The retail dealer buys at wholesale and sells at retail.零售商批发购进货物,以零售价卖出。
  • Such shoes usually wholesale for much less.这种鞋批发出售通常要便宜得多。
37 afterward fK6y3     
adv.后来;以后
参考例句:
  • Let's go to the theatre first and eat afterward. 让我们先去看戏,然后吃饭。
  • Afterward,the boy became a very famous artist.后来,这男孩成为一个很有名的艺术家。
38 conclusively NvVzwY     
adv.令人信服地,确凿地
参考例句:
  • All this proves conclusively that she couldn't have known the truth. 这一切无可置疑地证明她不可能知道真相。 来自《简明英汉词典》
  • From the facts,he was able to determine conclusively that the death was not a suicide. 根据这些事实他断定这起死亡事件并非自杀。 来自《简明英汉词典》
39 conclusive TYjyw     
adj.最后的,结论的;确凿的,消除怀疑的
参考例句:
  • They produced some fairly conclusive evidence.他们提供了一些相当确凿的证据。
  • Franklin did not believe that the French tests were conclusive.富兰克林不相信这个法国人的实验是结论性的。
40 fibers 421d63991f1d1fc8826d6e71d5e15f53     
光纤( fiber的名词复数 ); (织物的)质地; 纤维,纤维物质
参考例句:
  • Thesolution of collagen-PVA was wet spined with the sodium sulfate as coagulant and collagen-PVA composite fibers were prepared. 在此基础上,以硫酸钠为凝固剂,对胶原-PVA共混溶液进行湿法纺丝,制备了胶原-PVA复合纤维。
  • Sympathetic fibers are distributed to all regions of the heart. 交感神经纤维分布于心脏的所有部分。
41 cosmetic qYgz2     
n.化妆品;adj.化妆用的;装门面的;装饰性的
参考例句:
  • These changes are purely cosmetic.这些改变纯粹是装饰门面。
  • Laughter is the best cosmetic,so grin and wear it!微笑是最好的化妆品,所以请尽情微笑吧!
42 saturated qjEzG3     
a.饱和的,充满的
参考例句:
  • The continuous rain had saturated the soil. 连绵不断的雨把土地淋了个透。
  • a saturated solution of sodium chloride 氯化钠饱和溶液
43 addicted dzizmY     
adj.沉溺于....的,对...上瘾的
参考例句:
  • He was addicted to heroin at the age of 17.他17岁的时候对海洛因上了瘾。
  • She's become addicted to love stories.她迷上了爱情小说。
44 copper HZXyU     
n.铜;铜币;铜器;adj.铜(制)的;(紫)铜色的
参考例句:
  • The students are asked to prove the purity of copper.要求学生们检验铜的纯度。
  • Copper is a good medium for the conduction of heat and electricity.铜是热和电的良导体。
45 reliability QVexf     
n.可靠性,确实性
参考例句:
  • We mustn't presume too much upon the reliability of such sources.我们不应过分指望这类消息来源的可靠性。
  • I can assure you of the reliability of the information.我向你保证这消息可靠。
46 discredited 94ada058d09abc9d4a3f8a5e1089019f     
不足信的,不名誉的
参考例句:
  • The reactionary authorities are between two fires and have been discredited. 反动当局弄得进退维谷,不得人心。
  • Her honour was discredited in the newspapers. 她的名声被报纸败坏了。
47 skilful 8i2zDY     
(=skillful)adj.灵巧的,熟练的
参考例句:
  • The more you practise,the more skilful you'll become.练习的次数越多,熟练的程度越高。
  • He's not very skilful with his chopsticks.他用筷子不大熟练。
48 investigation MRKzq     
n.调查,调查研究
参考例句:
  • In an investigation,a new fact became known, which told against him.在调查中新发现了一件对他不利的事实。
  • He drew the conclusion by building on his own investigation.他根据自己的调查研究作出结论。
49 considerably 0YWyQ     
adv.极大地;相当大地;在很大程度上
参考例句:
  • The economic situation has changed considerably.经济形势已发生了相当大的变化。
  • The gap has narrowed considerably.分歧大大缩小了。
50 thereby Sokwv     
adv.因此,从而
参考例句:
  • I have never been to that city,,ereby I don't know much about it.我从未去过那座城市,因此对它不怎么熟悉。
  • He became a British citizen,thereby gaining the right to vote.他成了英国公民,因而得到了投票权。
51 interpretation P5jxQ     
n.解释,说明,描述;艺术处理
参考例句:
  • His statement admits of one interpretation only.他的话只有一种解释。
  • Analysis and interpretation is a very personal thing.分析与说明是个很主观的事情。
52 interval 85kxY     
n.间隔,间距;幕间休息,中场休息
参考例句:
  • The interval between the two trees measures 40 feet.这两棵树的间隔是40英尺。
  • There was a long interval before he anwsered the telephone.隔了好久他才回了电话。
53 intervals f46c9d8b430e8c86dea610ec56b7cbef     
n.[军事]间隔( interval的名词复数 );间隔时间;[数学]区间;(戏剧、电影或音乐会的)幕间休息
参考例句:
  • The forecast said there would be sunny intervals and showers. 预报间晴,有阵雨。
  • Meetings take place at fortnightly intervals. 每两周开一次会。
54 distilled 4e59b94e0e02e468188de436f8158165     
adj.由蒸馏得来的v.蒸馏( distil的过去式和过去分词 );从…提取精华
参考例句:
  • The televised interview was distilled from 16 hours of film. 那次电视采访是从16个小时的影片中选出的精华。 来自《简明英汉词典》
  • Gasoline is distilled from crude oil. 汽油是从原油中提炼出来的。 来自《简明英汉词典》
55 inspector q6kxH     
n.检查员,监察员,视察员
参考例句:
  • The inspector was interested in everything pertaining to the school.视察员对有关学校的一切都感兴趣。
  • The inspector was shining a flashlight onto the tickets.查票员打着手电筒查看车票。
56 lavatory LkOyJ     
n.盥洗室,厕所
参考例句:
  • Is there any lavatory in this building?这座楼里有厕所吗?
  • The use of the lavatory has been suspended during take-off.在飞机起飞期间,盥洗室暂停使用。
57 pharmaceutical f30zR     
adj.药学的,药物的;药用的,药剂师的
参考例句:
  • She has donated money to establish a pharmaceutical laboratory.她捐款成立了一个药剂实验室。
  • We are engaged in a legal tussle with a large pharmaceutical company.我们正同一家大制药公司闹法律纠纷。
58 gore gevzd     
n.凝血,血污;v.(动物)用角撞伤,用牙刺破;缝以补裆;顶
参考例句:
  • The fox lay dying in a pool of gore.狐狸倒在血泊中奄奄一息。
  • Carruthers had been gored by a rhinoceros.卡拉瑟斯被犀牛顶伤了。
59 apparently tMmyQ     
adv.显然地;表面上,似乎
参考例句:
  • An apparently blind alley leads suddenly into an open space.山穷水尽,豁然开朗。
  • He was apparently much surprised at the news.他对那个消息显然感到十分惊异。
60 specially Hviwq     
adv.特定地;特殊地;明确地
参考例句:
  • They are specially packaged so that they stack easily.它们经过特别包装以便于堆放。
  • The machine was designed specially for demolishing old buildings.这种机器是专为拆毁旧楼房而设计的。
61 entirely entirely     
ad.全部地,完整地;完全地,彻底地
参考例句:
  • The fire was entirely caused by their neglect of duty. 那场火灾完全是由于他们失职而引起的。
  • His life was entirely given up to the educational work. 他的一生统统献给了教育工作。
62 imputed b517c0c1d49a8e6817c4d0667060241e     
v.把(错误等)归咎于( impute的过去式和过去分词 )
参考例句:
  • They imputed the accident to the driver's carelessness. 他们把这次车祸归咎于司机的疏忽。 来自《现代英汉综合大词典》
  • He imputed the failure of his marriage to his wife's shortcomings. 他把婚姻的失败归咎于妻子的缺点。 来自辞典例句
63 analyzed 483f1acae53789fbee273a644fdcda80     
v.分析( analyze的过去式和过去分词 );分解;解释;对…进行心理分析
参考例句:
  • The doctors analyzed the blood sample for anemia. 医生们分析了贫血的血样。 来自《简明英汉词典》
  • The young man did not analyze the process of his captivation and enrapturement, for love to him was a mystery and could not be analyzed. 这年轻人没有分析自己蛊惑著迷的过程,因为对他来说,爱是个不可分析的迷。 来自《简明英汉词典》
64 prescription u1vzA     
n.处方,开药;指示,规定
参考例句:
  • The physician made a prescription against sea- sickness for him.医生给他开了个治晕船的药方。
  • The drug is available on prescription only.这种药只能凭处方购买。
65 tamper 7g3zom     
v.干预,玩弄,贿赂,窜改,削弱,损害
参考例句:
  • Do not tamper with other's business.不要干预别人的事。
  • They had strict orders not to tamper with the customs of the minorities.他们得到命令严禁干涉少数民族的风俗习惯。
66 sediment IsByK     
n.沉淀,沉渣,沉积(物)
参考例句:
  • The sediment settled and the water was clear.杂质沉淀后,水变清了。
  • Sediment begins to choke the channel's opening.沉积物开始淤塞河道口。
67 concealment AvYzx1     
n.隐藏, 掩盖,隐瞒
参考例句:
  • the concealment of crime 对罪行的隐瞒
  • Stay in concealment until the danger has passed. 把自己藏起来,待危险过去后再出来。
68 bullying f23dd48b95ce083d3774838a76074f5f     
v.恐吓,威逼( bully的现在分词 );豪;跋扈
参考例句:
  • Many cases of bullying go unreported . 很多恐吓案件都没有人告发。
  • All cases of bullying will be severely dealt with. 所有以大欺小的情况都将受到严肃处理。 来自《简明英汉词典》
69 justification x32xQ     
n.正当的理由;辩解的理由
参考例句:
  • There's no justification for dividing the company into smaller units. 没有理由把公司划分成小单位。
  • In the young there is a justification for this feeling. 在年轻人中有这种感觉是有理由的。
70 prosecution uBWyL     
n.起诉,告发,检举,执行,经营
参考例句:
  • The Smiths brought a prosecution against the organizers.史密斯家对组织者们提出起诉。
  • He attempts to rebut the assertion made by the prosecution witness.他试图反驳原告方证人所作的断言。
71 consigning 9a7723ed5306932a170f9e5fa9243794     
v.把…置于(令人不快的境地)( consign的现在分词 );把…托付给;把…托人代售;丟弃
参考例句:
  • By consigning childhood illiteracy to history we will help make poverty history too. 而且,通过将儿童文盲归于历史,我们也将改变贫穷的历史。 来自互联网
72 penal OSBzn     
adj.刑罚的;刑法上的
参考例句:
  • I hope you're familiar with penal code.我希望你们熟悉本州法律规则。
  • He underwent nineteen years of penal servitude for theft.他因犯了大窃案受过十九年的苦刑。
73 exclusion 1hCzz     
n.拒绝,排除,排斥,远足,远途旅行
参考例句:
  • Don't revise a few topics to the exclusion of all others.不要修改少数论题以致排除所有其他的。
  • He plays golf to the exclusion of all other sports.他专打高尔夫球,其他运动一概不参加。
74 solicitors 53ed50f93b0d64a6b74a2e21c5841f88     
初级律师( solicitor的名词复数 )
参考例句:
  • Most solicitors in England and Wales are in private practice . 英格兰和威尔士的大多数律师都是私人执业者。
  • The family has instructed solicitors to sue Thomson for compensation. 那家人已经指示律师起诉汤姆森,要求赔偿。
75 cleaver Rqkzf     
n.切肉刀
参考例句:
  • In fact,a cleaver is a class of ax.实际上,切肉刀也是斧子的一种。
  • The cleaver is ground to a very sharp edge.刀磨得飞快。
76 magisterial mAaxA     
adj.威风的,有权威的;adv.威严地
参考例句:
  • The colonel's somewhat in a magisterial manner.上校多少有点威严的神态。
  • The Cambridge World History of Human Disease is a magisterial work.《剑桥世界人类疾病史》是一部权威著作。
77 inquiry nbgzF     
n.打听,询问,调查,查问
参考例句:
  • Many parents have been pressing for an inquiry into the problem.许多家长迫切要求调查这个问题。
  • The field of inquiry has narrowed down to five persons.调查的范围已经缩小到只剩5个人了。
78 discrepancies 5ae435bbd140222573d5f589c82a7ff3     
n.差异,不符合(之处),不一致(之处)( discrepancy的名词复数 )
参考例句:
  • wide discrepancies in prices quoted for the work 这项工作的报价出入很大
  • When both versions of the story were collated,major discrepancies were found. 在将这个故事的两个版本对照后,找出了主要的不符之处。 来自《简明英汉词典》
79 corroborate RoVzf     
v.支持,证实,确定
参考例句:
  • He looked at me anxiously,as if he hoped I'd corroborate this.他神色不安地看着我,仿佛他希望我证实地的话。
  • It appeared that what he said went to corroborate my account.看来他所说的和我叙述的相符。
80 corroborated ab27fc1c50e7a59aad0d93cd9f135917     
v.证实,支持(某种说法、信仰、理论等)( corroborate的过去式 )
参考例句:
  • The evidence was corroborated by two independent witnesses. 此证据由两名独立证人提供。
  • Experiments have corroborated her predictions. 实验证实了她的预言。 来自《简明英汉词典》
81 jugs 10ebefab1f47ca33e582d349c161a29f     
(有柄及小口的)水壶( jug的名词复数 )
参考例句:
  • Two china jugs held steaming gravy. 两个瓷罐子装着热气腾腾的肉卤。
  • Jugs-Big wall lingo for Jumars or any other type of ascenders. 大岩壁术语,祝玛式上升器或其它种类的上升器。
82 premises 6l1zWN     
n.建筑物,房屋
参考例句:
  • According to the rules,no alcohol can be consumed on the premises.按照规定,场内不准饮酒。
  • All repairs are done on the premises and not put out.全部修缮都在家里进行,不用送到外面去做。
83 corroboration vzoxo     
n.进一步的证实,进一步的证据
参考例句:
  • Without corroboration from forensic tests,it will be difficult to prove that the suspect is guilty. 没有法医化验的确证就很难证明嫌疑犯有罪。 来自《简明英汉词典》
  • Definitely more independent corroboration is necessary. 有必要更明确地进一步证实。 来自辞典例句
84 depositions 501b5f2c22877a7ee308222b01cb47b5     
沉积(物)( deposition的名词复数 ); (在法庭上的)宣誓作证; 处置; 罢免
参考例句:
  • The safety problems are more severe for low-pressure depositions because the processes often use concentrated gases. 对于低压淀积来说安全性问题更为突出,因为这种工艺通常使用高浓度的气体。
  • The chief method is to take depositions of parties and witnesses. 主要的方法是录取当事人和证人的宣誓证言。 来自口语例句
85 magistrates bbe4eeb7cda0f8fbf52949bebe84eb3e     
地方法官,治安官( magistrate的名词复数 )
参考例句:
  • to come up before the magistrates 在地方法院出庭
  • He was summoned to appear before the magistrates. 他被传唤在地方法院出庭。
86 magistrate e8vzN     
n.地方行政官,地方法官,治安官
参考例句:
  • The magistrate committed him to prison for a month.法官判处他一个月监禁。
  • John was fined 1000 dollars by the magistrate.约翰被地方法官罚款1000美元。
87 taunt nIJzj     
n.辱骂,嘲弄;v.嘲弄
参考例句:
  • He became a taunt to his neighbours.他成了邻居们嘲讽的对象。
  • Why do the other children taunt him with having red hair?为什么别的小孩子讥笑他有红头发?
88 monstrously ef58bb5e1444fec1b23eef5db7b0ea4f     
参考例句:
  • There is a class of men in Bristol monstrously prejudiced against Blandly. 布里斯托尔有那么一帮人为此恨透了布兰德利。
  • You are monstrously audacious, how dare you misappropriate public funds? 你真是狗胆包天,公家的钱也敢挪用?
89 utterance dKczL     
n.用言语表达,话语,言语
参考例句:
  • This utterance of his was greeted with bursts of uproarious laughter.他的讲话引起阵阵哄然大笑。
  • My voice cleaves to my throat,and sob chokes my utterance.我的噪子哽咽,泣不成声。
90 justified 7pSzrk     
a.正当的,有理的
参考例句:
  • She felt fully justified in asking for her money back. 她认为有充分的理由要求退款。
  • The prisoner has certainly justified his claims by his actions. 那个囚犯确实已用自己的行动表明他的要求是正当的。
91 ascertained e6de5c3a87917771a9555db9cf4de019     
v.弄清,确定,查明( ascertain的过去式和过去分词 )
参考例句:
  • The previously unidentified objects have now been definitely ascertained as being satellites. 原来所说的不明飞行物现在已证实是卫星。 来自《简明英汉词典》
  • I ascertained that she was dead. 我断定她已经死了。 来自《简明英汉词典》
92 ascertain WNVyN     
vt.发现,确定,查明,弄清
参考例句:
  • It's difficult to ascertain the coal deposits.煤储量很难探明。
  • We must ascertain the responsibility in light of different situtations.我们必须根据不同情况判定责任。
93 exhaustion OPezL     
n.耗尽枯竭,疲惫,筋疲力尽,竭尽,详尽无遗的论述
参考例句:
  • She slept the sleep of exhaustion.她因疲劳而酣睡。
  • His exhaustion was obvious when he fell asleep standing.他站着睡着了,显然是太累了。
94 intestines e809cc608db249eaf1b13d564503dbca     
n.肠( intestine的名词复数 )
参考例句:
  • Perhaps the most serious problems occur in the stomach and intestines. 最严重的问题或许出现在胃和肠里。 来自辞典例句
  • The traps of carnivorous plants function a little like the stomachs and small intestines of animals. 食肉植物的捕蝇器起着动物的胃和小肠的作用。 来自辞典例句
95 exhumed 9d00013cea0c5916a17f400c6124ccf3     
v.挖出,发掘出( exhume的过去式和过去分词 )
参考例句:
  • Marie Curie's remains were exhumed and interred in the Pantheon. 玛丽·居里的遗体被移出葬在先贤祠中。 来自《简明英汉词典》
  • His remains have been exhumed from a cemetery in Queens, New York City. 他的遗体被从纽约市皇后区的墓地里挖了出来。 来自辞典例句
96 analysts 167ff30c5034ca70abe2d60a6e760448     
分析家,化验员( analyst的名词复数 )
参考例句:
  • City analysts forecast huge profits this year. 伦敦金融分析家预测今年的利润非常丰厚。
  • I was impressed by the high calibre of the researchers and analysts. 研究人员和分析人员的高素质给我留下了深刻印象。
97 exhumation 3e3356144992dae3dedaa826df161f8e     
n.掘尸,发掘;剥璐
参考例句:
  • The German allowed a forensic commission including prominent neutral experts to supervise part of the exhumation. 德国人让一个包括杰出的中立专家在内的法庭委员会对部分掘墓工作进行监督。 来自辞典例句
  • At any rate, the exhumation was repeated once and again. 无论如何,他曾经把尸体挖出来又埋进去,埋进去又挖出来。 来自互联网
98 spoke XryyC     
n.(车轮的)辐条;轮辐;破坏某人的计划;阻挠某人的行动 v.讲,谈(speak的过去式);说;演说;从某种观点来说
参考例句:
  • They sourced the spoke nuts from our company.他们的轮辐螺帽是从我们公司获得的。
  • The spokes of a wheel are the bars that connect the outer ring to the centre.辐条是轮子上连接外圈与中心的条棒。
99 insufficient L5vxu     
adj.(for,of)不足的,不够的
参考例句:
  • There was insufficient evidence to convict him.没有足够证据给他定罪。
  • In their day scientific knowledge was insufficient to settle the matter.在他们的时代,科学知识还不能足以解决这些问题。
100 impure NyByW     
adj.不纯净的,不洁的;不道德的,下流的
参考例句:
  • The air of a big city is often impure.大城市的空气往往是污浊的。
  • Impure drinking water is a cause of disease.不洁的饮用水是引发疾病的一个原因。
101 previously bkzzzC     
adv.以前,先前(地)
参考例句:
  • The bicycle tyre blew out at a previously damaged point.自行车胎在以前损坏过的地方又爆开了。
  • Let me digress for a moment and explain what had happened previously.让我岔开一会儿,解释原先发生了什么。
102 distinctive Es5xr     
adj.特别的,有特色的,与众不同的
参考例句:
  • She has a very distinctive way of walking.她走路的样子与别人很不相同。
  • This bird has several distinctive features.这个鸟具有几种突出的特征。
103 judgment e3xxC     
n.审判;判断力,识别力,看法,意见
参考例句:
  • The chairman flatters himself on his judgment of people.主席自认为他审视人比别人高明。
  • He's a man of excellent judgment.他眼力过人。
104 tainted qgDzqS     
adj.腐坏的;污染的;沾污的;感染的v.使变质( taint的过去式和过去分词 );使污染;败坏;被污染,腐坏,败坏
参考例句:
  • The administration was tainted with scandal. 丑闻使得政府声名狼藉。
  • He was considered tainted by association with the corrupt regime. 他因与腐败政府有牵连而名誉受损。 来自《简明英汉词典》
105 Partisanship Partisanship     
n. 党派性, 党派偏见
参考例句:
  • Her violent partisanship was fighting Soames's battle. 她的激烈偏袒等于替索米斯卖气力。
  • There was a link of understanding between them, more important than affection or partisanship. ' 比起人间的感情,比起相同的政见,这一点都来得格外重要。 来自英汉文学
106 positively vPTxw     
adv.明确地,断然,坚决地;实在,确实
参考例句:
  • She was positively glowing with happiness.她满脸幸福。
  • The weather was positively poisonous.这天气着实讨厌。
107 embodying 6e759eac57252cfdb6d5d502ccc75f4b     
v.表现( embody的现在分词 );象征;包括;包含
参考例句:
  • Every instrument constitutes an independent contract embodying a payment obligation. 每张票据都构成一份独立的体现支付义务的合同。 来自口语例句
  • Fowth, The aesthetical transcendency and the beauty embodying the man's liberty. \" 第四部分:审美的超越和作为人类自由最终体现的“美”。 来自互联网
108 vividly tebzrE     
adv.清楚地,鲜明地,生动地
参考例句:
  • The speaker pictured the suffering of the poor vividly.演讲者很生动地描述了穷人的生活。
  • The characters in the book are vividly presented.这本书里的人物写得栩栩如生。
109 deliberately Gulzvq     
adv.审慎地;蓄意地;故意地
参考例句:
  • The girl gave the show away deliberately.女孩故意泄露秘密。
  • They deliberately shifted off the argument.他们故意回避这个论点。
110 wretch EIPyl     
n.可怜的人,不幸的人;卑鄙的人
参考例句:
  • You are really an ungrateful wretch to complain instead of thanking him.你不但不谢他,还埋怨他,真不知好歹。
  • The dead husband is not the dishonoured wretch they fancied him.死去的丈夫不是他们所想象的不光彩的坏蛋。
111 inflicted cd6137b3bb7ad543500a72a112c6680f     
把…强加给,使承受,遭受( inflict的过去式和过去分词 )
参考例句:
  • They inflicted a humiliating defeat on the home team. 他们使主队吃了一场很没面子的败仗。
  • Zoya heroically bore the torture that the Fascists inflicted upon her. 卓娅英勇地承受法西斯匪徒加在她身上的酷刑。
112 destitute 4vOxu     
adj.缺乏的;穷困的
参考例句:
  • They were destitute of necessaries of life.他们缺少生活必需品。
  • They are destitute of common sense.他们缺乏常识。
113 formulated cfc86c2c7185ae3f93c4d8a44e3cea3c     
v.构想出( formulate的过去式和过去分词 );规划;确切地阐述;用公式表示
参考例句:
  • He claims that the writer never consciously formulated his own theoretical position. 他声称该作家从未有意识地阐明他自己的理论见解。 来自《简明英汉词典》
  • This idea can be formulated in two different ways. 这个意思可以有两种说法。 来自《现代汉英综合大词典》
114 mortification mwIyN     
n.耻辱,屈辱
参考例句:
  • To my mortification, my manuscript was rejected. 使我感到失面子的是:我的稿件被退了回来。
  • The chairman tried to disguise his mortification. 主席试图掩饰自己的窘迫。
115 rebut ZTZxZ     
v.辩驳,驳回
参考例句:
  • He attempted to rebut the assertions made by the prosecution witness.他试图反驳控方证人所作的断言。
  • This open letter is to rebut the argument of abstractionism.这封公开信是反驳抽象派论点的。
116 intentionally 7qOzFn     
ad.故意地,有意地
参考例句:
  • I didn't say it intentionally. 我是无心说的。
  • The local authority ruled that he had made himself intentionally homeless and was therefore not entitled to be rehoused. 当地政府裁定他是有意居无定所,因此没有资格再获得提供住房。
117 adjourned 1e5a5e61da11d317191a820abad1664d     
(使)休会, (使)休庭( adjourn的过去式和过去分词 )
参考例句:
  • The court adjourned for lunch. 午餐时间法庭休庭。
  • The trial was adjourned following the presentation of new evidence to the court. 新证据呈到庭上后,审讯就宣告暂停。
118 proceedings Wk2zvX     
n.进程,过程,议程;诉讼(程序);公报
参考例句:
  • He was released on bail pending committal proceedings. 他交保获释正在候审。
  • to initiate legal proceedings against sb 对某人提起诉讼
119 adviser HznziU     
n.劝告者,顾问
参考例句:
  • They employed me as an adviser.他们聘请我当顾问。
  • Our department has engaged a foreign teacher as phonetic adviser.我们系已经聘请了一位外籍老师作为语音顾问。
120 prescriptions f0b231c0bb45f8e500f32e91ec1ae602     
药( prescription的名词复数 ); 处方; 开处方; 计划
参考例句:
  • The hospital of traditional Chinese medicine installed a computer to fill prescriptions. 中医医院装上了电子计算机来抓药。
  • Her main job was filling the doctor's prescriptions. 她的主要工作就是给大夫开的药方配药。
121 congestion pYmy3     
n.阻塞,消化不良
参考例句:
  • The congestion in the city gets even worse during the summer.夏天城市交通阻塞尤为严重。
  • Parking near the school causes severe traffic congestion.在学校附近泊车会引起严重的交通堵塞。
122 certified fw5zkU     
a.经证明合格的;具有证明文件的
参考例句:
  • Doctors certified him as insane. 医生证明他精神失常。
  • The planes were certified airworthy. 飞机被证明适于航行。
123 decomposed d6dafa7f02e02b23fd957d01ced03499     
已分解的,已腐烂的
参考例句:
  • A liquid is decomposed when an electric current passes through it. 当电流通过时,液体就分解。
  • Water can be resolved [decomposed] into hydrogen and oxygen. 水可分解为氢和氧。
124 bowels qxMzez     
n.肠,内脏,内部;肠( bowel的名词复数 );内部,最深处
参考例句:
  • Salts is a medicine that causes movements of the bowels. 泻盐是一种促使肠子运动的药物。 来自《简明英汉词典》
  • The cabins are in the bowels of the ship. 舱房设在船腹内。 来自《简明英汉词典》
125 treasury 7GeyP     
n.宝库;国库,金库;文库
参考例句:
  • The Treasury was opposed in principle to the proposals.财政部原则上反对这些提案。
  • This book is a treasury of useful information.这本书是有价值的信息宝库。
126 nausea C5Dzz     
n.作呕,恶心;极端的憎恶(或厌恶)
参考例句:
  • Early pregnancy is often accompanied by nausea.怀孕期常有恶心的现象。
  • He experienced nausea after eating octopus.吃了章鱼后他感到恶心。
127 perspiration c3UzD     
n.汗水;出汗
参考例句:
  • It is so hot that my clothes are wet with perspiration.天太热了,我的衣服被汗水湿透了。
  • The perspiration was running down my back.汗从我背上淌下来。
128 foul Sfnzy     
adj.污秽的;邪恶的;v.弄脏;妨害;犯规;n.犯规
参考例句:
  • Take off those foul clothes and let me wash them.脱下那些脏衣服让我洗一洗。
  • What a foul day it is!多么恶劣的天气!
129 vomits 0244d7d4c04e070507c487c861d01f3e     
呕吐物( vomit的名词复数 )
参考例句:
  • A baby vomits milk from repletion. 婴儿吃饱会吐奶。
  • An active volcano vomits forth smoke and lava. 活火山喷出烟雾和熔岩。
130 rebutting ea8b1b187e1a5e9681da3acb3594996f     
v.反驳,驳回( rebut的现在分词 );击退
参考例句:
  • The union countered with letters rebutting the company's claims. 工会写信驳回了公司的要求。 来自辞典例句
131 presumption XQcxl     
n.推测,可能性,冒昧,放肆,[法律]推定
参考例句:
  • Please pardon my presumption in writing to you.请原谅我很冒昧地写信给你。
  • I don't think that's a false presumption.我认为那并不是错误的推测。
132 forensic 96zyv     
adj.法庭的,雄辩的
参考例句:
  • The report included his interpretation of the forensic evidence.该报告包括他对法庭证据的诠释。
  • The judge concluded the proceeding on 10:30 Am after one hour of forensic debate.经过近一个小时的法庭辩论后,法官于10时30分宣布休庭。
133 recurring 8kLzK8     
adj.往复的,再次发生的
参考例句:
  • This kind of problem is recurring often. 这类问题经常发生。
  • For our own country, it has been a time for recurring trial. 就我们国家而言,它经过了一个反复考验的时期。
134 purging 832cd742d18664512602b0ae7fec22be     
清洗; 清除; 净化; 洗炉
参考例句:
  • You learned the dry-mouthed, fear-purged, purging ecstasy of battle. 你体会到战斗中那种使人嘴巴发干的,战胜了恐惧并排除其他杂念的狂喜。
  • Purging databases, configuring, and making other exceptional requests might fall into this category. 比如清空数据库、配置,以及其他特别的请求等都属于这个类别。 来自About Face 3交互设计精髓
135 abdomen MfXym     
n.腹,下腹(胸部到腿部的部分)
参考例句:
  • How to know to there is ascarid inside abdomen?怎样知道肚子里面有蛔虫?
  • He was anxious about an off-and-on pain the abdomen.他因时隐时现的腹痛而焦虑。
136 calves bb808da8ca944ebdbd9f1d2688237b0b     
n.(calf的复数)笨拙的男子,腓;腿肚子( calf的名词复数 );牛犊;腓;小腿肚v.生小牛( calve的第三人称单数 );(冰川)崩解;生(小牛等),产(犊);使(冰川)崩解
参考例句:
  • a cow suckling her calves 给小牛吃奶的母牛
  • The calves are grazed intensively during their first season. 小牛在生长的第一季里集中喂养。 来自《简明英汉词典》
137 suffusion 4b77dbda68681284bf804416e4ab215d     
n.充满
参考例句:
  • He suffered from suffusion of blood on the brain. 他患脑溢血。 来自《现代汉英综合大词典》
138 irritability oR0zn     
n.易怒
参考例句:
  • It was the almost furtive restlessness and irritability that had possessed him. 那是一种一直纠缠着他的隐秘的不安和烦恼。
  • All organisms have irritability while alive. 所有生物体活着时都有应激性。
139 eyelids 86ece0ca18a95664f58bda5de252f4e7     
n.眼睑( eyelid的名词复数 );眼睛也不眨一下;不露声色;面不改色
参考例句:
  • She was so tired, her eyelids were beginning to droop. 她太疲倦了,眼睑开始往下垂。
  • Her eyelids drooped as if she were on the verge of sleep. 她眼睑低垂好像快要睡着的样子。 来自《简明英汉词典》
140 cramps cramps     
n. 抽筋, 腹部绞痛, 铁箍 adj. 狭窄的, 难解的 v. 使...抽筋, 以铁箍扣紧, 束缚
参考例句:
  • If he cramps again let the line cut him off. 要是它再抽筋,就让这钓索把它勒断吧。
  • "I have no cramps." he said. “我没抽筋,"他说。
141 incessant WcizU     
adj.不停的,连续的
参考例句:
  • We have had incessant snowfall since yesterday afternoon.从昨天下午开始就持续不断地下雪。
  • She is tired of his incessant demands for affection.她厌倦了他对感情的不断索取。
142 persistent BSUzg     
adj.坚持不懈的,执意的;持续的
参考例句:
  • Albert had a persistent headache that lasted for three days.艾伯特连续头痛了三天。
  • She felt embarrassed by his persistent attentions.他不时地向她大献殷勤,使她很难为情。
143 perfectly 8Mzxb     
adv.完美地,无可非议地,彻底地
参考例句:
  • The witnesses were each perfectly certain of what they said.证人们个个对自己所说的话十分肯定。
  • Everything that we're doing is all perfectly above board.我们做的每件事情都是光明正大的。
144 countenance iztxc     
n.脸色,面容;面部表情;vt.支持,赞同
参考例句:
  • At the sight of this photograph he changed his countenance.他一看见这张照片脸色就变了。
  • I made a fierce countenance as if I would eat him alive.我脸色恶狠狠地,仿佛要把他活生生地吞下去。
145 constriction 4276b5a2f7f62e30ccb7591923343bd2     
压缩; 紧压的感觉; 束紧; 压缩物
参考例句:
  • She feels a constriction in the chest. 她胸部有压迫感。
  • If you strain to run fast, you start coughing and feel a constriction in the chest. 还是别跑紧了,一咬牙就咳嗽,心口窝辣蒿蒿的! 来自汉英文学 - 骆驼祥子
146 purged 60d8da88d3c460863209921056ecab90     
清除(政敌等)( purge的过去式和过去分词 ); 涤除(罪恶等); 净化(心灵、风气等); 消除(错事等)的不良影响
参考例句:
  • He purged his enemies from the Party. 他把他的敌人从党内清洗出去。
  • The iron in the chemical compound must be purged. 化学混合物中的铁必须清除。
147 suffused b9f804dd1e459dbbdaf393d59db041fc     
v.(指颜色、水气等)弥漫于,布满( suffuse的过去式和过去分词 )
参考例句:
  • Her face was suffused with colour. 她满脸通红。
  • Her eyes were suffused with warm, excited tears. 她激动地热泪盈眶。 来自《现代英汉综合大词典》
148 inflamed KqEz2a     
adj.发炎的,红肿的v.(使)变红,发怒,过热( inflame的过去式和过去分词 )
参考例句:
  • His comments have inflamed teachers all over the country. 他的评论激怒了全国教师。
  • Her joints are severely inflamed. 她的关节严重发炎。 来自《简明英汉词典》
149 respiration us7yt     
n.呼吸作用;一次呼吸;植物光合作用
参考例句:
  • They tried artificial respiration but it was of no avail.他们试做人工呼吸,可是无效。
  • They made frequent checks on his respiration,pulse and blood.他们经常检查他的呼吸、脉搏和血液。
150 fiery ElEye     
adj.燃烧着的,火红的;暴躁的;激烈的
参考例句:
  • She has fiery red hair.她有一头火红的头发。
  • His fiery speech agitated the crowd.他热情洋溢的讲话激动了群众。
151 margins 18cef75be8bf936fbf6be827537c8585     
边( margin的名词复数 ); 利润; 页边空白; 差数
参考例句:
  • They have always had to make do with relatively small profit margins. 他们不得不经常设法应付较少的利润额。
  • To create more space between the navigation items, add left and right margins to the links. 在每个项目间留更多的空隙,加左或者右的margins来定义链接。
152 filthy ZgOzj     
adj.卑劣的;恶劣的,肮脏的
参考例句:
  • The whole river has been fouled up with filthy waste from factories.整条河都被工厂的污秽废物污染了。
  • You really should throw out that filthy old sofa and get a new one.你真的应该扔掉那张肮脏的旧沙发,然后再去买张新的。
153 hesitation tdsz5     
n.犹豫,踌躇
参考例句:
  • After a long hesitation, he told the truth at last.踌躇了半天,他终于直说了。
  • There was a certain hesitation in her manner.她的态度有些犹豫不决。
154 conjecture 3p8z4     
n./v.推测,猜测
参考例句:
  • She felt it no use to conjecture his motives.她觉得猜想他的动机是没有用的。
  • This conjecture is not supported by any real evidence.这种推测未被任何确切的证据所证实。
155 mandatory BjTyz     
adj.命令的;强制的;义务的;n.受托者
参考例句:
  • It's mandatory to pay taxes.缴税是义务性的。
  • There is no mandatory paid annual leave in the U.S.美国没有强制带薪年假。
156 abrogating feaa7b9b9054b6ee25e6f4e349dae4b3     
废除(法律等)( abrogate的现在分词 ); 取消; 去掉; 抛开
参考例句:
  • Oh, by the way, the United States is abrogating the NAFTA treaty-starting now. 噢,同时,从现在开始,美国也要取消太平洋自由贸易区谈判。
157 inmate l4cyN     
n.被收容者;(房屋等的)居住人;住院人
参考例句:
  • I am an inmate of that hospital.我住在那家医院。
  • The prisoner is his inmate.那个囚犯和他同住一起。
158 accusation GJpyf     
n.控告,指责,谴责
参考例句:
  • I was furious at his making such an accusation.我对他的这种责备非常气愤。
  • She knew that no one would believe her accusation.她知道没人会相信她的指控。
159 relics UkMzSr     
[pl.]n.遗物,遗迹,遗产;遗体,尸骸
参考例句:
  • The area is a treasure house of archaeological relics. 这个地区是古文物遗迹的宝库。
  • Xi'an is an ancient city full of treasures and saintly relics. 西安是一个有很多宝藏和神圣的遗物的古老城市。
160 baroness 2yjzAa     
n.男爵夫人,女男爵
参考例句:
  • I'm sure the Baroness will be able to make things fine for you.我相信男爵夫人能够把家里的事替你安排妥当的。
  • The baroness,who had signed,returned the pen to the notary.男爵夫人这时已签过字,把笔交回给律师。
161 applied Tz2zXA     
adj.应用的;v.应用,适用
参考例句:
  • She plans to take a course in applied linguistics.她打算学习应用语言学课程。
  • This cream is best applied to the face at night.这种乳霜最好晚上擦脸用。
162 rectified 8714cd0fa53a5376ba66b0406599eb20     
[医]矫正的,调整的
参考例句:
  • I am hopeful this misunderstanding will be rectified very quickly. 我相信这个误会将很快得到纠正。
  • That mistake could have been rectified within 28 days. 那个错误原本可以在28天内得以纠正。
163 corroborates 1b47fdad225ce6bcbcec108c601b905f     
v.证实,支持(某种说法、信仰、理论等)( corroborate的第三人称单数 )
参考例句:
  • This article narrates a innovated dynamic penetration test method that mainly corroborates soil bearing capacity. 探讨了一种改进的动力触探方法,主要用于确定土的承载力。 来自互联网
  • David, soon to be king of Israel, had an experience that corroborates this idea. 大卫即将成为以色列的国王之际,曾有过一次这样的经历。 来自互联网
164 contented Gvxzof     
adj.满意的,安心的,知足的
参考例句:
  • He won't be contented until he's upset everyone in the office.不把办公室里的每个人弄得心烦意乱他就不会满足。
  • The people are making a good living and are contented,each in his station.人民安居乐业。
165 gastric MhnxW     
adj.胃的
参考例句:
  • Miners are a high risk group for certain types of gastric cancer.矿工是极易患某几种胃癌的高风险人群。
  • That was how I got my gastric trouble.我的胃病就是这么得的。
166 irritation la9zf     
n.激怒,恼怒,生气
参考例句:
  • He could not hide his irritation that he had not been invited.他无法掩饰因未被邀请而生的气恼。
  • Barbicane said nothing,but his silence covered serious irritation.巴比康什么也不说,但是他的沉默里潜伏着阴郁的怒火。
167 lotion w3zyV     
n.洗剂
参考例句:
  • The lotion should be applied sparingly to the skin.这种洗液应均匀地涂在皮肤上。
  • She lubricates her hands with a lotion.她用一种洗剂来滑润她的手。
168 annoyance Bw4zE     
n.恼怒,生气,烦恼
参考例句:
  • Why do you always take your annoyance out on me?为什么你不高兴时总是对我出气?
  • I felt annoyance at being teased.我恼恨别人取笑我。
169 dealing NvjzWP     
n.经商方法,待人态度
参考例句:
  • This store has an excellent reputation for fair dealing.该商店因买卖公道而享有极高的声誉。
  • His fair dealing earned our confidence.他的诚实的行为获得我们的信任。
170 speculation 9vGwe     
n.思索,沉思;猜测;投机
参考例句:
  • Her mind is occupied with speculation.她的头脑忙于思考。
  • There is widespread speculation that he is going to resign.人们普遍推测他要辞职。
171 gulf 1e0xp     
n.海湾;深渊,鸿沟;分歧,隔阂
参考例句:
  • The gulf between the two leaders cannot be bridged.两位领导人之间的鸿沟难以跨越。
  • There is a gulf between the two cities.这两座城市间有个海湾。
172 secrecy NZbxH     
n.秘密,保密,隐蔽
参考例句:
  • All the researchers on the project are sworn to secrecy.该项目的所有研究人员都按要求起誓保守秘密。
  • Complete secrecy surrounded the meeting.会议在绝对机密的环境中进行。
173 mischief jDgxH     
n.损害,伤害,危害;恶作剧,捣蛋,胡闹
参考例句:
  • Nobody took notice of the mischief of the matter. 没有人注意到这件事情所带来的危害。
  • He seems to intend mischief.看来他想捣蛋。
174 scent WThzs     
n.气味,香味,香水,线索,嗅觉;v.嗅,发觉
参考例句:
  • The air was filled with the scent of lilac.空气中弥漫着丁香花的芬芳。
  • The flowers give off a heady scent at night.这些花晚上散发出醉人的芳香。
175 deductions efdb24c54db0a56d702d92a7f902dd1f     
扣除( deduction的名词复数 ); 结论; 扣除的量; 推演
参考例句:
  • Many of the older officers trusted agents sightings more than cryptanalysts'deductions. 许多年纪比较大的军官往往相信特务的发现,而不怎么相信密码分析员的推断。
  • You know how you rush at things,jump to conclusions without proper deductions. 你知道你处理问题是多么仓促,毫无合适的演绎就仓促下结论。
176 deduction 0xJx7     
n.减除,扣除,减除额;推论,推理,演绎
参考例句:
  • No deduction in pay is made for absence due to illness.因病请假不扣工资。
  • His deduction led him to the correct conclusion.他的推断使他得出正确的结论。
177 diluted 016e8d268a5a89762de116a404413fef     
无力的,冲淡的
参考例句:
  • The paint can be diluted with water to make a lighter shade. 这颜料可用水稀释以使色度淡一些。
  • This pesticide is diluted with water and applied directly to the fields. 这种杀虫剂用水稀释后直接施用在田里。
178 allay zxIzJ     
v.消除,减轻(恐惧、怀疑等)
参考例句:
  • The police tried to allay her fears but failed.警察力图减轻她的恐惧,但是没有收到什么效果。
  • They are trying to allay public fears about the spread of the disease.他们正竭力减轻公众对这种疾病传播的恐惧。
179 remains 1kMzTy     
n.剩余物,残留物;遗体,遗迹
参考例句:
  • He ate the remains of food hungrily.他狼吞虎咽地吃剩余的食物。
  • The remains of the meal were fed to the dog.残羹剩饭喂狗了。
180 thoroughly sgmz0J     
adv.完全地,彻底地,十足地
参考例句:
  • The soil must be thoroughly turned over before planting.一定要先把土地深翻一遍再下种。
  • The soldiers have been thoroughly instructed in the care of their weapons.士兵们都系统地接受过保护武器的训练。
181 killing kpBziQ     
n.巨额利润;突然赚大钱,发大财
参考例句:
  • Investors are set to make a killing from the sell-off.投资者准备清仓以便大赚一笔。
  • Last week my brother made a killing on Wall Street.上个周我兄弟在华尔街赚了一大笔。
182 necessitating 53a4b31e750840357e61880f4cd47201     
使…成为必要,需要( necessitate的现在分词 )
参考例句:
  • Multiple network transmissions overlapping in the physical channel, resulting in garbled data and necessitating retransmission. 多个网络传输重迭发生在同一物理信道上,它导致数据被破坏,因而必须重传。
  • The health status of 435 consecutive patients with sleep disturbances necessitating polysomnography was investigated. 435个患有睡眠紊乱的病人进行多导睡眠描记法对其健康状况进行调查。
183 discrepancy ul3zA     
n.不同;不符;差异;矛盾
参考例句:
  • The discrepancy in their ages seemed not to matter.他们之间年龄的差异似乎没有多大关系。
  • There was a discrepancy in the two reports of the accident.关于那次事故的两则报道有不一致之处。
184 swelled bd4016b2ddc016008c1fc5827f252c73     
增强( swell的过去式和过去分词 ); 肿胀; (使)凸出; 充满(激情)
参考例句:
  • The infection swelled his hand. 由于感染,他的手肿了起来。
  • After the heavy rain the river swelled. 大雨过后,河水猛涨。
185 recapitulated d1a4ddd13f7a73e90e35ed9fc197c867     
v.总结,扼要重述( recapitulate的过去式和过去分词 )
参考例句:
  • At the climax of the movement the \"fixed idea\" is recapitulated by full orchestra ff. 在这个乐章的高潮处,整个乐队以ff的力度重现“固定乐思”。 来自辞典例句
  • He recapitulated the main points of the speech. 他把讲话的重点扼要重述了一遍。 来自互联网
186 remitted 3b25982348d6e76e4dd90de3cf8d6ad3     
v.免除(债务),宽恕( remit的过去式和过去分词 );使某事缓和;寄回,传送
参考例句:
  • She has had part of her sentence remitted. 她被免去部分刑期。 来自《简明英汉词典》
  • The fever has remitted. 退烧了。 来自《现代英汉综合大词典》
187 offense HIvxd     
n.犯规,违法行为;冒犯,得罪
参考例句:
  • I hope you will not take any offense at my words. 对我讲的话请别见怪。
  • His words gave great offense to everybody present.他的发言冲犯了在场的所有人。


欢迎访问英文小说网

©英文小说网 2005-2010

有任何问题,请给我们留言,管理员邮箱:[email protected]  站长QQ :点击发送消息和我们联系56065533