chasers prepared to disprove the correctness of what has been. said? My learned friend, the attorney general, charges the witnesses as coming into court, as volunteers, to testify for the prisoner-what impropriety there is in so doing, I know not, but such is not the fact-they are compelled to come here to testify for him. The attorney general has carefully avoided. to consider the correct view of the case of Miss Williamson. Disease had made serious inroads upon her frame-unable scarcely to speak-an abscess wasting her vitals, and the presence of considerable fever-who that heard her so touchingly and artlessly relate the tale of her distresses and recovery, heard it unmoved? Who doubted its truth in every particular? If Mrs. Williams be not cured, the blooming countenance of Miss Williamson bears testimony to the skill and success of the prisoner at the bar, that colleges and diplomas can never confer. Her father had been sent for to see her die. Miss Williamson has gratitude to her deliverercould it be otherwise? The attorney general charges the whole body of the Thomsonians in this city, who attempted to relieve their fellow citizens during the prevalence of the late epidemic, which threatened a desolation of our city, with having a conscience for themselves and a conscience for the community-they had, gentlemen of the jury-it was a conscience which induced those truly brothers of charity to leave the comforts and delights of their homes, and seek out, and endeavor to save the lives of their suffering fellow-beings, and at the peril of their own. It is no disgraceful conscience which induces its possessor to seek to secure the comfort and safety of his fellow creatures in the stead of his own, in the day of calamity-a conscience which seeks, not theirs, but them; and, that too, in a disease which had baffled the united skill of the physicians of the four quarters of the world. The physicians had theorized and tested everywhere, and to no good purpose. The deceased it is proved had cholera, was intemperate, and under the influence of great fear. Fear has been said to be a proximate cause of that disease-and where it is found in connection with the disease, it is attended with

fatal consequences. A certain physician said, "I killed so many, fear killed the rest.' From what has been said and written upon the subject, take it for granted in cholera, where fear and intemperance are present, you may give the patient up as gone. Patrick, Moffitt, Townsend, and Dr. Hintze, say Hazelip was intemperate, and Dr. Hintze says he was fearful. West tells you he had shrivelled feet. Dr. Geddings unwillingly bears his testimony that it was a case of cholera-he says that a supernatural heat is a remarkable attendant upon cholera, and not the product of the steam. Professor Geddings admitted that he would not have known what had occasioned the death of Hazelip if the prisoner at the bar had not very candidly and unreservedly informed him that he gave him certain Thomsonian medicines and steam, which have not been extensively used by Dr. Geddings, and of which he knows but little from actual observation-while the witnesses testify that they and the prisoner have used everything here complained of to a greater extent and decided benefit. The other articles appear to be passed over as harmless, and the lobelia and steam which Professor Geddings supposes was the cause of Hazelip's death, are no longer a tenable ground for conviction. Professor Geddings says the lobelia produces a warmth and glow throughout the system; in this case the indications demanded it, and it was used for the purposes he acknowledges it is good to produce. The only difference on this point is Professor Geddings, who knows scarcely anything of lobelia, but what he has learned from another who gets nearly all his knowledge from hearsay, that it is a dangerous medicine-while the witnesses on the part of the prisoner, who have used, and very frequently seen. it used in much larger quantities, say it is not dangerous, but harmless, and was never known to do injury-in this number is Roger Brooke, a gentleman upon whose judgment and veracity we can safely rely, who says he has known it as a remedy for disease of the eye, under the name of eye-bright for forty years, and for the last two years as lobelia; and although his acquaintance with it has been extensive, he never

has had reason to think the administration of it calculated to injure.

I look upon the present case rather as a triumph for, than a trial of my client, and hope when the attorney general has closed his remarks, and the case is sent to the jury that they will give their verdict without leaving the box; for the competency, kindness and character for every qualification and duty of a physician, are abundantly proved to be possessed by Mr. Burke.

MR. GILL'S CLOSING SPEECH.

Mr. Gill. Gentlemen of the Jury, there is one part of the address of the attorney for the defense (Mr. Stewart) in which I heartily concur. If the jury see no reason to believe that the death of Hazelip was not caused by the medicines of the prisoner at the bar-and that the prisoner at the bar is not chargeable with ignorance-want of attention or humanity-then in this case they need not retire from their seats to make up a verdict. The statements made by the witnesses go to prove that there are cogent reasons why Mr. Burke should be convicted, and I hope, whatever defects may have been discoverable in my management of the case, the jury will bear in mind that they are to rely on the testimony of the witnesses and the laws having reference to the subject. I have given much attention to this case, and have industriously put in requisition all my sources of information, and after the most laborious and patient investigation of its merits-guided by the best light of which I am capable—I can candidly say, I discover in it a subject of the deepest interest to the cause of humanity, and the happiness of the community-and, that it would greatly advance both, if, by a decision adverse to the prisoner at the bar, a stop could be put to the further spread of a practice founded upon such wild and uncertain speculations as those of Thomson. I am astonished any one can be so misled by it as to dare to undertake the cure of disease with such foolish and dangerous means. There is in it a something so unaccountable that I

know not how to admit or comprehend that there is not an improper and base motive in its whole bearing and history. I am not disposed to wish that Mr. Burke, if innocent, should be condemned and punished-and hope the whole court will do me the justice to believe the assertion. The jury should not be misled, and I hope that nothing that has fallen from me will have a tendency to mislead their judgments in the smallest particular. I am here to advance rational arguments and honest and fair conclusions. If I discharge my duty in these particulars, whatever is the event-whether Mr. Burke be acquitted or condemned, my duties to the society in which I live, and to the laws of the state, which I am here for the support of, are performed, and no censure because of the consequences can be attributable to me. The same may be said of the gentlemen who act as counsel for the prisoner. We must arrive at a knowledge of the subject under discussion by a careful examination of all its principles and bearings, and present them for the consideration of the Court.

I yet contend that it is not allowing sufficient scope to the investigation if the view in the present case does not embrace both the principles and the practice of Thomson in connection with the qualifications of Mr. Burke and the treatment pursued by him. Is the system of Thomson sustained by fair and logical arguments? Do the counsel for the prisoner enter into an examination of it. Press them to it and they tell you that there is no necessity for an examination into its merits-if so, how then can correct conclusions be drawn on the propriety of the administration of their medicines the counsel for the prisoner say, and the bench say, it is unnecessary for the trial of the case before you. I am sorry for it, and must submit to the weight of circumstances. I still think while we are disposing of the subject it would be better to decide upon the whole ground of controversy, and settle the question for the benefit of the community. Notwithstanding the decision of the bench, I hope I shall be indulged if I occasionally advert to Thomson's system or rule of government in the administration of the medicines. The

counsel for the prisoner would confine the whole subject to a sort of mathematical argumentation. Thomson says all constitutions are alike and they defend the doctrine that all persons should be treated alike. Because one person may be steamed three or four hours without injury, another person may be steamed the same length of time without cause for reflection upon the operator or administrator, if the case terminates unfavorably. This appears to be the rule of argument of the defendant's counsel. Let us not be led astray any longer by wild and visionary postulatæ, but judge of the principle by testing and carrying it into all the minutiæ of the practice. If the practice be not safe then is the principle false, and the principle and practice being at discord, they can, neither, with safety be depended upon, and both are dangerous in their application to the removal of disease, and particularly so in the hands of the illiterate.

Let us come back to an examination of the bone and sinew of the argument. If all constitutions are alike, then must all persons laboring under disease be necessitated to submit to the same sort of treatment. Lobelia and steam must be administered alike to all. No one having any share of common sense would admit either the premises or conclusions to be correct. We know all diseases have different degrees of virulence and some are opposite in their nature. Others vary in their type in different constitutions-different climates, and under different circumstances of attack-yet, must they all be treated alike will one general mode of cure-one general remedy relieve from all? The cholera is said to be the bane of the intemperate, and that the temperate are most likely to escape, because the attack takes place under different circumstances in the one from the other. But would any one be so foolhardy to apply the same remedy for the relief of both in all the varieties and shades of attack. Certainly none would dare to do it without richly meriting, at least the charge of insanity. If all other sources of information are proscribed but what is contained in this book of Thomson's, where can Francis Burke get general skill to practice medicine safely and suc