9
difficult and important investigations in medico-legal practice.
With this preliminary information, you will come prepared to comprehend the use and importance of medical testimony in judicial proceedings, as well as the errors and fallacies to which it is liable. In treating this part of the subject, I will adopt, as far as possible, an arrangement founded on legal principles, and consider, in the first place, the medical proofs in offences against the person—as murder, manslaughter, assaults, and procuring abortion; and then proceed to examine the evidence in cases of disputed legitimacy—feigned and suspected pregnancy—impotence and sterility—life insurance—unsoundness of mind, and public nuisances. Each will require a distinct consideration; as the nature of the medical evidence, and its object, are in some respects different in all. Thus, in suspected or feigned pregnancy, it testifies to a fact to be recognized only by the aid of medical science. In assaults, it measures the amount of injury. In rape, it sustains or invalidates direct evidence itself; and in its most interesting applications it forms a part—and in general a most important part—of a chain of circumstantial evidence, where direct evidence is not attainable—as in secret murders, attempted assassinations, poisoning, and similar crimes. I may here observe, that it is in this last class of cases medical science has achieved its most signal triumphs, and conferred upon the administration of justice the most striking, if not the most important benefits. And perhaps I could not, in a single lecture of this kind, better give you some notion at once of the nature of medical evidence, and of the importance of medical knowledge to all concerned in such investigations, than by directing your attention to a few of those remarkable instances. They are to be met with chiefly in the judicial records of other countries, and especially of France and Germany; not that similar cases do not occur at home; but from the neglected—I might almost say despised—state of medical jurisprudence amongst ourselves, and the consequently imperfect and bungling manner in which medico-legal inquiries
