§ MR. TENNANT (Berwickshire)I desire to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to the report of the adjourned inquest upon the body of Mary Anne Poole, supposed to have died from lead-poisoning; and whether, in view of the very unsatisfactory nature of the medical evidence, he will direct that the body be exhumed and a chemical analysis be conducted; and whether he is now prepared to lay before the House the report of the certifying surgeon in this case?
§ THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENTMy attention hag been called to this case. I regret 585 that the medical evidence was inconclusive as to the origin of the epilepsy which was the immediate cause of death. Exhumation is, however, I fear, out of the question. This course is never taken except where there is a suspicion of foul play, or in very special cases at the request of relatives. I have received the report of the certifying surgeon. Like other reports of the kind, it contains confidential information which it would be detrimental to make public. The facts bearing on the cause of death appear to have fully come out at the inquest, at which the factory inspector of the district was present. On that point the report throws no fresh light.
§ MR. WOODALL (Hanley)Was it not stated in the course of the medical evidence, which has been referred to as unsatisfactory, that there were no symptoms in this particular case which could not be attributable to other causes than lead poisoning?
§ THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENTI did not mean to say the medical evidence was unsatisfactory. I meant to infer that it was not such as to enable the verdict of the jury to be conclusive. I am quite wed aware that there are certain marks which are usually present in the case of death arising from lead poisoning which were not present in this case.
§ MR. WOODALLDid not the jury decline to attribute death to lead poisoning?
§ MR. TENNANTasked what were the qualifications of Dr. Thomas, who conducted the post-mortem examination?
§ THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENTI am not aware.
§ SIR C. DILKE (Gloucester, Forest of Dean)With regard to the statement that the jury declined to attribute death to lead poisoning, is it not the fact that they also declined to take the opposite course?
§ THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENTYes; that is 586 what I meant by saying the verdict was inconclusive. If there were any object to be attained by making further inquiry I would do it.
§ MR. TENNANTWill the right honourable Gentleman undertake to make further inquiry?
§ THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENTNo, Sir; I do not see that any good could be obtained by doing so. Unfortunately, it is quite true that deaths have occurred from epilepsy, due to lead-poisoning, and it is not necessary to re-open the inquiry in order to establish that fact. I must, therefore, decline to do so.