Forensic Chemistry: Past, Present and Future
| Author | Henry T. F. Rhodes |
| Published date | 01 July 1930 |
| Date | 01 July 1930 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/0032258X3000300304 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
Forensic
Chemistry:
Past, Present
and
Future
By HENRY
T.
F. RHODES
Editor
of The Chemical Practitioner
1.
The Past
IT is important to remember of chemistry that it is a com-
paratively young science. Before Harvey discovered the
circulation of the blood the medical man, in spite of the
grosser sort of superstition that coloured his views in matters
relating to disease of the body, was still not without some
rudimentary scientific principles. With chemistry this was
not so. Prior to the classical work of Boyle, chemistry was
literally all superstition; for, so far as theoretical principles
were concerned, such facts as the chemist had to dealwith were
twisted to fit whatever philosophical speculations concerning
the ultimate nature of the visible universe happened to be
fashionable at the time or the favourites ofthe chemist himself.
There is no sound reason for believing that the men of the
middle ages or of the seventeenth century were greater fools
than we are. Indeed, on the contrary, they were interested in
many matters with which we have ceased to be preoccupied, to
our loss; but a passion for abstract speculation caused it to
be overworked in the service of causes which the twentieth
century would not expect
it
to champion. Much that we to-
day describe as superstition was nothing more than knowledge
misdirected and misapplied.
In no case is this point of view better exemplified than in
the evidence taken in the matter of the murder of Sir Thomas
Overbury in 1615.
The
action of poison was in general
regarded as something mysterious and unholy, as the history of
the trial testifies. Anne
Turner
and Richard Weston, the first
two prisoners, were found guilty and executed for administer-
359
To continue reading
Request your trial