[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 54.205.176.107. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Article
February 21, 1891

EDITORIAL NOTES.

JAMA. 1891;XVI(8):276-277. doi:10.1001/jama.1891.02410600024010

This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.

Abstract

The Office of Coroner.  —The London Law Journal, " referring to the approaching abolition of the office of coroner throughout the United States," says: "The coroner's inquest in an average American State seems to have been simply a costly and tedious way of doing nothing; the verdict of the jury was not only not conclusive, it was not even evidence, and the subsequent trial proceeded without any reference to it whatsoever." All this is written in the past tense, as of an accomplished fact, and without the theory of the preliminaries of an indictment. Meanwhile the Massachusetts experiment of medical examiners works admirably, and has stimulated reformatory discussions in our well populated communities.It is pertinent to allude in this connection to the usage of most European nations, which is to commit " the sudden death inquiries " to the public prosecutors, with the option of medical aid. Here, as

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview
×