File:Dr. William Palmer's cigar case with cigar, France, 1840-185 Wellcome L0058788.jpg
Original file (2,832 × 4,256 pixels, file size: 1.35 MB, MIME type: image/jpeg)
Captions
Summary edit
Dr. William Palmer's cigar case with cigar, France, 1840-185 | |||
---|---|---|---|
Title |
Dr. William Palmer's cigar case with cigar, France, 1840-185 |
||
Description |
What’s your poison? Finely painted onto porcelain, a pretty, young, slightly saucy woman adorns this Victorian cigar case. It still contains a single un-smoked cigar. It’s attractive, but is it remarkable? Might knowing who once owned this object change the way you look at it? Could this seemingly innocent object have a sinister past? We may associate smoking with premature death, but this cigar case has other lethal associations. It was once the property of William Palmer. Physician, racehorse owner, gambler……and killer. The so-called “Prince of poisoners”, one of the most notorious figures of the Victorian period. As a doctor, Palmer was expected to adhere to the spirit of the Hippocratic Oath – to abstain from doing harm to others. Instead, he broke it. This good doctor turned bad was convicted for one murder, but he may have committed another ten – at least. A charming rogue more interested in fine cigars and gambling than medicine, he was constantly in debt. In late 1855, a large win on the horses by his friend John Parsons Cook offered a way out. Within days Cook died in agony, from what was later described as strychnine poisoning. Palmer was prosecuted the following year. His trial caused a sensation, particularly when it was suggested he’d killed many others, including his wife and brother. It was even said that he murdered some of his children by getting them to lick a mixture of honey and arsenic from his finger. Such was his infamy, the pub refrain of “what’s your poison?”, is believed to be inspired by his exploits. He was publicly hung in front of a crowd of 30,000. And yet. A few scholars point to the circumstantial nature of the evidence, the prejudicial attitude of the judge and the public clamour against Palmer. Was he fairly treated? Could he even be innocent? Probably not, but would your perception of this object change again it he was? maker: Unknown maker Place made: France Wellcome Images |
||
Credit line |
|
||
References |
|
||
Source/Photographer |
https://wellcomeimages.org/indexplus/obf_images/1c/16/b11029771e97ac09f0e46c131fe8.jpg
|
Licensing edit
- You are free:
- to share – to copy, distribute and transmit the work
- to remix – to adapt the work
- Under the following conditions:
- attribution – You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
File history
Click on a date/time to view the file as it appeared at that time.
Date/Time | Thumbnail | Dimensions | User | Comment | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
current | 15:44, 17 October 2014 | 2,832 × 4,256 (1.35 MB) | Fæ (talk | contribs) | =={{int:filedesc}}== {{Artwork |artist = |author = |title = Dr. William Palmer's cigar case with cigar, France, 1840-185 |description = What�s your poison? Finely painted onto porcelain, a pretty, y... |
You cannot overwrite this file.
File usage on Commons
The following page uses this file:
File usage on other wikis
The following other wikis use this file:
- Usage on bg.wikipedia.org
- Usage on en.wikipedia.org
- Usage on es.wikipedia.org
- Usage on it.wikipedia.org
- Usage on ja.wikipedia.org
Metadata
This file contains additional information such as Exif metadata which may have been added by the digital camera, scanner, or software program used to create or digitize it. If the file has been modified from its original state, some details such as the timestamp may not fully reflect those of the original file. The timestamp is only as accurate as the clock in the camera, and it may be completely wrong.
Short title | L0058788 Dr. William Palmer's cigar case with cigar, France, 184 |
---|---|
Author | Wellcome Library, London |
Headline | L0058788 Dr. William Palmer's cigar case with cigar, France, 1840-185 |
Copyright holder | Copyrighted work available under Creative Commons Attribution only licence CC BY 4.0 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ |
Image title | L0058788 Dr. William Palmer's cigar case with cigar, France, 1840-185
Credit: Science Museum, London. Wellcome Images images@wellcome.ac.uk http://wellcomeimages.org What’s your poison? Finely painted onto porcelain, a pretty, young, slightly saucy woman adorns this Victorian cigar case. It still contains a single un-smoked cigar. It’s attractive, but is it remarkable? Might knowing who once owned this object change the way you look at it? Could this seemingly innocent object have a sinister past? We may associate smoking with premature death, but this cigar case has other lethal associations. It was once the property of William Palmer. Physician, racehorse owner, gambler……and killer. The so-called “Prince of poisoners”, one of the most notorious figures of the Victorian period. As a doctor, Palmer was expected to adhere to the spirit of the Hippocratic Oath – to abstain from doing harm to others. Instead, he broke it. This good doctor turned bad was convicted for one murder, but he may have committed another ten – at least. A charming rogue more interested in fine cigars and gambling than medicine, he was constantly in debt. In late 1855, a large win on the horses by his friend John Parsons Cook offered a way out. Within days Cook died in agony, from what was later described as strychnine poisoning. Palmer was prosecuted the following year. His trial caused a sensation, particularly when it was suggested he’d killed many others, including his wife and brother. It was even said that he murdered some of his children by getting them to lick a mixture of honey and arsenic from his finger. Such was his infamy, the pub refrain of “what’s your poison?”, is believed to be inspired by his exploits. He was publicly hung in front of a crowd of 30,000. And yet. A few scholars point to the circumstantial nature of the evidence, the prejudicial attitude of the judge and the public clamour against Palmer. Was he fairly treated? Could he even be innocent? Probably not, but |
IIM version | 2 |