BATTLE, MURDER AND SUDDEN DEATH

William James Deadman – Forensic Pathologist, Medical Pioneer

A biography of Hamilton’s first forensic pathologist

John Deadman
Edward Smith

A word about our title

William Deadman had always written about the events in his life. In his last years he set about writing his autobiography. He came up with the title: Battle, Murder and Sudden Death. It seemed to exemplify the phases of his life.

1. Battle: This was the period during the Great War where he broadened his experience and learned most of the knowledge of bacteriology, pathology and tropical medicine that he used throughout his professional life.
2. Murder: This was the period of his active practice in Hamilton during the Great Depression, the Second World War and the immediate post-war period. This was the time when he really became a forensic pathologist and established the forensic pathology centre and the related work on laboratory medicine that he became famous for.
3. …and Sudden Death: This was the period when his academic research and teaching led to his broad recognition by professional societies across the globe. His presentation on Sudden Death¹ earned him an international reputation and even a mention in the Miscellany column of Time Magazine.² This was followed by research on unexpected deaths in infants that led to the ‘sudden infant death syndrome’.

These terms were used in the latest versions of the text he wrote. He had gone through several other titles before arriving at this title.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

My father, William Deadman had always kept careful records of everything he did. In his last years he set about writing his autobiography. He came up with the title: Battle, Murder and Sudden Death. It seemed to exemplify the phases of his life. He had started writing it before his death in 1965 but died with only four or five chapters finished. My mother carefully bundled all his papers and artifacts into file boxes and when she died, they came to me. I am deeply indebted to both of them.

I started working on them when I first got them but the pressures of a busy political career meant that they sat in my basement for years. Then I went to the Hamilton Academy of Medicine for help. The Archivist, Edward Smith worked with me for several years and when he retired, became my co-author. His contributions made all of this possible.

I am also indebted to members of the Forensic Pathology Service who operated the service for many years. In particular, I thank the physicians who kept the service going despite attempts to close it. Finally, I am indebted to the Hamilton Public Library and particularly Margaret Houghton, who was chief of the Special Collections Unit. She had big files on my father and gave great assistance to this work.

John Deadman, Lead Author

Introduction

The Evolution of Forensic Pathology in Canada.

Excellent!” I cried. [Watson]
Elementary,” said he. [Holmes]

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, (1859-1930)
The Crooked Man (1894)

Sir Bernard Spilsbury (1877-1949) is generally regarded as the father of British forensic pathology.ⁱ Spilsbury had a number of famous murder cases to his credit, including Dr. Crippen (1910), and “the Brides in the Bath” (1914). He also had a critical role in developing ‘Operation Mincemeat” a deception operation during World War II which is credited with saving many Allied service men’s lives. Forensic scientists and pathologists captured the public imagination in Britain with names such as Sir Sidney Alfred Smith (1883-1969), Cedric Keith Simpson (1907-1985) and Francis Edward Camps (1905-1972). In the United States, Charles Norris (1867-1935) and George Burgess Magrath (1870-1938) medical examiners in New York and Boston respectively, and Milton Halpern (1902-1977) stand out. Charles Norris cannot be mentioned without his chief toxicologist for many years – Alexander Gettler (1883-1968) who in 1919, set up the first dedicated toxicology laboratory in the United States.ⁱⁱ

In the annals of Canadian forensic pathology, the name of William James Deadman (1885-1965) fits well in such august company. He was born only 7½ years after Spilsbury and did most of his early forensic work in the 1920s and ’30s at a time when the forensic sciences in Canada were in a very rudimentary state. They were well behind advancements in the United States or Europe. Deadman took part in numerous murder trials, many flowing out of the period of prohibition and the rise of organized crime in the Roaring ’20s, the Dirty ’30s and the ’40s, the Second World War years and their aftermath. Hamilton was a centre for organized crime, most of it arising in the period of Prohibition which ended in Ontario a decade before it did in the United States. Perhaps because forensic science in Canada was much less well developed at that time, William Deadman did not achieve the level of recognition that was seen in Europe or the United States.

His most famous case was the murder trial of Evelyn Dick in Hamilton in 1946. In the early 1960s, a few years before his death he was the forensic pathologist on what became known as the “C.O.D. Trunk Mystery” in which a woman’s body was discovered in a steamer trunk that haeen shipped from Toronto to Argentia, Newfoundland. En route it developed a peculiar odour.

He was also involved in many other projects. With his chief laboratory technician Frank Elliott, he established a training school for laboratory technology in the 1930s that was undoubtedly the first in Canada. He chaired a committee at the Canadian Medical Association to develop standards and curricula for the training of laboratory technologists. Out of this work came the Canadian Society for Medical Laboratory Science ³ founded in 1937, which accredits these training programs. He was a patron of this society until his death.

From 1956 to 1959 he directed the Erythroblastosis Foetalis project at the Ontario Medical Association which provided province-wide treatment for Rh babies, undoubtedly saving many lives. He also was actively involved in the reforms to the Regional Coroner system in Ontario. He worked with H. Beatty Cotnam on many issues. He was supported in this by the Ontario Association of Pathologists who proposed a system of regional pathologists and coroners that was adopted by the Province of Ontario. He furthered this work during his tenure at the Attorney-General’s Laboratory in Toronto from 1959 to 1965. At that time he worked with H. Ward Smith, L. Jocelyn Rogers and Noble Sharpe, three of the leading forensic scientists of that period.

It has always been a concern of the body politic that unnatural or unexplained deaths be investigated and murderers brought to justice. Forensic pathology and forensic medicine are sciences of the 20^th century but the social and legal issues they deal with go back to the beginnings of organized society. In countries of the British legal tradition, it became necessary to appoint an officer of the Crown that was independent of the political infrastructure of the time.⁴

In medieval England, the sheriff (shire-reeve), the sergeant and the bailiff were representatives of local government. There is reference to another officer called a crowner or coroner in pre-Norman times but by the reign of Richard II, coroners were appointed as the king’s legal officer to protect the monarch’s interests, to separate the legal issues, such as the death of a person, from the political administrative issues such as tax collection and property issues dealt with by the sheriffs and bailiffs. The office is specifically mentioned in the “Articles of Eyre” of 1194. The “General Eyre” was the periodic visitation of the King’s itinerant judges, later known as the “assizes”.

The office of Crowner or Coroner probably originated in England in Norman times although it was mentioned in Saxon times in the reign of Alfred the Great. Gradually over the centuries the coroner took on his more modern form as the legal officer who investigated unnatural deaths. The coroner system was instituted in all present or former British colonies or territories. Similar offices under a variety of titles exist in virtually every country in the World. But the English ‘Coroner’ system is undoubtedly the oldest.

In more recent years, the coroner was a physician or a lawyer – in the latter case the medical examiner would be a physician although this varied considerably from one jurisdiction to another. In the United States the terms coroner and medical examiner are used more-or-less interchangeably in different jurisdictions. In Canada there is some variability between provinces. In Ontario, the coroner is a physician. He investigates deaths and presides at inquests, calling in witnesses and other forensic science experts as appropriate. The Medical Examiner is usually a pathologist and would be called to give evidence.

In the 20^th century forensic science developed rapidly although it had its beginnings much earlier. A series of spectacular murders in England during the late 19^th and early 20^th centuries made names like Jack the Ripper and Dr. Crippen fall from every tongue. It spurred a sudden development of the science of ballistics and toxicology and also a rich literature – including Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s ‘Sherlock Holmes’ and Dame Agatha Christie’s ‘Miss Marple’ and ‘Hercule Poirot’. These still has great popularity today. Many popular television programs such as CSI follow this theme.

Forensic medicine and forensic pathology developed in the tradition of increasing specialization. The two terms seem to have been used somewhat interchangeably until well into the 20^th century. In the early years, forensic pathology required no special training. It was an interest, not a professional specialty. Physicians often did the work reluctantly if at all, and any physician who took an interest in the field was welcomed by all the others who were glad to be rid of unpleasant and unrewarding tasks. William Deadman was appointed City Pathologist and Director of Laboratories in Hamilton in July 1914 although he did not take up his duties until 1919. His early interest in this field ensured that he would get all of the forensic work in the city and surrounding area. His reputation as a pathologist and expert witness grew rapidly in Hamilton and later across Canada.

This is how it usually happened in the early years. Deadman’s experience in many ways paralleled that of the “father of forensic Pathology” Sir Bernard Spilsbury. Spilsbury obtained his medical degree (M.B., B.Ch.) at St. Mary’s Hospital, London in 1905 and an M.A. in 1908. Deadman got his B.A. in 1911 and his M.B. in 1913 at the University of Toronto. Both of them got some training in pathology as part of a general medical education. Spilsbury acquired his reputation because he was willing to take on difficult and challenging cases and gave convincing evidence in the witness box. His systematic approach to the evidence and careful analytical approach enabled him to solve some of the most complex cases. Deadman applied the same approach.

Deadman’s training at Johns Hopkins was cut short by the onset of the First World War. He always said that he got much of his training and experience as a medical officer with the Royal Army Medical Corps during that war. Like Spilsbury, Deadman also took on cases that others did not want to touch and brought a scientific approach to forensic work. Spilsbury went on to gain an international reputation. Deadman was much more reserved in his approach and his international reputation only developed in his later years when his active work was largely behind him.

When Deadman started his career in 1914, there was little difference between forensic and general pathology in Canada, although some distinctions had emerged in Europe in the late 19^th century and in the United States by the time of the First World War. At that time in most centres in Canada, pathological and laboratory work were seen as part of the task of the general physician although a physician with even a smattering of pathological training was always in demand. Dr. Deadman had established qualifications in pathology and bacteriology at a time when no such training existed in Canada but the fields of pathology and bacteriology were well established in Europe and were rapidly developing in the U.S.A. In Canada, formal services in forensic science were confined to Montreal and Toronto, with a laboratory at McGill and a medico-legal laboratory in Toronto under the Department of the Attorney General of Ontario. It was set up by Dr. E.R. Frankish in 1932. The specialty of forensic pathology was not formally recognized in the United States until 1959. Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada formally recognized it as a sub-specialty of Anatomic Pathology in 2003.

Deadman’s work as a forensic pathologist began after his return after WWI to Hamilton in 1919, but by then his training at Johns Hopkins and his extensive experience as a field pathologist and bacteriologist in the war was pivotal to his career. Throughout his life, the analysis of murders continued to be an important part of his work. He was interested in all aspects of pathology and laboratory medicine. After retirement, because of his long experience in forensic pathology he was invited to join the Attorney-General’s Forensic Laboratory in Toronto – the so-called “Crime Lab” – which provided forensic pathology services across Canada. He continued working there until his death in 1965.

The training and professional qualifications of professionals in this field were brought into question in Canada with the discrediting of the evidence of Dr. Charles Smith, one of the best known pediatric pathologist in Canada in recent years. Smith was a paediatric and forensic pathologist at the Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto. He was popular with crown attorneys because of his performance in the witness box. Some thirteen people were convicted of serious criminal acts based on his autopsy evidence and these were overturned on appeal or reopened later and described as miscarriages of justice. Smith resigned in 2005. In 2008 the government of Ontario ordered a public enquiry. It was chaired by Mr. Stephen Goudge, a judge of the Court of Appeal. It concluded that Smith had “actively mislead” his superiors and made “false and misleading” statements in court. It also noted that there were serious problems in the way that suspicious deaths in children were handled in Ontario. Smith had his medical licence revoked by the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario in 2011.

This is nothing new. Courts cannot deal with probabilities or uncertainty. Such evidence is too easily discredited. To please the Court, the witness must deal with all issues in black and white terms. Further, when an expert witness becomes more expert than anyone he is dealing with, appropriate humility is often the first victim. In his later years Spilsbury was often accused of arrogance, dogmatism and black-and-white assertions that resulted in increasing challenges to his evidence and alleged miscarriages of justice that harmed his later career.

Several provinces have had crises in their laboratory medicine tests, both hospital laboratories and commercial labs where efficiency and profit are too often more important than scientific accuracy. In the 21^st century they are now highly regulated and the situation has improved. We must not ignore the tremendous advances in forensic science in recent decades. These previous failures of quality health care and medicine only point out the high standards we now expect and are usually able to attain. One hundred years ago, there were few universal standards, medical and laboratory training was highly variable, sometimes non-existent, and too much often depended on the moral and ethical integrity of the individual – too easily corrupted by the pressures of the workplace and the demands of an international reputation.

Certified specialities were not established in Canada until 1929 when the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada was formed. Pathology was recognized as a specialty sometime later and William Deadman, like nearly all of his colleagues was grandfathered into the specialty and was given a Certificate in Pathology in 1945. This was long after he had received fellowships from other international professional bodies. He received Certification from the American Board of Pathology in 1939. More particularly, his tale looks at one sub-speciality – forensic pathology – which has remained the poor cousin in this explosion of specialization.

The late Roy Porter in his book had this to say about the situation in the United States and Britain. In this regard, Canada is much closer to Britain: ⁱⁱⁱ

“…the 20th century brought a widespread shift of gravity in the profession from general practitioner to specialist. Here a rift opened up between the UK and the USA. In Britain, primary care was to remain firmly in the hands of generalist family doctors. That was because panel practice under the National Insurance Act of 1911, later reinforced by the National Health Service (1948)… …made GPs the linchpins of a publicly funded medical system. Denied the right to attend patients in hospital, they were cut off from surgery and science and all that they implied in terms of innovations and superior professional identities. Yet GPs remained the dispensers of family care and became gatekeepers to the hospital and the specialist. …. In the USA, by contrast, general practice inexorably lost out to specialism. In a competitive market milieu, the scientifically advanced pediatrician, cardiologist or oncologist gained an edge. By 1942 fewer than half of all American doctors were GPs. and by 1999… …fewer than one in ten were in family practice; GPs had gone the way of the horse-and-buggy doctor.”⁵

During Bill Deadman’s lifetime, there were significant changes in the practice of medicine in Canada and across the world. The need for more focused specialty training had been recognized for many years but it was perhaps slower to come in Canada than in the United States and certainly in Europe. At the end of the 19^th century Europe was well ahead of North America but medical schools in the U.S.A. were rapidly moving ahead. Canada was slow in following the lead so it was the mid-20^th century before medical education, research and practice could be said to have caught up. Physicians in Canada often took their own initiative to move ahead and were only recognized later. Deadman’s appointment as pathologist and director of laboratories at the Hamilton General Hospital was intended to start immediately. It was on his initiative that he sought training at Johns Hopkins Medical School in pathology and bacteriology in the summer of 1914.

It is difficult for a modern reader to appreciate the significance of an extensive military career a century ago. Not only did William Deadman return home from training at Johns Hopkins to enlist in the 5^th Field Ambulance in October of 1914 he was given the rank of Staff Sergeant. He notes that the reason that he could not be appointed as a 2^nd Lieutenant, the usual rank for graduated physicians in the army, was because all the places were already taken – almost the entire graduating classes of 1914 and 1915 from the Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto had enlisted after the outbreak of war in August of 1914.

When he was in England in 1915 the (British) Royal Army Medical Corps was extremely short of physicians and were appealing to physicians in the colonial units to be seconded to the RAMC. He was seconded with the rank of Lieutenant, soon promoted to Captain and he subsequently worked with international leaders in the fields of bacteriology and pathology. He worked with L. S. Dudgeon, professor of pathology at St. Thomas’s Hospital and C. M. Wenyon, then the leading protozoologist in Britain. He became close friends with (later Sir) Philip Manson-Bahr, the son of Sir Patrick Manson who had founded the London School of Tropical Medicine.

At war’s end, he seriously considered giving up his position at the Hamilton General Hospital to join the Colonial service in Tropical Medicine. He did return to Hamilton and continued his military career in the Canadian Militia (Reserves) until 1945 when he finally went on the Retired List as a Lieutenant Colonel after 31 years of service.

Although he had given evidence at inquests and trials from the early years of his career and was a regional pathologist for the Attorney General of Ontario from 1940, it was the Evelyn Dick Trial in 1946, in which it was his responsibility to organize and present the medical forensic evidence at the preliminary hearings, the protracted trial and the subsequent appeal proceedings, that really made his name as a forensic pathologist. Oddly enough, he considered this to be too sensational and too salacious to be taken seriously in the academic atmosphere that was developing in forensic medicine in those days. It is hardly mentioned in his own autobiographical notes.

He was actively involved in the scientific approach, research and teaching. He trained interns had residents in pathology, internal medicine and lectured on medical jurisprudence and forensic pathology. He presented papers and published extensively on his research. His training program in laboratory technology at the Hamilton General Hospital became a Mecca in Canada for students in this field.

Deadman had written extensively on many subjects in pathology and forensic pathology over his career. But the immediate post-war period was undoubtedly his most productive. By the time of his retirement he had been honoured by many international societies at a time when Canada was struggling to catch up with advancements in forensic pathology in Europe and the United States. He established a position in the practice of pathology, laboratory and forensic science which more recently has led to the creation of the sub-specialty of Forensic Pathology in Canada. He was a founding member of the Ontario Association of Pathologists and worked with them to develop guidelines on regional coroners and medical examiners. He published scientific research from his broad experience in pathology, bacteriology and public health. And war or no war, he was involved in murder investigations and trials. He was a medical pioneer at a time of tremendous change in medicine and all the sciences.

But his interests were much broader. Deadman was an active observer and critic of Canadian political life. He wrote many articles on the post-war recovery and the state of politics in Canada. His paper on Canada’s Fundamental Reconstruction was acknowledged by the Prime Minister, W. L. Mackenzie-King. In 1950, he was named Hamilton’s Citizen of the Year. This not only recognized his great contributions to the development of medical and pathological services but also for his many contributions to the political and cultural life of the city.

He was keenly interested in his city, his country and the whole world. He was a student of world history and culture, and a patron of the arts. In this, he was influenced by the political, economic and social climate in a British Canada in the last days of the Victorian Era and up to the mid-20^th century. He had wide-ranging interests in all aspects of life. He was a 19^th century liberal in a 20^th century liberal world.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

---

1 Deadman WJ; Sudden Death. Can. Med. Assn. J.,56, 273-277, 1947. (read at the 77^th annual meeting, CMA, Sect. Medicine, Banff, 46/06/12.)

2 The Last Word.
A Dr. W. J. Deadman presented a paper on “Sudden Death”
at a recent meeting of the Canadian Medical Association.

3 The founding members, Ms. Helen Smith, Mr. Frank Elliott and Mr. Denys Lock as well as another nine members applied for a Dominion Charter in 1936 under the name Canadian Society for Medical Technologists. The Canadian Medical Association protested on the grounds that “medical” implied that it was a physician-run organization. So when the charter was issued in 1937 the name was changed to Canadian Society for Laboratory Technologists.

4 “Crowner: Origins of the Office of Coroner” by Bernard Knight, CBE. www.britannia.com/history/coroner1.html

5 Recently the same trend was noted in Ontario but the establishment of the College of Family Practice has meant that family practitioners have semi-specialist designation. Further, many family practice clinics have replaced solo practitioners. Other provinces have made similar provisions.

i Evans, Colin; The Father of Forensics: The groundbreaking cases of Sir Bernard Spilsbury, and the beginnings of modern CSI. Berkley Books, New York, 2006.

ii Blum, Deborah; The poisoner’s handbook: murder and the birth of forensic medicine in the jazz age. The Penguin Press, New York, 2010. ISBN 978-1-59420-243-8 © Deborah Blum 2010.

iii Porter, R; Blood and Guts : a Short History of Medicine .Penguin Books © Roy Porter. pp 43-44