Committee Report Investigating Doctor Robert Knox
This is the committee report that Knox uses to prove the veracity of the court’s decision to declare him innocent, and therefore not guilty of any complicity in the Burke and Hare murders. In the original newspaper publication, it is published alongside Knox’s letter to the editor of the Caledonian Mercury, edited here.
Report of the Committee¹
The Committee who, at the request of Dr.Knox, undertook to investigate the truth or falsehood of the rumours in circulation regarding him, have gone into an extensive examination of evidence, in the course of which they have courted information from every quarter. They have been readily furnished with all which they required from Dr.Knox himself; and though they have failed in some attempts to procure evidence, they have in most quarters succeeded in obtaining it, and especially from those persons who have been represented to them as having spoken the most confidently in support of these rumours ; and they have unanimously agreed on the following report :--
1. The Committee have seen no evidence that Dr. Knox or his assistants knew that murder was committed in procuring any of the subjects brought to his rooms, and the Committee firmly believe that they did not.
2. On the question whether any suspicion of murder at any time existed in Dr.Knox’s mind, the Committee would observe that there were certainly several circumstances (already known to the public), regarding some of the subjects brought by Burke and Hare, which, now that the truth has come out, appear calculated to excite that suspicion, particularly the very early period after death at which they were brought to the rooms, and the absence of external marks of disease, together with the opinion previously expressed by Dr. Knox, in common with most other anatomists, of the generally abandoned character of persons engaged in this traffic. But, on the other hand, the Committee, after much anxious inquiry, have found no evidence of their actually having excited it in the mind of Dr.Knox, or of any other of the individuals who saw the bodies of these unfortunate persons prior to the apprehension of Burke.
The bodies do not appear in any instance to have borne any external marks by which it could have been known whether they had died by violence or suddenly from natural causes, or from diseases of short duration; and the mode of protracted anatomical dissection practised in this and other similar establishments, is such as would have made it very difficult to ascertain the causes of death, even if special inquiry had been instituted with that intention.
No evidence whatever has come before the Committee that any suspicion of murder was expressed to Dr.Knox by any one, either of his assistants or of his very numerous class (amounting upwards of 400 students), or other persons who were in the practice of frequently visiting his rooms ; and there are several circumstances in his conduct, particularly the complete publicity with which his establishment was managed, and his anxiety to lay each subject before the students as soon as possible after its reception, which seem to the Committee strongly to indicate that he had no suspicion of the atrocious means by which they had been procured.
It has also been proved to the satisfaction of the Committee, that no mutilation or disfigurement of any kind was ever practised with a view to conceal the features, or abstract unseasonably any part of the body, the presence of which might have facilitated detection ; and it appears clearly that the subjects brought by Burke and Hare were dissected in the same protracted manner as those procured from any other quarter.²
3. The Committee have thought it proper to inquire further, whether there was anything faulty or negligent in the regulations under which subjects were received into Dr.Knox’s rooms, which gave or might give a peculiar facility to the disposal of the bodies obtained by these crimes ; and on this point they think it their duty to state their opinion fully.
It appears in evidence, that Dr. Knox had formed and expressed the opinion, long prior to any dealings with Burke and Hare, that a considerable supply of subjects for anatomical purposes might be procured by purchase, and without any crime, from the relations or connections of deceased persons in the lowest ranks of society.
In forming this opinion, whether mistaken or not, the Committee cannot consider Dr. Knox to have been culpable. They believe there is nothing contrary to the law of the land in procuring subjects for dissection in that way ; and they know that the opinion which Dr.Knox had formed on this point, though never acted on to any extent in this country, has been avowed by others of the highest character in the profession. But they think that Dr. Knox acted on this opinion in a very incautious manner.
This preconceived opinion seems to have led him to give a ready ear to the plausible stories of Burke, who appears from all the evidence before the Committee to have conducted himself with great address and appearance of honesty, as well in his conversation with Dr.Knox, as in his more frequent intercourse with his assistants ; and always to have represented himself as engaged in negotiations of that description, and occasionally to have asked and obtained money in advance to enable him and his associate to conclude bargains.
Unfortunately also Dr.Knox had been led, apparently in consequence of the extent and variety of his avocations, to entrust the dealings with persons supplying subjects, and the reception of the subjects brought, to his assistants (seven in number) and to his doorkeeper indiscriminately. It appears also that he directed or allowed these dealings to be conducted on the understanding (common to him with some other anatomists) that it would only tend to diminish or delivery the supply of subjects to make any particular inquiry of the persons bringing them as to the place and mode of obtaining them.
In these respects the Committee consider the practice which was then adopted in Dr.Knox’s rooms (whatever be the usage in this or other establishments in regard to subjects obtained in the ordinary way) to have been very improper in the case of persons bringing bodies which had not been interred. They think that the notoriously bad character of persons who generally engage in in any such traffic, in addition to the novelty and particular nature of the system on which these men professed to be acting, undoubtedly demanded greater vigilance.
The extent, therefore, to which (judging from the evidence which they have been able to procure) the Committee think that Dr.Knox can be blamed on account of transactions with Burke and Hare is, that by this laxity of the regulations under which bodies were received into his rooms, he unintentionally gave a degree of facility to the disposal of the victims of their crimes, which under better regulations would not have existed³, and which is doubtless matter of deep and lasting regret, not only to himself, but to all who have reflected on the importance and are therefore interested in the prosecution of the study of anatomy. But while they point out this circumstance as the only ground of censure which they can perhaps discover in the conduct of Dr.Knox, it is fair to observe that perhaps the recent disclosures have made it appear reprehensible to many who would not otherwise have adverted to its possible consequences.
John Robinson
W.P.Alison.
Geo Ballingall.
M.P.Brown.
George Sinclair.
James Russell.
W. Hamilton.
J. Shaw Stewart.
Thomas Allan.
13th March 1829
⁴For the information of our country readers, we may add the designations of the gentlemen who formed the Committee were Mr. Robinson (afterwards Sir John), Secretary to the Royal Society ; Mr. Brown, Advocate ; Mr. Russell, Professor of Clinical Surgery ; Mr. Stewart, Advocate ; Dr. Alison, Professor of the Theory of Physic ; Sir Geo. Ballinghall, Professor of Military Surgery ; Mr. Sinclair the younger (or Sir George), of Ulbster; Sir W. Hamilton, Bart., Professor of Universal History ; Mr. Allan, banker, in Edinburgh.
Editorial Notes
Note 1: Most if not everyone was aware that the lay committee which had decided Knox’s innocence was not adequate or just; the evidence they used to justify their decision was never once made public. An official inquiry and assessment of the facts of this case had been expected, but never came to pass (Richardson 137). ⮐
Note 2: To the contrary, there were numerous of signs of his and his staff’s active complicity and indiscretion. Burke said in his official confession that “Knox was present on two occasions when Burke and Hare delivered murdered bodies, and that in one case he had approved of a corpse’s freshness, but asked no questions” (Richardson 135). Several bodies brought to Knox were delivered with “blood at the mouth, nose or ears.” Daft Jamie’s head and feet were cut off in a likely attempt to prevent people from recognizing such a public figure in the dissection room, suggesting Knox was seeking to avoid accusations of foul play (136). Knox instructed his own staff to receive bodies without asking any questions.⮐
Note 3: The committee's prescient observation here signals the way in which Knox's involvement in the Burke and Hare murders would become a central justification for passing the Anatomy Act of 1832. In order to maintain the status quo of corpse commodification necessary to support surgical science and avoid any more legal liabilities, this law would allow any dead bodies found in workhouses (and a number of other locations largely populated by the poor) that were not claimed within 48 hours to be subject to medical experimentation. Following this legislation was a protracted increase in the burning of any buildings housing practising surgeons.⮐
Note 4: In Henry Lonsdale's collection of Knox's writings, his depiction of the letter and committee report do not exactly match what was published in the Calidonian Mercury newspaper. Lonsdale omits the phrase "For the information of our country readers, we may add the designations of" before the names of the people in the committee are listed. This is a significant choice and change, as there are many tonal indicators that both the writers at the Calidonian Mercury and much of the audience who read the newspaper were not of any inclination to believe Knox's attempts to shake off culpability (not the least of which being published on the final page of the issue). In the newspaper, the implication is that the people reading should know how illegitimate those passing judgment were, in Lonsdale's depiction it seems as though Knox or Lonsdale offered the clarification of who comprised the committee as an attempt at transparency (Lonsdale 88).⮐