Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1866-12-26
THE EVENING STAR.
LOCAL NEWS.
AMUsEMNNTs. &c, TONIGHT.

AMUsEMxNrs. &C.. To-NI9Hr.
NATIONAL TBEATER--Fifteenth nigh, OF Ief-
SPrsOu's engagement. and his ninth repr.
seniStiOn of RIP Van Winkle."
WALLS NEw OPKRA Hous8.-F. s. Caanfr an
VIII again appear in his great SD .e.aIity
sam" this evening.
fAIE BTILDISe. corner of TN street and Pa
ayenue-Ihe Grand Masonic Fair for ths
benefit of the Masonic Hail Aseociatio \. is ons
of the most agreeable places to spend q even
ing in this city.
lsIASD HALL--No one who attends the de
llghtiuI ialr at THIS place for the benefit Of
Grace Church, Will regret the time or macy
spent. Inc ladies are courteous and agrse
able, ana me entertainment is most Interest
ing.
ODD FELLOWS HALL-Second animal h.,,
or the nited Circles OF the Fenian Brother.
hood OF the District of Columbia this ryening
A pheasant time may be expected by ali who
IHE CASE OF LILA HoLLINGswoRrH- On
mohosy afternoon, Coroner Woodward sam
nOneu Jury OF inquest on the body of me
daughter OF MIR. W. IL. HolIingsworth, whose
utath AT her fathers residence. No 593 Vir
shla avenue, on Sunday night, was noticed by
us on Moncay The following comprised III.
Moses Meredith, Jonn Bright. Thomas
r. Plumsill, Joseph Il. Gordon Josi,b zen
sole, Joseph Repetti, Henry Davey, Jas. Cnil.
Alex e. Bromley, Henry G. Young Jobn
~lliet Daniel T.. kealiey.
IL Will be recollected that the death of the
cnlid WHO had been complaining for a day or
~
nave been caused by overdose of opium
admlhlstered IN a prescription written by pr
"a, "a. nlIIier, winch had been compounded ut
coded At the inquest that the death was caused
oy the opiate, and the inquiry was as 10 who
S S De held accountable for the child's
oeath- In The medicine given the child was
eNuact OF opium, which is one of the most
powerful opiates-much stronger than opium
Hnlen, ~ appears, was used instead OF the
eliNlr OF opium, which Is a very mild oplate
Dr. Walsh and his son (who Compounded
ne prescriptlon) and DIR. Miller Were present
n IOlueI bringing with him the prescription
IN question, as also other prescriptions from
me same physician, which were exhibited to
me Jury In the prescription the abbre Walton
unct. ana on comparing il with other pre-
>cripuons of DIR. M. il was found TO resemble
Inose ne dou btless intended for elixir Of opium
Ut " alsh claimed that the abbre Walton which
Dr Miller said he intended for ..elixir'' of
opium would be taken readily TO signify sex
t n OF oplum-a preparation much stronger
than the former. DIR. Miller claimed that the
aooreylatiCn was elk and not sext"
Dr. k. Bates, druggist testified after ex-
amlnlng the prescription, that bad it been pre-
sehieu AT MS counter he would have put up
the extract, but would have probably inc uired
given. - WIS =" NC
would understand the ADORE Walton for soy
tract" and would have put II up a : such bnt
had be seen the directions the bottom he
"ouio not nave put II up without making i'm :
quiry He would have put up such for a case
of deliTiUm tremens. Mr. Simmons further
testhed that he has refused TO put up pre-
scrlptions, and has been censured by the pby
stefan Tor not putting mp such according To Iii
recuOnS IL was not the habit of druggists
whep putting up prescription TO ask for
whom u was intended
Or. W. IT, CoOmbs testified that he read the
aoorevlation as intended for extract He came
over with Dr. Miller TO see the deceased after
the medicine had been admi q istered and found
her IN comatOse state. from w hich ; he did no,
recover he had no doubt but that the medi-
cine caused death.
The following verdict was drafted but was
not signed by all the jurors THAI the said
LllIa came TO her death between the hours OF
III ana II o clock on the night of the 2}d inst ,
from the effects OF an overdose of opium ad .
minlstered IN medicine prescribed by DR.
Miller and put up by DIR. Walsh that the
opium was compounded in the prescription by
Inc druggist mistaking an obre Wait OH In tend .
ed by Dr. Miller for elixer'' for extract and
they further ind both the physician and drug.
gist were AT fault-the former in not writing
his prescription more distinctly. and the latter
IN not making inquiries 70 the nature of the
case cefore allowing II TO leave the store"
Ten OF the Jurors signed the above as their
verdict, and another juror signed il under pro-
test, while one refused TO sign IL unless il was
made 70 read as censuring the physician only
As this Is q case OF considerable importance,
and the question as 10 who should be held &c
countable In such cases, Is one W nich should be
ruled on by the courts. we understand that the
Coroner viii take il to the Grand Jury for
their action.