Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1871-08-11
BUFFENBARGER.
The Ohio ROrgia Case.
Verdict of COrOner's Jury.
Was He Poisonedl

" ms fOA9DhGa!
COLUMBUS, o, Aug. 10.-The invesii-
cation of the Coroner in the Buffenbarger
poisoning case closed to-day, and the jury
returned the following verdict:
After hearing the testimony, we, the
jury, do find and say that arsenic was
administered to the deceased, Peter
BuffeRbarger, by come person or persons
unknown.
Prof. W0rmley and DR.. Collins were
the only material witnesses examined.
The following is the substance of Prof.
Wormley's testimony:
On the 18th of February last, receiv-
ed from the Coroner, and DR.. Sprague,
of London, two jars, said to contain the
stomach and liver of human subject.
AT the time of receiving the jars | made
no critical examination. They were re-
tanned in 8 safe place till the 18th of May
last, when l commenced an examination.
The shoppers of the jars were in place,
tied with Irvine, and sealed with sealing
wax ever the Irvine. opened the jars,
and first made physical examination of
the contents. In the larger jar found
mass of matter which, on minute exsmi-
nation, proved to be stomach, aud a
large mass of what is known as omentum.
The stomach was entire, the tirsure being
well preserved. The structure of the
other organs was well preserved, but at
first it was difficult to make out
the several parts. In the other jar
l found what appeared to be remnants
of liver. The structure was well pre-
served. Within the gall bladder was
some matter apparently in the form of
gall. After thus making q physical ex
animation l proceeded to make chemi-
cal examination of the contents separ
ately. The parts first examined were the
contents of the smaller jar. These were
cut into small pieces and extracted with
diluted hydro ch:hric acid until the tissue
was entirely broken up. The solution
thus obtained was examined chemically
for poisonous substances. In this sou
ton detected very minute quantity of
arsenic, but quite sufficient to establish
its presence beyond all doubt. The solids
were very carefully preserved. The next
step in the analysis was with reference to
the contents of the larger jar, which con-
tanned the stomach and mass of matter.
The solids were cut in small pieces and
extracted with diluted hydro chlOric acid
and the liquid separated from theremaining
solids. A chemical examination of thd
liquid or extract thus obtained, showee
the presence of arsenic in decidedly
larger quantities than found in the liver.
/ may remark that the quantity was large
enough to enable indentifcstion by diff
ferent tests. The next step was with the
solids of the liver now dissolved by the
acid. They were re examined from the
fact that diluted hydro chloric acid will
not rlwsys extract all the arsenic that
might be present, nor would it extract
any arsenic which had passed into the
form of sulphuric. These solids were now
treated so as 10 take up sll the arsenic, and
the final extract thus obtained was
found to contain an obvious quantity
arsenic being sufficient present. That
one part of the final solution would furn-
ish positive evidence of the presence of
poison. This final extract was examined
by three different tests, all of which
proved conclusively the presence of
poison. The solids from the stomach,
now dissolved by acid, were next exam
ined, to take up arsenic if present under
any sorm. The examination of the ex-
tract thus obtained did not furnish trace
of arsenic. That concluded the chemical
examination.
Question By the Coroner-Is it possible
to introduce arsenic into the liver after
death9
Answer Yes, answering in general
terms.
Odd you recover sufficient arsenic
to cause death?
Al did not; thst is, under ordinary
circumstances.
Q.-Might there have been any more
arsenic in the body at the time ct death
than you recovered
Ayes.
@. If there was any more, what be-
came of il
A. l could not say what became of 1t.
There may be large quantity in a body
at the time of death, and it may entirely
disappear The finding of = small qusnti-
ty is not proof that there was not large
quantity at the time of death; neither is il
proof that there was large quantity.
At this hour, II o'clock, the jury ad-
jOurned until 80 P. NJ.
After the close of the proof Of Worm
ley's testimony, other testimony was In
troduced, showing that the organs exam
ined by Wormley was taken from the
body of Peter Buffenbarger.