The New York herald., 1879-11-08
Professor Wormley, Of Pennsylvania
University, as an Expert.
CONFLICT CONCERNING FEES.
Boot Heel Prints in the Muir
dered Girls Cheek.
ARSENIC PHOTOGRAPHED.
New HAVEN. Conn. Nov. 2. 1879.

New HAVEN, Conn.,, Nov. 2. 1879.
After casting the subject aside for nearly week
the prosecution in the Hayden trial to-day offered
further testimony on the various arsenical speci-
mems which have Importance in supporting the
charge that Hayden poisoned Mary stannard. Here
tofore the testimony of the States experts has in
cluded descriptions of the pecularities OF the sew
eral lots arsenic revealed by the microscope.
This all jury had to rely upon until Profess
sor Brewer yesterday offered them opportunity
to personally test the powers of microscope. by
agreement of counsel. however. they examined but
q single specimen, and which had no connection
with the case. To-day the State succeeded
and in a way to economic time, in getting TO the
minds of the jurors clearer idea of the differences
the experts had described. This was by series OF
photographs of samples of arsenic noticeable in the
case magniied 100 times. However, the demonstra-
ton was less satisfactory than had been hoped for
as photography does not yield all the results de-
sired or at did not do in this instance 1t is
understood that better photographs will be pro-
duced during the trial. enlarged from the same neg
atives. An important ruling to-day was that the
fee promised an expert is not proper subject Of
inquiry during trial.
PROFESSOR woRMLEY ON ARSENIC
The first witness called this morning Pro-
fessor Theodore G.. Wormley, of the University of
Pennsylvania. and for twenty years professor of
features smoothly shaven, and has piercing black
eyes, which fash quickly the top of his eye
glasses when question is put to him by counsel.
Being called expert he substantiated his claim
10 be SO considered by producing and announcing
his authorship Of large volume on 1.-The Micro
Chemistry of Poisons, Including their Physiological
Pathological and Legal Relations Adapted to the Use
of the Medical Jurist, Physician and General
Chemist" This, he said, the result Of
ten years Of research and Investigations
of the poisons described organic ana metallic,
and the Illustrations OF crystalline poisons pre-
pared from drawings made and engraved under his
direct supervision Professor Wormley further said
that in addition to this volume, he had written vari-
reports and articles the micro-c chemistry of
posons. ION the 11h of October last said Profess
Wormley. Il received from Professor Dana. Of
Yale, eleven samples purportng to be arsenic. Pro-
fessor Brewer also sent single sample. pre-
pared microscopic slides from the sampleslprocess
described)-and examined them under a Beck's mi
croscope. magnifying from rs to 300 diameters.
know that the samples received from Professor
Dana included Garland Dragon 'Welsch. Col
grove 'Squibb's medicinal Mckee and
barn arsenics. Professor Brewers sample
was not marked. [This was arsenic from Mary
Btannard's stomach.l The Colgrove and Mckee
senics were alike. Two samples of tho barn
arsenic very similar The Garland and other
arsenics known by their trade brands presented
various differences. The stomach arsenic closely
resembled the Colgrove and Mckee arsenics The
distinguishing characteristics of the last named
the large size and frequency Of the ir
regular fragments, while in the barn
nearly all the particles in crystalline form and
very small. many OF them only H. l0OOth Of inch.
had photographs made of all the samples magni-
fed 100 times the work being done by experienced
photographer under my personal supervision"
The negatives were produced and passed around
to counsel for examination. The defence objected
to their Introduction in evidence unless the photog
rapher was called as a witness. Judge Harrison
ad data lilo nf fhn nf vt.aE fJa
plates from the samples, and after col
1oquy Professor Wormley said that he salts
fed that the negatives exactly the arsen
cal particles any microscopic slide. The positions
OF the ''felds the microscope slides which
photographed he said were fixed by the "Matwood
finder Ia delicate ruled glass instrument used by
scientists) and can be found again at any time.
Mr.. Warous explained that his objection that
the instrument by which the negative was prepared
manipulated by man (the photographer who
stood between the light of heaven on one side and
the light OF the Professors scientific attainments
the other.
Judge Harrison argued that Professor wormley
had watched all the operations and had compared
one or two of the negatives with the originals the
presence of the operator was not essential.
Chief Justice Park said the negatives compared, if
not the others, were certainly admissible
Mr.. Waller for the State protested against the OBJ
lection as uncalled for ana said that 1t would only
necessate the expense of bringing the photographer
here.
Wormley remarked that he could not remember just
which negatives had been compared, but could de-
termine by the of a "Maltwood finder" which
lege.
Mr.. Waller proceeded to argue that Professor
Wormley should be permitted to go with all
his testimony. and that the photographer afterward
be brought il necessary.
Chief Justice Park-But Professor Wormley under
the objection could not go and testify to all
the photographs until the photographer has proven
their production.
Mr.. waller-But, Your Honor, can't have both
the stand at the same timo. One must pre-
cede the other, as u matter of course.
HAYpESs CONCESSION.
Finally MIR. Jones that after consultation with
the accused the defence had agreed waive the OBJ
jections and let Professor Wormley proceed, with
the understanding that the photographer be put on
the stand hereafter.
Professor wormey then produced the photo
graphic pictures OF the samples of the "Colsrove"
and Mckee arsenics and testified that the charac-
teristics generally the relative proper
lions between the crystals and fragments.
The jury examined the pictures carefully, and
while doing Professor wormley, in reply to
interrogatory said that it impossible to get alb
souteiy perfect outlines OF the crystals by photog-
raphy; also that lie had made a study OF ply sizes,
and gave his opinion that photography was governed
by the science OF OPTICS
Mr.. watrous-Do you intend to call this witness us
an expert on photography
Mr.. Waer-The Professor being familiar with the
laws of optics may be regarded expert in
sense.
Chief Justice Park--If the results obtained in the
photographs depended upon the law OF optics the
witness is competent to answer questions regarding
the principles of photography.
Professor Wormley explained that the differences
in the distinctness with which OF the particles
of arsenic were pictured la comparison with others
was due to the focus obtaned-those nearest were
most distinct, of course
The jury then further examined photographs Of
the "Colgrove'' and MCKEE" arsenics, and next
compared these with photographs of the arsenic
found in Haydcn's barn in witch the difrerenoes
not plainly distinguishable as they
said to have beon under the microscope All
of these specimens exhibited octohedral
sencal crystals and for the purpose of showing
that there may be great differences between arsenics
Professor wormey, in response to questions by the
States counsel, stated that he had examined three
specimens lin which no crystals whatever were
found. All the PARTICLES were irregular and appa-
renty fragments of glass rather than crushed
crystalline arsenic. These specimens came from a
wholesale druggist in Philadelphia, and were taken
respectively from the top. bottom and middle of
key, yet there were marked differences between
.hem.
STARTLING QUESTION.
The cross-examination then began. and after a
few questions to how long the Professor had been
In the employ OF the State expert Mr.. Watrous
asked Professor. what is your charge to the state
for the time spent hereY'
mad Ind Har