Morning journal and courier., 1881-10-25
The shelton Case.

 tOrney Pickett opened the by reading the infor nation, and after he had concluded Judge Blyden- burah filed demurrer in the case which fol- lows:
 WILLIAM R. SHELTON.
 CIrY CoURT, October 24, 1881.
 The said William R. Shelton in court defends. pleads and says that the said complaint and the matters therein contained nsufcient in the law. whereof and for special rsas pms of demurrer assigns
 1st-Tt is nowhere in said complaint. in either advised carried the said Mary Harenstein to take any drugs or medicines.
 9d-It is nowhere stated in either count of said complaint what drugs medicines were used or ad- vised or carried to be used.
 that any drugs or medicines were by the accused ad- vised to be used caused to be used, or that any
 4th-It is nowhere alleged in either of tue counts that the said accused knew that the said Mary Hart that drugs or medicines instruments were neces- to be used to either the life of the said Mary Hartenstein or the unborn child
 5th-It is nowhere alleged in said complaint that the accused advised the said Mary Hartenstein to act under the direction of one Henry Brown therein de- scribed.
 6th-And it is nowhere alleged what said diHec- tions were that the accused what said direc tions were, that they to do any act contrary to law. . said complaint, and the matters therein contained, are insufficient and defective; Whereof, etc.
 NM. R. SHELTON, BYL. N. BL.yDENBURGH, Arr'Y.
 State vs. William R. Shelton.
 And the State Of Connecticut replies says InaI the said complaint and the matter therein contained are sufficient in the law.
 City Attorney of New Haven. Judge Blydenburgh said that he would prefer to the authorities he desired and also because there another case against the accused that could De Rstorney Pickett said that the case had been ing since September 8, and he had thouGht much he had conc;.ded that it best to go with the pending Sabortionl case. .,. .,,-+ had a right to elect the order in which the cases should be tried He hoped the cases would go along when once begun.
 Judge BIydenburgh said that he saw no reason why they should not go on uninterruptedly
 Mr. Pickett said that since feeler had been thrown out as to whether the evidence would be confined to he would say that the testimony would evil
 Judge BIydenburgh said that he demurred to the abortion because if there was no testimony to support the seduction case the abortion case could go no further a matter of course.
 After further discussion among the attorneys Judge studley ruled that the city attorney had the
 When this decision was rendered by Judge studiey the counsel for the accused (Bydenburgh proceeded to read the demurrer He said that this action must be brought under Section H. page 499 revised stat utes He read the statute and also the allegation He said that it had not set forth that the accused had not been charged specifically, and in no criminal charge can anything be left to implication. What to learn from this complaint? The day is not specific; the drugs are not named. We ought to know. what drugs and medicines tho State alleges used and have our experts to show whether the drugs and medicines proper or not How do we know who Henry Brown is from this complaint? How do we know who they think intended an abor- tion? It is not alleged At this point the witnesses for the State excused until oclockt Whose in tent was it? Was it Henry Browns or Mary Harten- stein's? Judge Blydenburgh claimed in conclusion that the defense should know specifically what drugs and medicines it is alleged were used.
 MT. Pickett in his reply said that the statute was broad enough to cover any method of abortion It IS alleged that William R. Shelton acted knowingly and wilfully and that he knew that Mary Hartenstein pregnant, and it not necessary to show that Mr Shelton kne just what was necessary to be done JudOe Rlydenburph authorities and cOntended for partcularity, and said that if the State could @ one nP Snts it vss not crime The statute is for the person who causes the abortion And for person to tell one person to go to another person is not a crime.
 When Judge Blydenburgh concluded recess was ordered until 2:15 o'clock.
 Afternoon Session. When the court opened about 2:30 o'clock Judge studley announced that he would overrule the de- murrer and ordered the hearius to proceed Judge BIydenburgh then blended mot guilty fo1 | his client.
 pr. Hawkes. was called the first witness, but did not respond, but after little delay he came in. Dr. Hawkes. was sworn and testified that he had been practicng medicine fer the Last three months and located at the State hospital in this city. 1 To question whether he knew Mary Hartenstein Judge Blydenburgh asked what the question for and informed by Mr. Pickett that he intended to ultimately show that she the subject of abor tion Judge Blydenburgh insisted that this was inn | material and objected. After further discussion Judge studley ruled that actual abortion tended tc 1 show the attempt. If the abortion was performed and was connected with the accused, the test mony is not admissible If the attorney for the State \ says that the testimony connects MT. Shelton he ' thought it was admissible.
 Dr. Hawkes. then proceeded and testified that he recognized Mary Hartensein (pointing her out) have treated her for miscarriage at the hospital fol | three weeks, beginning September she came tc the hospital Testimony to what she said about hel condition conteEed and ruled out) he noticed thai | she in pain abortion was impending, which | he attempted to avert the feHtus finally dis charged, and he thought it between four and five months old Witness described infinitely the markf on the dead body of the child, and gave it as his opinion that the marks the back the little body | were caused by an instrument used to produce a | Dr. Walter R. Bartlett was called and sworn. He said recognize Mary Hartenstein saw her pro Oak street; she complained of pain and hemorrhage made examination and found that she was suf- | fering with threatened abortion.
 No, there no indications that abortion had been necessary to the life of the mother or child did not notice disease of the generative organs.
 Dr. M. c. White was called, and said he
 e D hs paee us he n chsr at the morgue at the hospital took charge of and weighed it and found it weighed thirteen ounces above thes small of the back, little to thesrght oi the spine, were marks that looked as though blood might have efused into the skin they indicated that they caused by mechanical violence during ife With other marks found on the body the doctor | concluded and said In my opinion the marks on the little body were caused by some mechanical oI l solid instrument.
 On the examination witness said he did mol see how the marks the back could have been pro | duced by accident. He could not swear positively that the miscarriage not produced by accident by drugs, but did not think the spots would be l found the back in such 8 case
 At this point an adjournment was taken until Thursday afternoon at o'clock Mir. Pickett being engaged in the Superior Court for the next two days