Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1882-04-19
TOOHEY MURDER TRIAL.
Tho Day Co,sss13i,sd In Expert Testimony
DR.. o. u. Exams WJthstdnds q Hot
Characterization UnscGtted.

MORNING SESSION.
The court assembled at 9:15 yesterday morn
ing.
While waiting for witnesses a portion of
the evidence was read to Drs. Salisbury and
Simpson by the court reporter these physi-
clans having been subpGnaed as experts on
the part of the state.
County Attorney Hale then announced that
be proposed to prove that Toohey worked
twenty-nine days in August, twenty-six days
in November and seven days in December.
Attorney for defense was willing to admit
the fact, providing an admission was made on
the part of the state that he had not worked
from the 18th to the Oath of November.
DR.. E. ]. EVANS,
the first expert, was sworn, sand testified, Civ.
ing in detail the effects upon the man of alco.
hol, as demonstrated by scientific analysis:
The primary condition Is drunkenness; secon.
dairy, nervousness, debility, irritability, etc;
alcoholism includes any degree of poisoning
from alcohol, from drunkenness to death: /
do not use it as being synonymous with delir-
ium tremens, but it includes that. Witness
testified as to the symptoms OF delirium ire
mems. AS a rule, persons who have them
his hallucinations known by acts and words;
so far as Ihave observed the results of delir-
ium tremens do not go to the hOmicidal ex-
tent; come authorities claim that they do; of.
ten results in suicide to escape fame ed enc
mics; if person did kill another he W -uld be
likely to give his phantom as the cause,
Q-Assuming the evidence to be true
tradictions; he can't assume both sides to be
true.
Mr.. secombe-I is the same question you
asked.
Mr.. Erwin-There was no contradiction at
that time.
A lengthy argument ensued as to whether
there was any direct conflict.
The court held that if the prosecution as
sumed, to the switness sthat all the evidence
was true, the inquiry would be a proper one.
The question was then amended.
| Q-Assuming the testimony introduced up
| to the time the experts for the defense were
put on the stand, to be true, in your opinion,
at the time of the shooting, was the defend
ant 80 much under the effects of the use of
alcohol aslthat he did not know what he was
doing.
Objected to. Mr.. Irwin insisted that the
| question should be, was he suffering from de-
llrium, not regarding the grade of the disease
and condition of his mind.
Judge Shaw suggested that if the question
of the condition OF the mans mind should be
one which the jury should finally be called on
to decide, It would hardly be proper question
| to ask this witness.
a measure, usurp the rights of the jury.
The question was again amended so that
| the latter portion should read: In your opin-
ion had the defendant delirium tremens?
| The witness replied regarding his under
standing of some of the testimony, and there
being a misunderstanding, the reporter was
directed to look it up, during the noon hour,
and the court took recess until 2 p. m.
AFTERNOON.
The court reassembled at 2 o'clock. j..
Mills, who had charge of the workmen III the
Minneapolis & st. Louis car shops, was called
and testified to telling John Toohey on the
night previous to the murder that he must go
to work, and that Toohey thereupon started
towards the shops as he had supposed to 60 to
work as usual,
EXPERT TESTIMONY RESUMED.
Dr.. Evans was again called. Tooheys evil
dence was read TO him by the court reporter,
when he answered the query propounded at
the forenoon session, as follows:
| There were some symptoms of delirium
tremens; don't think the evidence establishes
! the disease as matter of fact; it is exceeding
| ly difficult to draw the dividing line between
testimony of what occurred on the morning
of the homicide, see no convincing evidence
of delirium; patients usually remember the
real; | think there are various degrees or
stages of delirium tremens.
Crosse xaminatioE-In many cases of de-
lirlum tremens, the patient is sometimes
garrulous, and is sometimes sulen, morose
and stupid; will arise from his bed and search
for an imaginary foe; perform grotesque ma
neuvers; can at all times be recalled from his
attacks to perfect saueness by the voice OF au-
thority; I heard the testimony of Mary
| Toohey; did not remember hearing her testify
to the wild looks of her father on the night
previous to the murder; remembered she tes-
titled to his residences; remembered she testi-
talking" when no one was talking;
heard the son testify to his father frequently
putting his hand on his pistol. (The attorney
for the defense Intercepted the prisoner re-
pecting his hearing the testimony of the son
seriatum.)
Question-How can you account for these
decisions except delirium?
Answer-Drunkennes and jealousy; jeal-
ousy is combination of passions; it is not
with the case in point to make
the man a coward; when under the
influence Of liquor coupled with jealousy
the man might entertain delusions the only
reason have for thinking the man cowardly
is derived from the fact that he carried are
volver; one of the characteristics OF a drunk
ard is that they repeat many times the same
things; one moment they will be all right and
in the next they will want to fight; if he gets
an idea upon his mind is very liable to carry
| It to an extreme; in regard to
keeping tho family up the night
before the murder it accounts from then
fact that 1t is characteristic of drunken
men to be contrary and ugly; man under
the influence of liquor is not accurate in
anything, and might think someone was still
talking after they had ceased talking; man
may have Authorizations without the presence
of delirium tremens; from the testimony
cannot say that the man was troubled with
Authorizations; think a man actuated by
drunkenness aggravated by jealousy would
be very liable to act as Toohey did; it is di f.
icult to tell just what drunken man would
do; it might have been symp-
toms of delirium~ tremens; peering
out of the window would not necessarily
have been symptoms of delirium tremens;
wishing persons to sit up with him all night
would not from necessity be a symptom of
delirium tremens; perpetual drinking would
not necessarily induce delirium tremens;
sometimes moderate drinking superinduces
delirium tremens; have heard of instances of
ceasing the use of tobacco inducing the NAL.
ady.
The attorney then propounded an exhaus-