Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1886-06-03
TsE MAXWELL CASE.
Judge Van Wagner's Charge 10 tn
Jury

/
| Jury.
ST.. LOUIS, May 27.-In the MAXWELL
Preller murder trial to-day the prisoner
again took the stand. He admitted hav-
| ing conversed with Mccullough, the de-
tective, while in prison, but characterized
McCullough's testimony in court in re-
gard to confession as ''an infamous ~
from beginning to end"
The remainder of the day was spent in
the cross-examination of Maxwell by Dis
trict Attorney Glover. This brought out
all of Maxwelrs shortcomings in rather
pronounced manner, but no change of
any consequence was made in Maxwells
direct testimony.
The further promised sensation in the
trial has been uncovered and consists in
the fact that after it was definitely learned
that Maxwell would acknowledge the Kill
ling, claiming it to be the result of an &C
cident in treating Preller for structure, the
prosecution had the remains exhumed and
the parts dissected. The body was found
to be well preserved, having been en-
balmed before burial, and the parts which
Maxwell claimed were diseased were dis
sected, with the result that not the slight
est trace of disease of any kind was
found. Three physicians will go on the
stand in the rebutttl and testify tothis.
ST. LOUIS, June 1.--Judge Van Wagner
at the adjournment of the criminal court
last evening, stated that he would be
ready to read his instructions to the Jury
trying the Maxwell case at ten o'clock
this morning, but it was an hour after
that time before he appeared in court.
The Jury received the instructions stand
ing and gave the prisoner better oppor-
tunity to search in their countenances
some expression of leniency. The jury
listened attentively to the words of
the Judge, but betrayed no hint OF n con-
viction as to whether the defendant was
guilty or innocent. Maxwell appeared
more nervous than usual, not fixing his
attention upon the words of the Judge,
but dividing it between the latter, the
jury, his attorneys and the audience.
The Judge, in his instructions, said that
if the jury should find that the defendant
did kill and murder Charles Arthur
Preller in the manner and form charged
in either of the counts of the indictment,
they should return a verdict of guilty of
murder in the first degree. If, however,
the evidence showed the defendant mn
dertook to treat or operate npon Pre1ler
for disease and administered chic
reform SO negligently, carelessly
and recklessly as to cause
his patients death, but without
intent TO kill or do bodily harm, then
they should bring in verdict of man.
slaughter in the fourth degree. The Judge
further instructed the jury that if it had
been shown that Preller desired the de-
PENDANT to treat him for the disease indi-
Gated in the testimony, and submitted
himself voluntarily to such treatment, and
that the defendant administered the chic
reform in careful, cautious and prudent
manner, then q verdict of not guilty
should be returned and should acquit the
defendant. The judge also informed
the jury that verdict of guilty could be
returned upon circumstantial evidence
alone. If, however, the evidence should
show that the defendant had made any
statement regarding his guilt or inno-
cence, the defence should be entitled to
the benefit of what he had said for him.
self, and the state should be entitled to
what he had said against himself. The
remainder of the instructions was devoted
to defining various legal terms. Upon
the conclusion of the judges speech Mr..
Bishop, of counsel for the state, began
the speech. making. He will be followed
in the order named by Mr.. Fauntleroy of
the defence, Mr.. Mcdonald of the prose-
cution, Mr.. Martin of the defence, and
Mr.. Glover of the prosecution. 1t is ex-
pected that the case will not be given to
the jury before Thursday next at noon.