Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1891-03-26

he said, could be detailed to the jury after
ward.
The court asked il i. were q written state
| ment
MEMORANDA By ONE PRESENT.
Mr.. Cole said that person who was present
| made memoranda ct the time.
Mr.. Wilson argued against the hearing Of the
preliminary testimony before the Jury. He
| thought that possible discussion Of testimony
| which might not go TO the jury ought not to take
place In the presence of the jury.
Mr.. Cole said he had no wish about the mat
| ter except to do 1t correctly. He held, how
ever, that in case the declaration was admitted.
II the defense had the right 70 rebut this pre-
limary testimony the rebutting testimony must
DC excluded from the iury, else all the testimony
Judge Bradley said he had never known in a
civil case jury to be excluded from the court
| room while testimony was taken to show the
| admisslbility of paper. He thought the jury
should be possessed Of all the information re-
| lating to the circumstances under which such
| declaration was made.
Mr. Cole said he could bring out all the testi-
mony as to the condition of Taulbees mind,
&c., without letting out the slightest intimation
| Is to the character of the declaration.
THE JUDoE's DECISION.
Judge Bradley decided TO have the testimony
taken in the presence of the jury.
The defense noted an exception.
DR.. Bayne. who was the first witness wanted
by the government on this point, not being
present the court took q recess until o'clock.
DIR. BAYNE As TO TAuLBKr's DYING STATEMENT.
When the court met at o'clock DR.. John W.
Bayne was among those sitting within the bar.
He was called at once to the stand by Mr.. Cole,
the district attorney. Mr.. Cole asked the wit
ness what Mr.. Tauibee's condition was Oh the
9TH and Sth days of March after the shooting.
There was some discussion as to the admission
OF the testimony, and MIR. Cole read
tho rules governing the admission Of dying
declarations. The witness said the prospect OF
Mr.. Iaulbees recovery on the 7th and Sth days
of March was very remote. He had not prior
to that time, so far as he could recollect, any
conversation with Taulbee as to the prospects
of recovery. He had had conversations with
Taulbee about his condition. After the 9Th,
when aphasia appeared, indicating brain trou-
BILE, the witness had little hope of his recovery.
Taulbee was under the impression during all
his illness that he had received mortal wound.
This impression did not continue at all times.
| There were times when Taulbee had and the
witness had hopes of recovery. The witness,
however. had no hopes Of recovery after the
/ 9Th of March.
Objection was made to admitting the witness
opinion, but the objection was overruled and
| the testimony admitted. An exception was
noted.
The witness, continuing, said that he did not
communicate to Taulbee his opinion of his case
after the 9th. Several times between the eta
and the 9Th Taulbee communicated to witness
| his (Taulbee's) opinion. Witness could not
remember Tauibees exact words. and the testi-
mony was not admitted.
He remembered on the 9Th that DR.. Taulbee
and Mr.. Taulbees son we're present. There was
| conversation in the presence of Taulbee
about a statement Taulbee had made and the
witness heard portion of the statement read
| to Taulbee. Taulbee was capable at that time
| Of understanding what was being read to him.
CONSTRAINED By MIR. WILSON.
DR.. Bayne was cross-examined by Mr.. Wilson.
He described the aphasia which afflicted Taul-
| bee after the 9Th. Taulbee knew his son. but
| would call him by the wrong name. He knew
witness, and it was manifest that he knew him,
but would call him also by the wrong name.
In cases of aphasia the doctor said a man
would use in the middle of q sentence a wrong
| or irrelevant word. The aphasia was
| symptom of disturbed condition of the brain.
| The brain had undergone certain changes;
| Inflammation had set in.
HOW TAULBEE's MEMORY WAS AFFECTED.
The aphasia, the witness continued, was the
! result of the injury to the brain, the infamma-
| ton of the membranes. Witness frs. noticed
| this symptom on the 9Th of March. 1t in
creased after that, but not very rapidly.
On the morning of the 9Th he was capable of
| conversing intslligibly, but would miscall
names. He could understand what was said to
| him. He was present while Taulbes was giving
| a statement of the occurrence.
Taulbee's brother was reading over q state
ment that had been made at some previous
time and Taulbee was making corrections in it
| as 1t had been written by his brother.
Witness had heard that others had
| been Their, to take Taulbee's statement. He
| torney. Mr.. Armes, there He thought this
was the 9th or 10th: Taulbee got into the con-
dition of coma on the evening of the 10TH
J On redirect examination the witness was
asked whether the aphasla affected Taulbee'
| memory. The witness said there we're times
| when his mind was SO affected that he would
not have been capable of giving an ineligible
| account of it. There were times, lucid inter-
| walls, when his mind was perfectly clear.
On the morning the Statement. was read Taul-
bee certainly had clear recollection Of what
| had occurred and could understand perfectly
what was said. When Mr.. Armes called the pa
| tent was in an excited condition and witness
| did not think it well at that time to disturb
him. 1t was at witness suggestion probably
that Mr.. Armes concluded to wait until a more
On a recross-examination the witness said he
| did not hear Taulbee express any hope of re-
covery after the 9Th of March.
DIR. JACKSON b. TAULBEK.
DR.. Jackson B. Taulbee of Mount Sterling.
Ky, was next called to the stand.
DIR. Taulbee, who is about thirty, was a
brother of ex-Representative Taulbee, and re-
| sembles him somewhat. He testified that be
/ first saw his brother at Providence Hospital on
| the evening of the first day after the shooting
| and remained with him constantly then until
| his death. The statement referred to was taken
| by witness on the morning of the 9Th of March,
| about or 8 o'clock. His brother was then
| very weak. There was no prospect of
| recovery. Prior to the time the state
| ment was made witness had converse
ton with his brother as to the prospects
Of the case. An objection to this testimony
his brother had frequently conversed about the
| case. Witness had told his brother that it was
his (witness's) opinion that he would not get
out of that bed; that he would not recover
His brother had said that he did not like to die
| that way.
HE told me-" said the witness, shat he be-
lieved he was going to die"
The witness was asked what impression the
deceased was under, as indicated by converse
| tons at the time he made the statement.
Objection was made and overruled
Witness said he expressed himself as beliey-
ing that he would die from the wound Wit
ness did not remember il he indicated when he
believed he would die.
Cross-examined by Gen. Grosvenor.-Dr.
Taulbee was cross-examined by Gen. Grosye-
nor. He said in the cross-examinatiou that he
believed when he first saw his brother that the
wound was fatal. His brother also expressed
such belief. His brother had at times hopeful mo-