Fairhaven herald. [volume] (Fairhaven, Wash.) 1890-????, 1892-03-31
LONG STILL ON TRIAL
Expert Testimony On Poison
ing BY StrYchnine offered
BY the Defense
Evidence of Emotional lnsan-
ity At Time Crime Was
Committed
Local Doctors Testify to Symp-
toms of Great Mental
Strain

The first witness called yesterday
morning i'm the Long murder trial was
John Burke, the baker who was
charged with having sold the loaf con.
tanning strychnine. He met Long the
day after he had eaten a piece of the
bread, and from him learned that il
| had contained some bitter stuff which
neither he nor Long could account for.
The day following he went to the
house and saw Mrs. Long, whom he
asked for the balance of the loaf that
he might investigate the stuff supposed
at that time to be poison. Mrs. Long
not being able to find more than one
slice of the loaf, he went to Lemm's
store, from whom the loaf had been
bought, and Mrs. Long soon came to
the store with the remainder of the
bread.
The white material found in the loaf
was examined 10y Mr.. Lemm and him
self and a portion Of it preserved to
show to a chemist for analysis. He
swore that the loaf which contained
the poison was not from his bakery.
as upon breaking it open it was found
to contain a different flour from that
used by him.
Upon crOss-eXamination, witness
testified to hard feeling existing be-
tween local bakers and a belief on his
part, at the time Of the discovery Of
the poison, that it had been put there
by parties desirous Of injuring his busi-
ness.
The poison could not have been put
i'm after baking as it was scattered
through the loaf i'm all portions and
must have been in the dough before
baking.
Can you swear poison was put in be-
fore baking?
Yes.
Did you tell White, the druggist,
that the bread was from your bakery?
No.
Witness here testified 70 having been
called into Attorney Fairchild's office
on a subpoena and compelled to give
his testimony on the bread question.
II. A. White, the druggist who made
the analysis of the white particles
found in the bread brought him by
Burke, was the next witness called. He
explained the effect of heat and moist
ure on strychnine and how it wonld be
effected by baking in a loaf of bread.
A little amount of heat or moisture
would cause it to change form, would
it not?
Yes sir.
Witness stated a conversation be-
tween himself and Burke, who was
very much excited over the discovery
ofthe poison and endeavored to obtain
Whites Assistance i'm locating the par
ties who had placed it i'm the bread.
The bottle of strychnine, which had
been found in Mrs. Longs cloak pocket,
was presented to witness who recog-
nized it as the same one brought to him
some four or five weeks ago by Mr.
Newman.
He described the bottle as a one
drachm strychnine vial and informed
the Jury that that class and size of bot
tie was the customary package for the
poison, and always bore a cautiOnary
label which had been partially de-
stroyed on this vial.
In what quantities did you find
in the loaf Of bread you ex-
amined?
In a little packet less than a cubic
inch, there was perhaps three grains and
more scattered through the loaf.
Did you weigh it?
No.
How much did the bottle contain?
One drachm or sixty grains.
How much was there in the entire
loaf?
Perhaps one-half drachm, or half the
contents Of the vial.
The bottle half full of the deadly poi
son was here examined and placed i'm
charge of the clerk.
w. A. Hardy, a chemist of six years
experience, was next called, and testi-
fled to an extensive acquaintance with
poisons and drugs. He testified that
this bottle was brought to him by Mr..
Newman. He analyzed its contents at
his request and found it to contain sui
phate Of strychnine, which is deadly
poison, ,one-half grain being sufficient to
produce fatal results.
Mr. Hardy here explained the effect
of strychnine on the human system,
and the manner in which symptoms of
poisoning were first made evident and
made the customary test analysis of
the poison before the jury to better ex'
plain his authority for declaring it
strychnine.
Mrs. Brown, the next witness called,
identified the bottle of poison as the one
found in Mrs. Longs cloak
+. i. Collier, county auditor. was
called and testified to Longs conversa-
ton with him during November, at
which time he Long) cautioned the
auditor against recording a deed of his
property which might be brought to
the Office, as forgery as such a paper
was expected to be made by his son-in-
law or wife.
He could not swear to the identity Of
Long.
Judge Palmer, who married Humes
and Ida WINS next called TO sfafe the