The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1892-03-03
A 0 @ DAY FOR BAKER.
DE-. rarIoR,s EyIDEycE KEDUr7ED.
Tho Tcstimony of Professors Maiict and
Jarman Create Quite "a sensation-'"
clnia Affairs in General.

Aryxcpov. Va. March 2.-lSpecial.l-Dr
Baker entered the court room TINS noFninl
with n firm step. He is looking better thai
he did when the trial began. Examination o
Dr Taylor was continued. lie was asked ]
he thought the parts Of the body taken ~ef'
sualcien, for a complete ANALYSIS. 10 which h'
replied that he took oil that lie thought wa'
necessary and did not have cause to Telio'
not having taken more. ~
The witness was then cross examiner. He
was first asked about his connection WIN VIZ
case and his duties "a State chemist ~ a"'i
there was no salary attached to the oinGc wy
that its duties consist chiefly IN "hat ~tns
soils. etc. lie was asked 10 DESCRIBE aSai. Hm 20
several analyses Of the organs tor sulenn
and arsenic and his analysis OF the
fluid furnished by Dir. BALDWIN.
THy cgLoRArE or POTASH.
TT. MN. ouestioned infinitely about tne
1hi"..no ~ po,ash found in the fluid. lie
"a go. ,ho,ouchly commit himself on the
srh;sc, INT said there certainly was a emo
IA. ~ some sort and he was very certain IL
wss chloride of potash. The next important
tonic was the redness OF the stomach ana inc
ca,ses of that redness. The witness hau shi9
on his chief examination tnst sisen'o Inyooaeu
alter death would not produce the same ap-
nssrance as when administered during lie.
lie was asked: rs your opinion subject 10
obsngesr "Yes nv opinion could be changed
Inv good authorities is Nlteraus "a good
snnt6ority,p Yes" The book was produced
aud examined by the witness anu ne aoih''.oa
that IL differed from his own experience, but
he could not think of any theory that would
account for such effect of arsenic on dead
tissue.
pEroRK AM AFTER DEATH.
The last question asked the witness was
about his best judgment az 10 whether the
arsenic found was administered before or
after death. This Is his exact answer: We'll,
n il inst as | said yesterday. with all the limi-
tations put on II Yesterday. The best judgment
| could make is that the arsenic reached
the stomach and liver before death. That IS
my best Judgment, but considering that the
body had been buried twenty-one days. and
that the embalming fluid contained arsenic.
and with all the difficulties | had detailed TO
you. ! consider M judgment in that partcu-
lar so hampered that | can scarcely put any
confidence init"
Dr. Taylor was the last important witness
Of the prosecution. The prevailing opln-
ion is that they have not made out a. stIohs
" case as at the former triai.
THE DEFESsE's TURN SOW.
The defense at the afternoon session began
the examination OF Witnesses.
Professor Jarman. professor OF chemistry
at Emory and Henry College, said: Il made
All analysis of an embalming fluid said TO have
been the same us that with which Mrs. Baker
was embalmed. found ziIc. chioridecOrrOslye
sublimate. white arsenic alum nltrates and
tarbrates. but no potassium chlOrate. Inc
CELEBRATES were wholly wanting lie then
described the various tests be made. oil OF
which failed to reveal potassium chlOrate. lie
considered these tests conclusive. ana ne
could only account Tor the fact that DR.. lay
Tor found none. they supposing that the nulds
were different. or that either his, Dr. IayIors,
analysis was faulty. He was subjected to a
very rigid cross-examinatlon and sustained
himself with credit.
PROFESSOR MALLRT TEsTIFIEs.
Professor Mallet, professor of chemistry OF
the University of Virginia, was then intro
duced and was asked:
DC you consider the analysis that D-.
Taylor made of the embalming fluid for
chlorate of potash as concluslve!"
II do not, if there was any organic matter
present"
DO YOU attach any importance TO the APP
pearance of the stomach twenty-one months
after death as indicating whether arsenic was
administered heretofore or after death
IL do not"
Do you attach any Importance to the pres
ence of arsenic in a body twenty-One months
after death when the body was embalmed
with q fluid containing arsenic;
Il do not. | think that the fact that an
embalming fluid was used vitiates any chemi-
cal evidence of a%rsenical poisoning. while all
anatomical evidences are vitiated by the pro-
cess of decay"
A GOOD DAY FOR BAKER.
These were the most important points of
DIR. Mallet's testimony. lie fully sustained
the analyses of Professor Jarman. and the
most rigid cross examination failed to shake
his testimony in the least. The prevailing
opinion is that this is the best day Dr. Baker
has had since he was arrested. The expert
testimony will be continued tomorrow morn
ing.
A sensation was produced by the testimony
Of Professors Mallet aud Jarman.
DELAYED by the Storm.