St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1893-03-07
RE-TRIAL OF PEARCE
Rapid Roadway Recorded in
the Second Effort to Sc
cure Conviction.
Advocate Erwin Manages the
Defense, but Says Very
Little.
The Dead Woman'S Husband
Goes Over His SorroWful
Story Again.
Critical Cross Examination
on Technical Questions and
Possibilities.


There was rapid progress made yes
terday in the trial of DIR. Thomas j.
Pearce, accused of causing the death of
Helen Clayton in an attempted abor-
ton. w. w. Erwin occupied the seat
filled by Mr.. McCafferty at the former
trial, and G.. p. Brown conducted the
cross-eXaminatIon of the states wit
nesseS. Mr.. Erwin did not InterpoSe as
many objections as did MIR. McCaiferty,
but he held frequent conversations with
his associate, Mr.. Brown. and directed
the crOSS-eXaminatiOn to great degree.
The county attorney made his opening
speech to the jury during the forenoon.
after the remaining juror had been
secured.
At the opening of the afternoon ses-
sion, John Douglass Clayton, the hus-
band of the woman who died SO prema-
Iurely, was called to the stand. and IN
three-Ouarters of an hour detailed the
story of his wife's going with HIM to the
Office of DR.. PeaTce, where the Grim
inal operation Is claimed to bave been
performed, and ending III the death or
his Young wife one week after the
operation. MIR. Clayton told identlcally
the same story as detailed by him III the
former trial. He was submitted to
more searching crOSS-eXaminatiOn than
before. with the result that he strength
ened his testimony i'll chief very
materially.
During the afternoon DIR. Herbert
III ? In ttrTr Gro M
aud testified to having treated Mrs.
CLAYTON from the morning after the
criminal operation until her death. lie
detailed The course of the disease and
what lie found upon pOst-mOrtem
examination. He testified that death
was caused by blood poisoning, induced
by the abortion. He found The presence
of septic9mia the day after the oper-
alton, and it developed and extended
until death came. on Dec. % last.
DR.. Davis was subjected To very eX-
tended crOss-eXamination, which eX-
tended TO the night session of the court,
Much or the crOss-eXaminatiOn was of
technical character, and several dis
putes arose between the county attOr-
ney and Mr.. Brown for the defense.
During this examination the defense
asked questions based OH supposed
causes OF the sensitiveBeSS of Mrs. Clay
ton at the time of the operation. Mr..
Brown stated in
Arguing the Objections
TO his questions that it is claimed by the
defense that Mrs. Clayton had taken
drugs and the fOetus had been expelled
before Dec. 10 last. This was a new
declaration in the case. The point had
been but Indefinitely limited at in the
former trial, but 10 attempt was then
made to prove such theory.
Asked as to the cause of pain aboat
the time the operation was claimed to
have been performed, before the inStru-
ment was used, DR.. Davis said it might
have been timidity.
Would timidity cause pain?" asked
Mr.. Brown.
DIR. Davis replied: Yes; or rather
the expression similar to that caused by
pain"
DR.. Davis was then asked as to the
pOSt-mOrtem examination, and espe-
cially if he had examined the stomach.
The county attorney objected to ask
ing as to the examination of the stom-
ach for cause of death, and said that If
a man was shot through the heart it
would not he necessary to examine the
SlOilutil lOl TIC NdNSC VI uNshAHs
Mr.. Brown explained that he did not
desire to crticiSe the autopsy of DR..
Davis. as it was conducted under the
direction of the coroner. No reflection
was intended as to DR.. Davis. The
county attorney asked what then was
the purpose of the questions as to the
examination of the stomach for the
presence of poison, or whether the pres
ence of poison in the stomach would not
cause death. Judge Kelly would not
permit these questions as to poison, but
said when any evidence tending to show
that poison had been introduced into
the stomach was offered he would have
the witness recalled for crOSS-eXamina-
ton on that point.
Asked as to what would cause infam-
nation of the organs, DR.. Davis replied:
Just what did cause it,
Acute Blood POIsoningo
The question was asked if there is a
difference between death by septic 8mia
and by other diseases. and to explain
the difference. The objection to this
question by the county attorney brought
Mr.. Erwin TO his feet TO urge that Dir.
Davis be directed to give the symptoms
of death by blood poisoning. Mr.. Erwin
asserted that he claimed that the death
OF the woman was caused by the shock
from the use of the curette and not by
septic &c mia.
A number of questions were asked
DR.. Davis. to which Judge Kelly sus-
tanned objections. and finally said to
Mr.. Brown: You continue to cross
examine IN your own croSs-eXamination,
which is not permissible"
On redirect examination, DR.. Davis
said that in his Opinio II septic@mia was
present when he first called on the
woman the morning after the operation,
and that the embryo was discharged
between his first and second calls. lie
administered digitalis or stryehnia a
day or two before death to stimulate
heart action.
On a further cross-eXamination, DIR.
Davis said that he found embryonic
tissue. which was evidence of the Ovum.
At this point there was a running COM
ment. III which all the attorneys, the
court and the witnesses mingled in a
discussion. The court insisted that the
defense was travelling around repeat
edly in a circle. Shortly after 9 O'Clock
last night court adjourned until 10
o'clock this morning.
Spring Hats and Spring Overeoats
At the plymouth corner" Seventh
opd ROhprt StrpptS