New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1893-12-16
TO 90 TO THE JURY MONDAY.
THE TAKING OF TESTIMONY IN THE MEYER
CASE ENDED.
NEITHER THE PRISONER NOR HIS WIFE PUT on
THE WITNESS sTAND-How TIE DEFENDANT

NEITHER THE PRISONER NON HIS WIFE f'i ON
THE WITNESS sTAND-How TIE DEFENDANT
HAS BORNE THE STRAIN OF THE TRIAL.
There is no defence In the Meyer case. Both
s,des have closed and the arguments VIII be
heard the charge delivered and the case sent
TO the jury on Monday. Yesterday belonged to
the defendant but nc made no other use OF 1t
than to adducc medical and chemical expert
testimony as 20 points which are not denied by
the state and which. ! ad the case gone to the
iury at the moment when the prosecution rested
would have been already proved or conceded
ca that II Is literally true to say that there
Is no defence beyond the mere claim that the
State has not made out its case. The defendant
did not take the stand. Neither did his wife.
No effort was made to contradict any Of the
tremendous array OF facts which the prose-
cution had rnarshalled to accuse and condemn
the prisoner. They go to the jury as facts. and
II does not seem open to doubt. if their minds
have been open to the truth. that Meyer will be
promptly convicted
We looks as If he entertained little hope
of another result. His sharp, angular face has
grown more pnched and thin daily since the
trial began. The yellow tint OF his complexion
has sensbly de,pened. The skin has seemed
10 contract over his face. as II its preserving
fluids were rapidly evaporating. His large
objectionable. feature he possesses have lost
some of the almost poisonous lustre they possess
ed when he first confronted a talesman. He
shows no nervousness-indeed. no feeling He
seems to be trying to take whatever fate has
in store for him with mans equanimity. and
If his appearance suggests his sensations they
will not be very acute, whether he Is sent out
OF the courtroom q free man or condemned to
q murderers grave.
MR. CIIANLER'S SPEECH
Mr. Chanler. his Junior counsel. made an I'M
expectedly strong speech at the opening. NJ
CHAMBERS apparent dfdence during the trial
has amounted almost to apparent timidity, and
when he turned upon Mr.. Nicol and babe him
remember that 1t was more important for justice
to be done the prisoner al the bar than for Mr.
Nicor to leaYe office in blaze Of glory with
third poisoning case successfully tried to his
credit 1t was clear that Mr.. Chanler had much
more audacity than any one could have sus-
pected. More. too. than was creditable to him.
The manliness of an attack depends upon us
character When Mr. Chanler told the jury
that at one stage of the case. meaning the oc-
casion when argument was made for post
ponement of the trial. Assistant Distrlct-At-
torney Mcintyre stated in open court that MI
Nicoll wanted to conduct the trial personally
because he was about to go out OF once anu
wanted to go out with another victory-wheh
Mr.. Chanler said this ne said what Is widely
denied by those who were present, Including
Mr.. Mcintyre, and what is certainly dificuit
to believe -
In anv event It was the kind Of attack that all
who know Mr. Nicol. not excepting the puohc
whom he has so effectively served, Will be sure
~ denrecate Mr. Nicol has been jealous
prosecutor. and may possibly stand at the head
of the long list of NETWORKS District-Attorneys
for the number of verdicts obtained In compare
son with the number Of indictments tried' pu'
he Is neither so vain nor so heartless as MI
Chanler undertook to paint him. The TACT was
duly reported in The Tribune that the Assistant
Observation-Disclosures opening was impoli'c IN '"e
merciless character of the attack II mace OH
the prisoner but all that was said In opening
would now be amply justified in sumnihs-up'
Mr. CHAMBERS retaliation was not at al III
kind 1t was an unwarrantape anu ui'p''
voiced attack on the District-Attorney as
man. and it can scarcely have done 'he pi'So"e'
any other than hard service.
Except in this aspect, Mr.. Chanler maze d
good speech a much better one than was eH-
,,oo,ed of him. He had the silent but quite per-
cantibIe sympathy Of an interesting company OF
Murray Hill young ladies in pretty gowns ana
stv,,sh hats He had also the close attention oi
the Jury: and If, to support 1t, he had heid any
evidence in reserve. it must have been an erect
i've opening He said he denied that the oouy
hurled was the body of Baum, but since the
case was closed without evidence to make 'he
denial more than rhetorical claim IL can nave
no weight He substantially admitted .na' ~, ,n =
nrisoner and his wife. Muller and Baum mao
Pnn engaged in a conspiracy to defraud IN
surance companies. but in the absence oi pr. ~.
that murder was not the means iisb W ,ith Raum
conspiracy was finally accomplished WIN DauI'
conyerted from a participant in it into victin,
Of It. Muers evidence that Meyer admihis.e .0s
the poisons and acknowledged to MIN the ih'eh-
ton to kill Baum stands uncontrauicteu'
THE PRISONER AND HIS WIFE HAVE RECORDS
Tho n,a,n exclamation of the omission Of the
nrisoner and his wife to go on the stand Is tha'
thev have records which they could not submit
IN cross-examination without fatal results. Inc
defence knew that the State was in possession
of these records, and nothing remained LOT 'iie
defendant to do except to seek to persuade 'he
fury that the States evidence uncontradicteu
necessarily left a reasonable doubt as TO tne
prisoners guilt. Medical and scientihc men WEI,
produced more or less well qualined by tne'i
claimed experience to speak as experts VINO saio
in response to a hypothetical question. deciaIlis
Baums symptoms and the iact ina. NE mat attend
ing him during his illness Tor acute oysen.I,y .
that in their opinion, dysentery was the caust
NJ death: and that they were not shaken IN ina
on,n,on nv the mere fact that from six TO ter
grains of anthony and two to three grams VI
arsenic were extracted from MS body aItei
death. and that there was no satisfactory way
of ascertaining from the presence OF poisons IL
q dead body whether their entrance INTO Una
roJv mad heen effected before or after death
All this would have been pertinent ana vaiu
able II proof had been afforded that the drug Tue
had really got into Baum's body aiter ne aleu
hut no such evidence having been given and th'
Affirmative proof in the case being that t ne
were administered during the progress o. ans ais
ease originally caused by toxic dose OF crotoi
oil and that fact having been omitted from thei
bvpotheticai question. the opinions OF these ex
nerts q re opinions of case which Is not peior'
Hel's nnd which II II were, would involve
them in no controversy whatever with the
States experts.
DETAILS OF THE PROCEEDINGS.