The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1895-09-08
Position Revolver Must Have Been
Held 60 Have Caused the Wound.


Position Revolver Must Have been
Held 90 Have Caused the Wound.
The contention OF the State in this noted
trial Is that Mr.. Hinshaw. after numbering
his wife. inflicted wounds upon himself TO
give further crederce TO his story OF an at
tack by burglars. The nature OF his wounds
and a minute description was furnished by
DIR. Dryden. in response 90 the numerous
questions Of the attorneys. and the most inn
portant conclusion that might be drawn
from the description OF the wound in Mr..
Hinshaw's shoulder was that he himself
fired the shot that caused the injury. The
bullet taken from the body OF Hinshaw
was produced by the State. having been OBJ
tanned from DIR. Dryden. who refused TO
surrender it to the prosecutors except on
the advice OF Mr.. Hinshaw's counsel. The
Doctor admitted at the beginning of the att
ernoon session that the bullet struck the
minister's body at an angle; that from its
course it could not nave been fired from a
pistol or revolver the muzzle OF which was
pointed directly at the body.
Mr.. Span unro,led a bundle he had at his
feet. and from it took a torn, red under
shirt. the one the minister wore on the
night Of the tragedy. In it was the hole
H " < AH[ D4AAt 80
prosecution, stood in front of the jury,
while Mr.. spaan played the part of the
modiste. draping the garment to his asso-
ciate, after borrowing pins from various
court officials. After the bullet hole was
supcrimposed to a relative position on Mr..
Cully's body. Mr.. Spaan asked the Doctor
TO examine the faint marks of a stain about
the edge of the puncture. The Doctor adj
mitted that the garment had been washed
since the murder, and was not certain the
stain was caused by a powder burn. He
corroborated his statement before the cor
oner that he thought both shots fired at
Mr.. Hinshaw were fired at practically the
same range. He said there was not the
slightest danger of the bullet that caused
the lower wound entering beneath the rib.
which detected it's course
The witness then arose, and grasping the
revolver which Mr.. Span had produced,
explained the manner in which the weapon
must have been held TO have produced a
wound of such a description The weapon
was I'm the Doctors right hand, with the
muzzIe pointed to his left breast at an
angle that would have carried the bullet
through into the arm near the shoulder
bone. The Doctor reiterated his statement.
upon the request OF Mr.. Spaan, that this
was the probable position in which the
revolver was held. The course Of the breast
wound had been upward, while that OF the
lower wound was downward. The prosecu-
ton contends that this helps prove their
theory that Hinsnaw inflicted both wounds
upon himself. Within two weeks after his
wounds had been dressed the minister had
left his home for Winchester.
The witness was then crOSS-examined AT
length as TO his knowledge OF cerebral
localization, the prosecution maintaining
that they had a right TO thoroughly inquire
- <L.. -, .-1or 70 Hafarrnfno tho Cn1ln6-
ness of the Doctors opinion and the COR
rectness of his statements on the stand In
the morning. The Doctor had testified that
the wound in Mrs. Hinshawss head would
not necessarily bring about complete I'M
consciousness or paralysis. He was asked
to describe the various convolutions that
are supposed to govern speech. locomotion
and other functions of the body. speech
was controlled just above the templar LOBE,
but he could not exactly locate the convolu-
ton. Mr.. Span asked him what authori-
ties he had read in gaining his knowledge
Of the brain Dr., Dryden s SAID me ne n nond re,
Lancet by DR.. Semm, an eminent authority.
he had read this since. the muir
thorities from which he had gained
his information. Mr.. Span named over a
number of authorities, but the Doctor DID
Mr.. Spaan that the ascending parietal con-
trolled the lower extremities. He didn't
admitted that ne did not know a great
deal about cerebral localization, qualifying
his statement TO show, that he knew ABOUT
as much as a man who did not nave the
advantage Of special study in this direc-
ton
that Mrs. Hinshaw could not have talked
and moved after receiving. the wound. as
her husband insists she did. The Doctor
thought It was possible ar SO ne y; sa,d . IN w rsp,g
such as Mrs. Hinshaw received TO- walk,
talk and fight a burglar. He could not
a comparison by the number of possible
cases In a thousand. He was sure that
there nort nave Of oe the motto motor area Of the brain
fniured. nave walked. The witness admitted
that he appeared on the war records as a
hospital steward, though he had acted in
the capacity, at times, of regimental sur
geon.
coIoration of Mrs. Hinshaw's left eye- The
witness testified that blood ~coagulates more
rapidly in cold than in warm weather:
The conversation the witness had with the
preacher when he dressed his wounds after
the tragedy was brought out in detail. The
preacher had told the witness that a move
ment OF Mrs. Hinshaw in the bed and some
noise awoke the husband. The wife arose
in bed and Hinshaw followed her a second
later. Fer a moment the minister saw the
impression was. so he inforueed the wit
ness. that he had grappled with the in
truder. who was striving 10 get out of the
room the preacher and the burglar had a
dog fall" Then the other burglar ap-
peared on the scene and m 10 Sepa-
rate the preacher and burglar No. l. He
was successful. and the three went back
into the east room. Hinshaw did not re-
member which coor he passed through in
pursuing burglar No. l into the street. The
preacher remembered going through the
woodhouse gate and scuffiing with burglar
No. / in the street. He told the witness he
was trying TO capture the burglar; not &c
harm him. Hinshaw. upon reaching the
opposite side OF the street. tried TO throw
The burglar across a fence. The witness
dropped somewhat into his W impressions
while relating the story as told &c