Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1895-05-14
DIR. KERsHNER's TRIAL.
The Opening Session Marked With Ex.
citing Incidents.


The objection of the defense in the court
martial Of DR.. Kershner at Brooklyn yes
terday to written testimony as described
in The Stars kilograms, was sustained.
This was regarded as big advantage by
Dr. Kershrer's lawyers.
The first witness was Lieut.. Harry P.
Huse. who was judge advocate at the
court of inquiry on board the Z. s. g. New
York. He testified to the order Of the ad-
mfral and read the newspaper reports Of
the refusal of DR.. Kershner 10 send as
sistance to the bark asking for a doctor,
and the co-resr ondence which the doctor
Is accused of making public. He said the
court of inquiry was held on Saturday,
April 6. and the following Monday on the
New York, while lying off Kingston, ia
maica, DR.. Kershner was sworn as wit
ness before that court by Capt. Glass,
who was president of the court. This was
on the afternoon Of April 9. He read the
oath which was administered to all the
witnesses. He examined DR.. Kershner and
interrogs ted him in reference to the state
member the exact language DR.. Kershner
used, but he remembered the substance.
He looked at the record which he had
written at the time.
Lieut. Loucheiner asked him il 1t was q
true record of the proceedings. but Mr..
Choate jumped to his feet and protested.
Mr. Hinsdale insisted that the record
was not true and correct report of the
full proceedings, and until the witness had
exhausted his recollection on the facts he
had not been permitted to refresh his men,
ory from his report.
Lieut.. Loucheimcr got very angry and
exclaimed: This Is my witness, and I OBJ
ject to the defense laying out the line of
the prosecution"
After this tilt between counsel. the ex-
aminat ton of the witness was continued
81 Sudden
he could not rer;ember the exact words
used. and when he was requested by the
judge advocate To look at the record, Mr.
Choate objected.
The objection was overruled.
Lieut.. Huse then read the several ques-
tions put to DR.. Kershner at the court of
respondence came into the possession of the
press. DR.. Kershner denied having any
knowledge of the manner in which the
facts leaked out
When Mr.. Choate began his cross-exam-
nation. he asked the witness to show him
the record which he had referred to.
When Mr.. Choate got the document he
said: Now, will you please tell what
DR.. Kershner said at the inquiry, without
looking at this paper?"
The witness did not relish the request.
but he went ahead and did the best he
could. He repeated the doc tors denials as
to having made public the letter and in
dorsement which appeared in the news
papers.
took notes In pencil and afterward tran
scribed them. After reading the transcript
to the board it was accepted as the origi-
nal record of the inquiry and the pencil
notes were destroyed.
did you take down everything that oc-
CURED at he inauiry?"
Yes. l took down all the answers and
questions after had cautioned DIR. Kersh-
ner.''
Never mind your caution. I want to
know did you take down everything
We'll, DIR. Kershner conversed, COM
menting on his answers. and did not take
down his conversation"
With whom did DIR. Kershner con-
verse;"
some hesitation.
He could nor recollect the words DR..
kershner spoke in addition to his an
swers. but he was sure they were not re-
sponsive. He could not give the substance
of the words. He read over the questions
and answers to Dr. Kershrer when he
wrote them down. and put down only what
Dr. kershnsr wanted put down.
Mr.. Choate got the witness to admit that
he had held two conversations about the
case with the Judge advocate before the
trial besa1. and the little lieutenant siren
uously objected to Mr.. Choate's line of
pired during these conversations or what
documents We're shown to the witness. All
these objections were sustained.
In reply to Mr.. Choate, the witness said
that he could not recollect any questions
which he asked the doctor, but everything
that was IN the record was correct. He
said that Or. Kershner had admitted that
he had written home, and that he was in
some kind of trouble.
Delevan V. Bloodgood. retired medical
director of the navy, was the next witness.
He said he received a letter from DR..
Kershner in March last, but he tore. it up
soon after he had answered it. There were
Enclosures il the letter, which he also de-
stroyed, after having shown them to
friff but =, ,1l
them. To the best of his belief. there was
a copy of Capt Evans report, and there
were also two Endorsement papers shown
to the witness. and he said the Enclosures
were substantial copies of the papers
handed him by the judge advocate. These
were the Evans report and the indorse-
ments mentioned in the charges and speci-
fications.
On cross-examination by Mr.. Hinsdale he
said that the Enclosures were substantially
the same as those which subsequently ap-
peared in a morning paper, but he did not
compare them.
Did you give the letter or Enclosures to
the paper?'
II did not" replied the witness. 81 have
known DR.. Kershner since 1861. and it is
the custom among officers in the navy to
write to each other about their troubles
and successes"
The court then adjourned until today.