The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1895-03-13
EVIDENCE IN.
The Hillmon Trial Nearing an End
Arguments Now to Come.

Arguments Now to Come.
The proceedings in the circuit court of
the United States opened yesterday morn
ing by the plaintiff reading the deposit
ton of Julius braves, of Wichita, which
was to the effect that when Hillmon left
Wichita March 5, 1879, that witness
noticed no one with him except John II.
Brown.
Mr.. Levi Baldwin was then called to
the stand. and testified that he was we'll
acquainted with the following witnesses
who have testified for the defense, hav-
ing known them for years: DR.. Phillips,
ME- Carr. Mr.. VIM. Brown, MIR. Bebout,
Mr. Griffith, Major Wiseman and Mr..
Buchan. Witness then stated that he
had no personal knowledge as to where
he was in the first fortnight of May,
1889.
Mrs. .Hillmon was the next rebuttal
witness for the plaintiff. She contradict
ed the testimony given by twelve wit
nesses for the defendants. She stated
that Hillmon used tobacco in no form. as
testified to by the defendants witnesses;
that she never requested Mr.. W. W.
Nichols, Hillmon's brother-inlaw, not to
tell on the witness stand that Hillmon
had a scar on his hand; that she never
stated in the presence of Mrs Nichols
(Hillmon's sister,, w. w. Nichols and
George A. Nichols (Hillmon's brothers.
in-law) and Mr. and Mrs. Nixon at the
Continental hotel at Leavenworth that if
they testified to Hillmon's having defec-
tive teeth and scar on the hand that
she would withdraw her suit and give
her husband up to the authorities for
prosecution, as testified to by these wit
nesses; that she never had conversation
with G.. w. E. Griffith about writing the
insurance companies, and never told
him that she had received a letter from
minister at Medicine Lodge, and never
told him that she did not want to see her
husbands body, all of which was testi-
fed to by Mr.. Griffith; that Mr.,
Borgalthus who had been her attorney
for years, never represented her or was
in consultation with her at the coroner's
inquest at Lawrence in 1879, as testified
to by a number of witnesses; that she
never said in the presence of Mr.. Buchan
that she had given the insurance policies
to Mr.. Wheat, as testified to by Mr..
Buchau, and that she never told Mr..
Buchan, as testified to by him, that Levi
Baldwin had promised to come with her
to Leavenworth, but had subsequently
refused. She denied that Photographer
Lamon took the tintype of her husband,
as testified to by Mr. Lamon.
The next witness was DR.. McVey, of
the Topeka Medical college. This wit
ness testimony was entirely expert testi-
mony, of no particular bearing beyond
his statement that from the time of the
vaccination, until the vaccine scab
dropped off, twenty to twenty five days
would usually elapse; that it was quite
easy to take the virus from a persons
arm and vaccinate a second person by
means of jack knife, and that that was
the old way of doing; that witness could
tell the difference between the original
and a secondary vaccine scab.
Mr.. F. o. Popenoe was the next wit
next witness called by the plaintiff Mr..
Popenoe read extracts from the evidence
taken down by him at the trial in 1885
before Judge Brewer and subsequently
transcribed, of the following witnesses,
the court having decided over defen-
dants' objection that such could be done:
Jos. Bebout, Major Wiseman, DR.. Stuart,
DR. Mottram.
| DR.. Nicely of Topeka was the next wit
ness called by plaintiff, and his testimony
was similar to that of DR.. McVey, the
principal part of which was to
| the effect that from the time
of vaccination until the scab dropped off,
| 10 to % days would usually elapse, al
though there were exceptional cases
where the time was prolonged. Plain
! tiff's counsel then stated that they rested
their case.
The defendants then put Mr.. ]. W.
Green on the stand to formally prove
that the reason for not calling Mrs. Nc
Coy, whom they had stated in their open
ing remarks they would call, was that
| she was too i'll to be in attendance, al
though she had been subpRnaed and
had been in attendance at two different
occasions during the present trial, when
her testimony could not be used, as the
plaintiff was there putting in her evil
| dence.
Mr.. Barker for the defense then stated
that they closed their case The court
excused the jury until 2 o'clock p. m.
today, but adjourned court until 9 o'clock
this morning, the intervening time being
consumed by the counsel in argument on
certain points.