New-York tribune., 1896-06-05
QUANTITIES OF ARSENIC.
Continued from First Page.


terdav morning AS the result OF the andIysis,,
he founG that the sediment con'alheu1 a.. a.
arsenic and antimony The witness dIso "a
scrbed the chemical process TO which ne hau %
snbiected the matter elected by Mrs Bliss; 10
complete the chain the witness descrlSeu Ias 1Is
analysis of the contents OF tne etoii,"U ~ ooior
identified the bottle which held II ana lhe oov. s
when II was delivered to him. 1t contalheu ,ouI
cubic centmetres. and the test was appns,u apph,or,c ~
two cubic centimetres by boiling 1t In o hao
acid in which small strips or copper hau 80 80
Immersed When this mixture was eNdhlheu
after standing for sixteen hours the s.lle W.
removed and dried and placed IN test '"D. o..
the matter being heated through eIdss & 10y
tba. means was obtained product when was was
dissolved in water To this was addea ni.aao nras
acid and nitrate of silver. 50 revealing 'he PieS
ence of the constituents of arsenic
SCIENTIFIC TESTS.
o-Does that complete the list of articles SUBMIT
+ed 10 Won for analysis? Alt does
W. tho processes YOU have described to us
all that YOU did? A-No; in every case | made some
additional test which did not note down nor nave
oHAre the tests you epoyed the tests adopted
bv scientists for the recognition. iden.hcation ana
isolation adnned HI ar such as are recognized by scen
tfc men in this country ana h es % that ap-
proved of them myself
Now DR.. Mott" asked counsel slowly ana as
tinctly having used the tests you nave maue
and having made ouantitative and qualitative
ANALYSIS of the articles submitted to you, how
much do YOU estimate was the total amount or
arsenic found in the articles submitted 10 !ou'
with the exception OF the pie? -,
Mr Brooke Immediately objected TO the col
lective nature Of the reply asked for. an1 ~, ~
Recorder to withdraw the question. ana put
seriatim interrogations. Going on 10 90 ,s ,his
he asked From Peoples Exhibit II: marked
contents of stomach or MIS- T. NJ. pls'' """'
did you separate!
AMOUNT OF POISON
..x -, .horofror, .ri-oyida ~ arsenic,
what is ordinarily known arsenic. l3--o
grains" With a view probably to impress the
figures on the minds of the jury. DR.. O'Sullivan
reneated his question and received similar an
swer with the addition that the witness sald
that he only examined portion of the contents
of the stomach. and was proceeding to state & wha'
was the total amount of arsenic In the eNhlpit'
as derived from the knowledge gained from t nls
ANALYSIS when Mr.. Brooke stopped nm Wilis
an objection to the giving OF any evidence oi
calculated results. DR.. O'Sullivan endeaVoleo 10
get the evidence admitted 1T Is surely comPe
tent " he protested IF this witness only taxes
a portion Of the contents of the stomach anu
makes a percentage examination, he Is Justlneu
in saving how much is the whole of the arsenic D!
comparison, contained in the cohteh's q, ny ny
stomach" The Recorder suggested mat the
point might be reached in way more more, IN az, az
cordance with legal procedure. Dr. - ouiii'o an
then elected from the witness that he had not
isolated the whole Of the arsenic from me con- con,
tents of the stomach. The cologne bottle sun
contained a norton OF the contents taken by Dr
OHanlon from the body Of Mrs Bliss and Or;
Mott testified that those contents still contained
mineral poison. Neither did he separate all '"e
antimony from the exhibit.
Asked how much antmony he had actually
separated from the fluid Of the stomach. Or Mott
replied that the amount of antimony, calculated
as tartar emetic was 22o grains .
Now on a percentage calculation, asker
counsel how much do YOU estimate was ,ns ,ns
total amount of antim0y in the exhibit marked
H9" DESPITE a further objection by MI Brooke
the witness was allowed to reply, ana testned
that. altogether in the contents or the stoi''-
ach were lob grains Of antimony
And how much do you estimate" next asked
Dr. O'Sullivan. was the total amount OF the ar
senic in the contents Of the stomach? esu-
mate" returned the witness. that there were
1904 grains in the exhibit marked Contents
of stomech Of Mrs. f. NJ. Bliss
GREENSBORO EXHIBIT.
The decanter in which placed half OF the
stomach taken from Mrs. Bliss's body was next
brought forward in evidence. when Mr. Brooke
put in the same objections as in the case OF the
other exhibits AS Mr.. Brooke interposed, DR..
Osuvan sat down with an impatient gesture
and said something in an undertone 10 MS COL
league Mr. Mcintyre. Mr.. Brooke. however
heard the whisper, and exclaimed DR. OSul-
lvan. you have no rght 10 make such siue
remark that.
II was saying nothing publicly" retorted Or.
O'SulliVan; Il was merely consulting with my
associate. You ought not to nave such iohs
and YOU" shouted back Mr.. Brooke. should
not have such a long mouth. The jury couid
hear what you said
poison IN THE TISSUES.
Dr. Mott. continuing his evidence said ne
found in the tissues Of the stomach .l2ol grains
20 arsenic and O213 grains Of antimony. He
had only analyzed half of the stomach. ana on
the percentage basis. he estimated that the
total quantity of arsenic in that organ was 'o'
grains and Of antimony .144G grains.
In the cases of the last vomt OF Mrs Bliss anu
the pitcher DR.. Mott said he had made no esti-
mate Of the quantity of arsenic ana ahtiihony
contained i'm these exhibits but had Simply
demonstrated their presence x ~.
Court what the total amount was Of the arsenic
and antimOny in the contents or Mrs Bliss
stomach, and the organ Itself. apart from the
vomit and the pitcher. where no esuinaIloi' wa wa
made The witness called for paper pau, anu
after figuring out he various results, declared
that the actual amount of arsenic separated iroi,
the contents of the stomach. In conJuhcuon %It1
the arsenic in the stomach itself was 1891
grains The total amount of antiinony separdteu
in the same way was 2'6j, or shghty more ti!aH a
q ouarter OF a grain The total amount OF the
two poisons combined was l33oJl, or httie
over thirteen and One-third grams
ANOTHER SERIES or TESTS
DIR Mott testified that on December last nc
was asked by the authorities of the District ht
torneys office to make another series OF exami
nations The articles submitted to him consisted
of a. tea tray, small japanese jar some cut
loaf sugar a portion Of carpet taken from the
bedroom at the Colonial Hotel the cover OF a tir
pail and another piece of carpet taken from the
front of the bedrooms occupied by Mrs: flemlne
All of these articles were delivered 10 him al ms
private laboratory by Acting Inspector McCul
iagh and Assistant District-Attorney Miller or
December 3.
Before Dr. Mott could add anything more to his
testimony Mr. Brooke put on record an emphatic
objection, and protested against any further rel
erence to the exhibits on the ground that SO fal
there had not been a particle of evidence 10 SHOW
that any of the things had ever been In possession
of the defendant. or, in fact. that she had eve
seen them. ., -
Had the objection succeeded. the prosecution
would have been greatly handicapped In the pres
AR MCINTYRE strove for over twenty minutes e
Ii focfi Go