New-York tribune., 1896-05-26


set the scientific evidence which the prosecution
Will avowedly make use Of In his final question
to the Juror. however. Mr.. Brooke made clear that
expert evidence would be given on his clients be-
half.
EXPERT TESTIMONY FOR THE DEFENCE
Let me ask you this question" he said. "Evi.
dencc will probably be presented by the prosecu.
ton which will be directly contra iicted on be-
half Of the defendant Some evderce on be-
half Of the defendant will probably be claimed
TO be fabricated. Circumstances NAV he proved
on Dehaf OF the prosecution, which, when unex-
planned. may tend to implicate the defendant
but which the defendant will claim to explain
by other evidence. Expert testimony may be
prese on behalf Of the prosecution which, IL
1t is. may tend adversely to the defendant. but
which testimony, by expert witnesses on behalf
OF the defendant may be contradicted or de-
stroyed. Can you and will you suspend and
withhold your Judgment concerning the value
OF all such testimony on the part Of the prosecu-
ton until you have heard all the evidence in
the case?' But while 1t Is thus known that the
defence will avail itself Of expert evidence. it is
not known who are the witnesses to be called
by Mr.. Brooke.
When the twelfth juror had been duly sworn
yesterday afternoon, consultation took place
between the Recorder. the foreman of the jury
and the respective counsel for the purpose OF
considering the advsability of going with the
case at once Assistant Distrct-Attorney Nc
Intyre expressed his readiness to proceed imme-
diately. but Mr.. Brooke opposed such course.
urging that weary day had been passed in ex
amining talesmen. and that ii would be better
for all concerned In the case to start with their
minds fresh and clear in the morning. The Re
corder was of the same opinion, and decided to
adjourn. The Court admonished the jury at
great length counselling them not to talk or
converse about the case to read or to do aught
that might tend to prejudice their minds He
paid high tribute to their intelligence. and
added that his satisfaction as to their probty
and honesty was such that he was willing to
trust them in every way. and for that reason he
would allow them to come and go from the court
without putting them under the supervision OF
officials Of the court.
A LONG TRIAL.
Assistant District-Attorney, Miller will make
the opening speech for the prosecution. while
Mr. Mcintyre will reserve himself for the cross
examination of witnesses. and the summing up
for his side The trial is likely. according to
Mr. Mcintyre. to be protracted one. He said
Yesterday to Tribune reporter that 1t would
undoubtedly extend over thirty days: Ana
when II is remembered that the strength OF the
evidence for the defence is not known. II Is prob
able that this estimate will prove 10 be 100 con-
servative. In that case a verdict VIII not dc
reached before the middle of July.
In the last three days certain papers IN the
absence of sensational features so iar IN 'he
trial have given publicity 10 several more or less
startling stories concerning the case. one OF
these was that Mr. Mcintyre had obtained knowl-
edge that an attempt had been made TO brlpe
some of the witnesses for the prosecution. Wheii
ict-Attorney promptly denied the rumor he
added that he had thought II advisable 10 pu,
his witnesses under protection. and with tnat
idea in view he had that morning placed three
Of them in the House Of Detention. He would
not however divulge the names of the three VII
nesses .
Another Of these fakes stated that Ferdinand
Wilckes who is a reputed lover Of Mrs. Fleming.
and has been placed under $1,000 bond to give
evidence on behalf OF the prosecution had ex-
pressed his determination TO marry the accused
woman provided she secured an acquittal. To n
Tribune reporter who saw him yesterday In the
court Mr. WiIckes denied that he was under any
promise to marry Mrs Fleming. The latter also
denied the report. and added that such exagger-
ated and untruthful rumors were calculated 10
do her case much harm 1t was stated IN court
Yesterday that Mrs. Fleming had drawn S21,Ooo
from her estate in the course or the DAY. Out her
counsel denied the fact .
Hitherto II has been looked upon as certain that
Mrs Flemng's little daughter. Oracle. who was
Mrs Bliss would be brought forward by the prose
ton 10 testify against her mother. After the ad-
journment Of the court yesterday Mr.. Mcintyre. IN
reply TO inquiry. said that he would not call the
child to the stand to testify. "To my mind" he
said at would be most brutal thing 10 do. There
is something utterly repellaut in calling child 10
give evidence against mother. when that mother
is on trial for her life. If ! cannot convict Mrs
Fleming without resorting TO such step. then
have no desire to convict her II / convicted
Mrs Fleming on her daughters testimony
II would ever be a cause OF regret TO me-"