New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1896-06-19
pOTNTS FOR THE DEFENDAN


counted for In that the sub-nltrate OF Dlshu'h az"
uir,stnred nv DR. Huffman to Mrs. Bliss was con-
taminatcd with arsenic Mr.. Brooke intimateh yes
terday before tho adjournment OF the COURT u'"'
the defence would complete its testimony py INC
recess hour to-day. 1t IL apparent therefore, ina.
the defence intends mainly to rely FOR the acdu''"
OF Mrs Fleming In the discrediting OF DR. Sche'ie.
According TO a recent calculation, Mt BROOKE VIII
complete his summing up for the defence TINS al
tcrnoon on Monday morning Assistant Distrl't-
Attorney Mcintyre will sum up FOR the prose'u-
ton and, after the charge OF the Recorder the
case may be expected to 20 to the jury AT ABOUT
or : o'clock on Monday afternoon.
Dr O'Sulvan continued his cross-eNainlild'l'h OF
Professor Witthaus yesterday morning. Inc VIII
less admitted at the outset that he had never hah
a case OF arsenical poisoning under MS oDserVdt'o"'
He vas familiar, however. with most OF the ceie-
brated cases Of arsencal poisoning that had Deeh
BROUGHT to public notice. Or. O'Suvan. however,
elected from him that he at least unacqIainted
with one important comment In a leading authority
which directly bore upon the present case flhai'y'
DR. OSullivan asked the witness II ne had any
doubt whatever that all the chemical eAhD'tS pro-
duced by the prosecution were what Drs. scheeIe
and Mott represented them as being. Professor
Witthaus replied that h. had not made any
ANALYSIS OF the exhibits and when invited by Dr.
O'sullivan TO take any single exhibit OF which ne
had doubt and test II himself. the witness refused
to do so. on the ground that his time vas limited.
DR. VISSMAN CALLED.
The chief pathological expert for the defence was
then called. He Dr. william Nissman' VINO
WAS graduated from the Louisville (kyD Medical
College In 1855. He had been presen, at 5000 au-
tops!es To the hypothetical question propounied
by Mr. Brooke the witness CAV" It "a his opinion
that the death OF Mrs. Bliss was due 70 asphyxa,
produced by odoema Of the lungs arising from Kid
ncy disease. The appearances OF the organs OF me
dead woman I'D not in his opinion necessarily ndi-
TAM
In clam chow1cr. eaten ~ Mrs. Bliss he thought.
migh, have been tho cause OF Death and he also
testified that piomalnos were not permanently de-
stroyed by boiling.
Or O'su!.van. tn his early cros'-examinaiion' en-
deavored to depreclate Or Vssmans competency T.
t.etlfy the subject % pomaine poisoning but the
witness adhered to the soundness OF the deductions
n. hal given In ms direct examination concerning
the cause Of Mrs. BLISS death.
After recess Dr O'Suyan continued his cross
examination Th- doctor wished - test the Wit
nerss knowledge Of every kno"n kind II gasirii4s
Some ~ the questions pat by counsel - Dr. Nlss-
man wer- cnvelopcd In involved technical language.
and their names conveyed more meaning to the
| lay mind than would a Sanskrit sermon once or
| twice tho jury laughed outright The result 81 all
this learned talk that the Jurors finally were In
formed that different names were given 10 the
! variable Appearances Il the inflammation and crup-
ton caused by gastri,s the tssuoe Of the stom-
ach.
| Or. OSull.van read 10 the witness the description
OF the vlscora made by DR. O'Hanlon after the lat
ter performed his autopsy on Mrs Bliss's body,
and asked II those symptoms were not consistent
with arsencal poisoning. pr. Nissman. however.
after a moments thought would not agree 10 the
suggestion. and said the same symptoms might
apply to p,omaine poisoning or to the drinking Of
answer. DR. Osullvan endeavorei 10 pin, the Wit
ness TO the assertion h1t hot wS6er woqa %
his reply, and said that the stomach must De dis
eascd before the drinking OF hot water would cause
the gasir!tls signs TO appear
GOOD FOR THE DEFENDANT
The defendant was fortunate in that her counsel
we're able 10 enlist the services In her behalf OF Or.
Russell II. Chittenden. professor OF physiological
chemistry and Pathological instructor a, Yale Uni
| versty. Professor Chlttenden is well known as one
| OF the most accomplished chemists In the country.
and has given evidence In many celebrated murder
| trials The chief purpose Mr. Brooke had in putting
the expert on the stand was further To discount
membered that the latter testified that he had COM
| ple,ed his analysis OF n portion Of the stomach ana
tenden deposed that 1t would take from three To
four weeks TO make an analysis OF the organ and its
contents for volatile. mineral and vegetable poison
Used In the examination for their purify 1t was
could have made proper ANALYTICAL examination in
he had looked for the presence OF ptomaines and
akalods which may have have. been produced through
examination occupied about twenty five or thirty
Professor Chttcnden. in replying to Mr. Brooke
secuted the idea that such an examination could be
made in t%sny,nye or thirty minutes ana md said The
Mr. Brooke placed before the witness other estImo,
time the latter had taken to compete his Analysis
and In each case the witness averred that IL was
scheele In the times given by that chemist. He also
characterized as an imPosslbity the division Of a
parts in weight to the fraction of sixth place in
dccmals. Or. scheec testified that he accomplished
mi Tn thcrc min ion ho wit aafd
he had frequently anayzed subnitrate OF bsmuth
similar to nai S FOR M Ss by Dr Bn
the bismuth.
WHAT THE BIsMUTH YIELDED.
Or. O'Su.livan conducted the cross-examlnatlor
and elected from the witness that his analysis OF
subntrate CT bsmuth yielded In one instance COZ
grains of arsenic In 100 drains of bismuth. He had
made this analysis fourteen years ago. lie had
however, he said. made other examinations OF bis
muth recently, which demonstrated TO him the pres
ence of arsenic In the bismuth.
asked DR. O'suvan. would it be necessary for
of arsenic found In her system after death?'
About sixty ounces, or exactly'ive pounds" an
swered the witness. The reply apparently sat
isfactory to Or. osulllvan. as almost immed atel,
ms ss OK m" %s " s%a
Chittenden that he had occupied in cross-examnlns
the previous experts for the defence.
When Professor Chlttenden had left the stand
Mr. Brooke. addressing the Court on the subject Of
said that Of ' Ss
possession Of the Dstris. YAtorney VIII View 'o
ascertain II these powders actually did contain
eenic he said the defence would be perfectly willing
for Dr. Mott ore OF the experts for the prosecution
TO make an analysis Of them and counsel for the
defence would rest satisfied with, Dr. Motifs re.
port. Mr. Mcintyre. however protested and tn.
suggestion was not acted upon
MRS KELLY NOT ALLOWED TO TESTIFY
Mrs. Mary Kelly the costumer attached to the
American Theatre. was next called Mrs Kelly. n
appeared. had been poisoned through eating clan
chowder. and Mr.. Brooke wished to get the fact on
the record. and her description also OF the symp
toms OF her Illness Mr.. Mcintyre strongly objected
the ground that there relevancy In such
evidence. The Recorder agreed with the Asssta nj
District Attorney. and upheld the objection. Nor