The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1896-11-19


several forms, and each time with
strenuous objections by Mr.. Pierce,
witness said that to the best of his
knowledge and belief Mrs. Hull was
suffering from arSenical poisoning, and
that the doses had been administered
in such quantities as to endanger her
life.
This testimony on the part OF DIR.
Hawkins came as a shock to Hull, and
evidently his wife, who was prepared
for the blunt answer to the question,
showed signs of breaking down. Mr..
Pierce dallied a moment with some pa
pers, and every one seemed relieved
when the court ordered an adjourn
ment until afternoon. Mr.. Hull was
restless and paced up and down in
the limited space near the attorneys
table and was impatient of the delay
that attended the opening of the after
noon session. Mr.. Pierce finally began
his cross-eXamination of the. witness.
DR.. Hawkins said that he had prepared
many prescriptions for Mrs. Hull.
While there was no organic trouble, she
seemed to suffer from weakness OF
the heart.@ He was shown prescrip-
ton he had written for the relief OF
Mrs Hulls kidney trouble. 1t con-
tanned strychnia, buchu, digitlais and
other ingredients. Witness said strych-
MIA and digitalis were poisonous in
large doses The bitter taste of the
the buchu. Mr.. Pierce examined the
witness at length on the effects of the
poison on the system and the DISPOSE
ton of the system to throw 1t of.
Finally Mr.. Pierce picked up pre-
scription from the, table and remarked
that no one but a druggist could de-
cipher 1t.
ANY one can read a prescription"
Interrupted the court
Quick as a flash Mr.. Pierce retofted.
Judge, l will give you a quarter IT
s you'll read that" handing the bit OF
8 paper to the court.
Judge Egan reached for the paper.
adjusted his glasses and very promptly
read: "Rx-everybody knows that;
there's digitalis-that's foXglove; and
there's buchu-and the court remarked
that it was easy enough. He had won
his quarter, but Mr.. Pierce did not
Join in the laughter that followed.
There was some difficulty in identi-
flying another prescription. DR.. Hawk
ms said it was difficult for him to keep
track of the dates on which he had
written prescriptions for Mrs. Hull as
he had never made any charge for his
services and had no record to go by.
Counsel for the defense and prosecu-
ton expressed sympathy with the no
charge feature, as each claimed to
have had considerable experience with
the temerity and regularity Of doctors
bills. The witness thought that at
some time he
HAD PRESCRIBED ARSENIC
for Mr.. Hull. She had SHOWN depres-
sion and her condition indicated need
for a stimulant Arsenic was a tonic
but not a stiniulant It was in the
winter of 1894-95 that he had prescribed
arsenic and iron for her. OF the arsenic
there was one-fortieth Of a grain in
each dose.
William F. Peet was called to relate
the conversation between himself and
Mr.. Hull concerning the lapsed insur
ance policy taken out in a company
represented by Mr.. Peet. Nothing Of
Importance was brought out in the
questioning and the defense did not
crOSS-examfne
Mrs. Hull was recalled and denied
that she had ever said to her husband
that she thought DR.. Hawkins was
trying to poison her. The poisons in
evidence, she said, she did not know
were about the house. She had never
bought or procured arsenic except in
the form Of the prescription given her
by her physician, and she had never
asked any one else to get poison Of amy
sort for her.
Mr.. Pierce in a brief cross examin-
alton sought to show that Mrs. Hull
ought to hang" referring to the girl
Bertha, and that she also said, threat
B ening him, "Ill make you suffer for 1t. ="
But Mrs. Hull denied using such lam
guage with a show Of Indignation.
Mr.. Butler for the state then an
noUnced that he had one more witness.
but that she was absent. 1t was Bertha.
Mr. Butler had information that the
young woman would be in the city On
the o'clock train, and that she would
be placed on the stand this morning.
For the present the state would rest.
Mr.. Pierce demurred to proceeding with
the defense until the state had pre-
scented all of its testimony. He was
not sustained by the count in this de-
murrer, however, and after ascertain
ing that there was nothing for the
state to present while waiting the ar
rival of the one witness, Mr.. Pierce
was instructed to proceed with the
presentation of his case After a brief
recess, Mr.. Pierce addressed the jury in
a brief and thoughtfully worded plea.
He realized that he was defending a
desperate cause. His speech was slow
and his words well chosen. The MEM
bers of the jury were thoughtful and
attentive, the audience gave the closest
attention to his words. Even the
women in the gallery seemed for the
moment to be touched by the earnest
ness of the old lawyers appeal. His
reference to the admitted weakness Of
the accused brought tears to the eyes
of Mrs. Hull, and Mr.. Hull himself
seemed for the moment overcome with
emotion. Strong, earnest, and force
full, the appeal was the best argument
that has been made in behalf Of the
accused. Mr.. Pierce's remarks were
partially as follows !:
The county attorney has produced evidence
that is exceedingly strong against the ac-
he Of nf
the prisoner exists until your verdict, if 1t
should be guilty, is reached You must re-
member the tremendous Importance of the
verdict not only TO the defendant. but to his
family and the community. AS it is possible
for the human judgment to err, 1t is better
that nine and ninety guilty escape than one
81 innocent perish. This thought has become
maxim in all civilized communities, that
the common we'll the cvil law recog-
Iizes the Importance of shielding the person
on trial because of the liability of human
judgment to form erroneous Impressions
8. If this prisoner were not on trial to es-
cape prison, / should say his testimony Is
more credible than that of his wife. There
lis a temptation on his part to testify falsely
to avoid punishment. He laborS under this
unfortunate disadvantage. In this case Mr..
Hull is the principle witness, in fact, may
say, the only witness we have. We have only
his word to combat the testimony Of Mrs.
Hull. when she declared she did not procure
these posons found in the house. If the
jury is able to place implicit confidence in
her testimony, then there is no way for the
jury but to think Mr.. Hull is guilty. No
hypothetical theory will answer for the ac-
cused. Our defense will assert that Mr.. Hull
found those poisons in the house and con-
cealed them to prevent his wife using them.
We shall show to you how the 9Th OF Au-
gust Mr.. Hull intended to explain to Dr.
Hawkins the fact that his wife is a mono
maniac on the subject OF poisons Further
her conviction that he had been untrue to
his marital vows, had so sharpened her NEIL
tai infrmity-an infirmity inherited from her
Inother-that she had become morbid and her
unbalanced mind led her to believe that her
husband was seeking 70 take her life This