The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1897-07-29
Slayer of DR.. L. A. Berger
Has Strong Defense.
Murder in First Degree Not
Proved, 1t is Claimed.
STATES CASE is WEAK,
Witnesses Tells of Schlegel's
Good Character.
Interesting Testimony in X. C..
Murder Trial.

NaHSdS CITY, july ZS.-oO lar DIS tHC
taking of testimony is concerned, the
preliminary hearing of John Schlegel,
charged with the murder of DR.. Lyman
A. Berger, was completed yesterday
Saturday morning at 10 o'clock the at
torneys for the prosecution and defense
will submit TO Justice Walls briefs and
authorities, and a decision will be rem
dered.
The question at issue is whether, as
the prosecution contends, Schlegel shall
be held to the grand jury on the charge
or murder in the first degree and con-
fined in the county Jail without bail; or
shall be held for murder in a lesser de-
gree and admitted to bail, as insisted
upon by the defense.
That the prosecution failed to make
out case of murder in the first degree
against Schlegel on Tuesday is the al
most unanimous opinion of attorneys
who heard the proceedings. No addi-
tional testimony was introduced by the
prosecution yesterday, and there was
nothing that tended in any way to
strengthen the states case.
Major Woodson, for the defense, in
troduced testimony to show that Mr..
and Mrs. Schlegel were man and wife;
that they had been living in Kansas
City for a long term of years; that
Schlegel was engaged in business here
and had family; that he had, during
all the years of his residence in this
city, borne an unimpeachable reputa-
ton as a good, peaceable. quiet, law
abiding citizen; and that there was no
feated by his being admitted to bail.
1t was further shown by the testimo-
ny of witnesses for the defense that
there had been trouble in John Schle-
gels family. and that Dr. Berger had
been connected with that trouble. Com
petent witnesses testified to the truth
of Mrs Schlegel's statements. made i'm
mediately after the tragedy, that short
ly after the date on which the assault
in DR.. Bergers office is alleged to have
taken place she had blue marks on her
e hat
up to that time DR.. Berger had been the
family physician of the Schlegels, and
that after that date he had never WISH
ted the family in a professional capac-
ity:
No attempt was made by the defense
to justify the killing, hence no testimo-
ny could be introduced by the prosecu-
ton in rebuttal showing prepare ton
or reconciliation on the part of Schle-
gel.
The first witness was Mrs Marie
Wuerz, wife of Hugo Weurz, sanitary
inspector. She had known Schlegel Is
years and Mrs. Schlegel Il years, and
had lived adjoining them ever since
| they came to Kansas City. She called
on Mrs. Schlegel when the latter was
taken sick in November.
Did you see any bruises on Mrs.
Schlegel?" was asked of the witness
The prosecution objected to the ques-
ton and the objection was sustained
Was Mrs. Schlegel sick last fall?"
was next asked.
Were you there during her sick
| ness?"
Yes"
Who waited on herr"
DIR. Van Quasi
when did DR. Berger cease to be the
family physician of the SchIegels?''
This question, as well as several 9TH
ers tending to show why DR. Berger
ceased to be the family physician of
the SchlegeIs. was objected to by the
prosecution, and the objections were
sustained
When did Dr. Berger cease to be the
| family physician with reference TO this
sickness last fall?" was asked
DIR Berger was the family physician
on November 9, and DR.. Won Quasi was
! called in on November "a DR.. Berger
never waited upon the family after
NoVemb Der 9.
Did you learn from Mrs. schlegel
| the probable cause of her sickness ?''
Objected to and objection sustained.
What was the physical condition of
Mrs. Schlegel within your professional
knowledge?'
She had blue marks upon her arms
Did you learn that there had been
any trouble between Mrs. SchIegel and
| Dr. Berger?'
Yes"
Did you ever talk with Mr.. Schlegel
about those bruises on his wife, or he to
| you?"
Not with him. I did with his wife"
Witness stated that the regulations
| of Mr.. and Mrs. Schlegel in the COM
munity in which they lived was the best
| that any man or woman could have.
Attorney Henry Steubenrauch was the
| next witness called. He testified that
| he had been called to the home of the
| Schlegels last November.
| Did you learn from Schlegel that
/ there had been any trouble in his fam
yes"
WAS the subject matter of that trou-
| BILE talked over while you were there ?''
| 1T was
| What other party did that trouble
concern except Mr.. and Mrs. Schlegel ?''
| Mr.. O'Grady objected 10 this question
| and a lengthy argument ensued. The
ness answered.
DIR Berger
Did you see any bruises on the person
| of Mrs. Schlegel at that timer
| Yes
What was the date of this visit to
| the home of the Schlegels?''
| November II. L think it was Sat-
urday."
Explain where the bruises were?'
Mrs. Schlegel showed me bruises on
her leg
| reputation as good, quiet. peaceable
| 1aw-abiding citizen was good.
| Major Woodson offered in evidence
the marriage of the Schlegels,
| showing that John Schlegel and Ida
Cation Were married at Bloomington
| Ill, March 81, 1885.
| Mrs. Minnie Kranz. 1916 Locust street.
| a sister-in-law- of Mrs. Wuerz. was the
| next witness. She had called on Mrs
Schlegel in November last. the day after
| she was taken sick. Dr. Won Quasi
| waited upon her. DR.. Berger had been
| the family physician prior to that date
| but never after.
| Witness had seen the marks on Mrs
| Schlegel's person. There was the i'm
| press of five fingers on the right leg.
| also on the right arm.
Did you learn that DR.. Berger had
| any connection with those marks 90
| asked Major Woodson-
Mr.. O'Grady was on his feet with an
/ objection, but he was too late to prevent