The San Francisco call., 1897-08-24
WITNESSES FOR
THE DEF PENSE
Attorneys for Figel Trying
to Prove Him Inno-
cent.
Attendants Of the Receiving
Hospital Give Their Tes-
timony,
They Say There Was Black Powder
smudge Around the Wound on
the Cheek.

When the Figel case was called yester-
day morning MIR. Ach announced that
Judge Murphy was confined at home by
severe attack of bronchitis and asked that
the case be continued until he was able to
attend court
General Barnes objected to the post
ponement of the case on the grounds that
the defendant was in actual custody and
was, therefore, entitled to speedy trial
The general said that while he regretted
that Judge Murphy could not be present
he thought Mr.. Ach thoroughly compe-
tent to conduct the case.
Judge Campbell sustained the objection
and Detective Whitaker was called TO the
stand by the prosecution and testified
that he, in company with Chief Lees, Mr.
Acn and ]. G. Maloney had gone over the
route taken by Maloney on the night OF
June when he claimed to have seen
H offma and Figel arguing in front OF the
store. Whitaker said it took IL minutes
to cover the distance.
Mr. Ach next called Isaac Fleisig, a
merchant of Santa Cruz. who said he had
talked with Mr.. Hoffman on May 26 Mr..
Ach asked him: "Did Mr.. Hoffman know
at that time that Figel was short in his
accounts?'
General Barnes objected that this was
not competent evidence.
Mr.. Ach stated that he desired to show
that the witness had been on intimate
terms with Hoffman, who had told
Fleisg that he was troubled because his
bookkeeper was not straight.
The court sustained the objection and
ruled the evidence out.
James Kearney, an inferno at the Re
ceiving Hospital, was the first witness for
the defense. He testified that he was at
the hospital the night MI Hoffman was
taken there and that he had rece wed and
taken charge of the body. He had exam
ined the wounds. He said that around
the wound in the cheek he had found
ring of smoke about the size of dollar,
and on the inside OF the mouth he had felt
with his finger some granular substances
which ne took to be powder.
Joseph A. Mogan, steward at the hos
pital, said he had helped take care of
Hoffman's body the night of June l, and
had made an examination OF the wounds.
He had seen a smoke smudge around
the wound in tne cheek. 1t was about two
inches in diameter. The witness had
everted the cheek and had found some
powder-stains on the inside.
On cross-examiDation Mr.. Ach read to
the witness his testim ony at the Coroner 8
INQUEST, in which he said that he had
made no examination OF the wounds. Mr..
Mogan said he did not consider the super
ticial look he had given the wounds an
examination.
"And yet all that time you knew all
these facts about the powder-stainr 7"
asked Mr.. Ach.
"Yes," replied Mogan, ''but 1 wasn't
asked about them"
"Whom did you first tell of this 2"
"Mr. Louderback called at the hospital
and tod him.
Assislan. Police Surgeon DR.. Edwin
Bunnell said he had made thorough ex
animation of Mr.. Hoffman's wounds after
his death. He had noJed q smudge around
the wound in the cheek. On the inside OF
the cheek he had found circle of powder
grains about the size of two bit piece.
General Barnes asked: What conclusion
did you come to as to whether ID offman's S
wounds were self-inf icted or not?
Mr.. Ach objected TO this, and his oblec-
tion was sustained.
The witness then testified that he had
made some experiments with a revolver
similar to the one with which Hoffman
was shot. From these he thought
weapon held half an inch from the face
would cause powder mark similar to the
one on Hoffman's cheek; held eight il ches
10 two ieet from the face no smudge or
smoke mark would be made, but there
would De u pOWuer.DurH. = u6 ndlT WOulU
be burned between one and ten inches.
A hypothetical question by General
Barnes as to the distance the pistol was
held to inflct wounds No. l and No. 3
was ruled out on objection after lengthy
argument
The witness further testified that. in his
opinion, Hoffman might have been able
to inflict either of the wounds after hav-
ing inflicted the other, and that there was
nothing in the nature of either to prevent
their having been self-inficted. He said
Mr.. Hoffman could have moved from one
room TO the other after receiving the
wounds.
In the cross-examination the witness
was questioned at length as to his
experience in gunshot wounds, and was
asked to give instances of cases he
had treated. he testified that the
effect OF Hoffman's wound. would
be TO produce unconsciousness and
afterward death. A severe shock resulted
from the Shots and Hoffman was probably
knocke down.
The cross examinatio will be continued
TODAY.