The Topeka state journal., 1897-09-10
RAG AND A BONE
And a Hank of Hair Are the
Chief Features
In the Evidence Before the
Luetgert Jury.
EXP ERT TESTIMONY
Fails to Establish the Fact
That the Bones
Found i'm the Vat Are Those of
Human Being.

consumed in the trial of Adolph Luetger
in the taking of expert testimony
Through chemical analysis the state must
establish not only the possibility of
human body being dissolved by the action
of caustic potash heated to the boiling
point, but also that the bit of bone, hair
and flesh and the scraping of pinkish
brown material from the interior of the
Yats in the sausage factory are portions
of the body of human being. If they
cam demonstrate these two propositions
beyond a reasonable doubt one of the
most important portions of their case will
have been accomplished. By circumstan-
tial evidence they have endeavored to
prove that Luetgert was anxious to rid
himself of his wife and that he enticed
his wife to the factory on the evening of
May 1. BY expert testimony they expect
to prove that Mrs. Luetgert's remains
are now represented by the bits of flesh
and hair. Two expert witnesses have
been called, DR.. Charles B. Gibson and
Prof. Mark Delafontaine. DR.. Gibson,
whose direct examination begun
Wednesday, offered further testimony for
the state and was turned over to the de-
fense for cross examination. Prof. Della
fontaine was examined by Assistant
States Attorney McEwen.
The first witness called was H. F.
Kruger, the druggist who sold Watchnnan
Frank Bialk the medicine which Luetgert
ordered his employe to purchase. The
testimony was intended merely as cor
roborative of the watchman's statement
as to the time for the purpose of showing
the hours between which the alleged muir
der was supposed to have been commit
ted.
The second witness was DR.. Charles
Gibson, the chemical expert, who was
placed on the stand for redirect exanli
nation in regard to his analysis of fleshy
substances and slime removed from the
vat where the state is attempting to
prove the wife murder was committed.
Gibsons testimony proved to be of lit
tie value to the state. Although the wit
ness freely admitted that the bits of
heshy substance and organic matter TAX
en- from the solution were similar to hu-
man flesh, he was equally candid in his
admission upon cross-examinat ton by At
| torney Vincent, chief counsel for the de-
| fense, that the flesh was as similar to the
| flesh of any other animal. as it was to
| the human. Professor Gibson testified
| that a body could be disintegrated in the
! manner charged by the prosecution but
| denied that the bones would be affected
| in the manner that the state has endeav-
| ored to establish. The witness testified
| that the bones would be merely softened
| at the 0nQS, DuC WOulQ not De QlSSO1VeQ
| The lawyers for the defense were highly
pleased at the result of the cross-exami-
| nation and felt that their case had gain
| ed, as the result of the evidence.
| Professor Delafontaine, a Swiss chem
| ist, was next put on the stand. Professor
| Delafontaine was educated only in the
technical terms OF English and it was
| impossible for him to couch his answers
in language that the jury could compre-
| In add fn n
manner of his testimony the witness was
possessed of a faulty delivery and his low
| tones could hardly be distinguished by the
| court and lawyers, who were very near
! him, however, his testimony neces-
| sary to the case of the state a witness,
| as without the testimony of experts
neither the manner of Mrs. Luetgert's
| supposed murder, nor the fact of her
death can be established.
Testimony concerning bones was the
| chief portion of the evidence submitted
| by Professor Delafontaine. The bits of
| bone, which the police gathered from the
| refuse pile where the ashes of the fur
| mace were said to have been dumped, were
| submitted to the scrutiny of the learned
| chemist who readily answered yes, when
| questioned as to whether they were hu-
| man bones. Other of his answers were so
| vague and uncertain to be valueless as
| evidence. Several times the court at
| tempted to have the witness define him.
| self as to certain terms and expressions,
! but such attempts were futile. The
| chemist gave it as his opinion that a body
could be dissolved in caustic potash, heat
| ed to the boiling point, in the space of
| three or four hours, nothing but the
| bones and some of the hgaments and
| cartilages remaining. However, he would
| not commit himself further than had DR..
| Gibson, who preceded him the stand.
! At the afternoon session, Professor
/ Delafontaine was cross-examined by the
| defense.
| The prosecution could not draw from
| Professor Delafontaine the assertion
| that the bits of flesh were human flesh.
| They might be human, but they might
also be the flesh of animal The bones
| he was sure were human bones but re-
/ garding the flesh was very guarded and
| careful in his statements.
| Luetgert handled the gunny sacks and
| inspected with curious glances bits of
| flesh and bone which were passed ginger
| ly from attorney to attorney but at no
| time did his hand tremble the look of
! ordinary interest give away to pallor or
| averted glance. Innocent guilty the
verdict of all is that Luetgert is possessed
| of more nerve than any other man who
has been tried for murder within the pre-
| cincts of the criminal court building.
The attorneys for the defense continue
| in their confident attitude. and assert tina t
| when their prisoner is acquitted a num-
| ber of damage suits are to be commenced.
| They intend that those who have manu-
factured evidence they put it, shall
| suffer for the wrong which they say has
| been done their client.
Free exhibit paintings and sketches
| American and European, by the late