The Irish standard., 1897-09-11

* Denotes the Vat in Which the Rings
We're Found.
blades, gazing curiously at the weapon
and scraping the blade with his finger
{. il to feel the stains which covered 1t.
He evidenced no emotion, though he
knew that every person in the court
room, including court, jury and spec
tu,ors, was closely watching and talk
ing note OF his every action. In talking
with his attorneys he admitted TINT the
knife was his property.
Court opened with the usual crowd
cinmoring for admission ut the door.
Within the courtroom members Of the
fa;r sex prcdomnnted among the spec
GATORS, and the little room was crowded
to its utmost caperi,y. When Luetgert
entered shortly before court opened he
repeated his manner of Tuesday and
smlingly nodded at the jury. He att
tempted to catch the eye of Judge Tut
h;ll, but that official refused to notice
ahr prisoner
Mrs. Feldt was called to the stand and
identified the knife as stated above.
Other Evidence.
j. II. Odenbrett and Edward B. Cuddy,
expert corset makers Mt go Fifth NV
enue, took the stand and declared that
the bent pieces of bluckencd and burnt
steel found In the ashes rnkcd from
the furnace In the Luetgert factory
were parts Of corset.
Dr. Carl Klein, DR., dentist ut Wells and
Division s,rcets, sworc to making n set
of artificial teeth for Mrs. Luetpert in
July, 1892, and said thnt the portion Of
Il tooth found in the factory was SINH
lar to those he used in milking her
plate.
Emma Schimpke, sister of Gottlicbe.
testified to seeing Lnetgert and wife
walking near the factory on the night
OF May !.
Police Officer Tall!wicz swore to find
ang a woman's hairpin in the ashes
dumped in the road near the factory.
Officer Preuss described where he
found the corset stecls and the pieces of
bones to be introduced in evidence by
The state later
Expert Testimony
The afternoon was devoted to dry OK
pert testimony. Prof Charles Is. Glib
eon, to whom the newspaper mon gave
the fluid they drew from the WIT, was
examined, and testified to finding or
ganic matter in the pinkish brown
fluid which he subjected to a chemical
analysis. His answers were delivered
slowly and deliberately and were
couched in technical terms. Itrequired
much time to question the witness, SO
that his testimony could be made clear
TO the jury. Witness asserted, in his
opinion, that the dissolution of tieshy
portions of the body could be accom-
plished in the time and manner alleged
by the state, but denied that the condi-
ton Of the bones would be materially
affected.
The defense considered that n point
was scored in their favor when the witt
ness asserted that the hair would be
the first portion Of the body to dissolve
in caustic mixture. Attorney Vincent
Will request the jury to reconcile this
hit Of testimony with the alleged find
Ing of the hair in the vat. The last wit
ness sworn was a son of Waterman
Bialk, who testified to having enticed
I-uetgert to his fathers room under the
pretense of the latter's illness. a de-
tective was concealed under the bed
at the time, and the testimony was in
tended to merely corrobornte portions
of the testimony of the officer who lis
tened to the conversation between Luet-
CERT and his old employee.
Attorneys for the defense assert that
the day did their cause good. They ex-
pect to controvert material points in the
testimony, and ignore many points