Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1899-12-08
DRUGGIST SMITH ON TRIAL
Alleged Sale Of Poison Without Observing
Proper Precaution.
Motion to Quash the Information
Overruled by the Court-The
Evidence Submitted.

| William L. Smith, the druggist who is
| charged with violating the pharmacy law
| by selling, without proper precautions. to
| Agnes Z. Bruseke carbolic acid. with which
| she committed suicide November 49, was
| today placed on trial before Judge Scott
| and jury. Mr.. Mulowny represented the
| government and Mr.. D. w Baker the de-
| PENDANT.
| Before calling upon the accused man to
| plead and also before the jury was en-
| paneled, Mr.. Baker asked that the in
| format ton be quashed for the reasons as
| alleged: THAT the information is double
| and sets up several alleged offenses and
violations of section 10 of the act of June
| Is, 1878; also that it fails to allege an Of
| Tense within the meaning of the act for it
| fails to state that the said poison alleged
| to have been sold was for medical use, and
further that the information fails to show
! an offense within the meaning of section
; 10, as it does not alIege that the poison
| alleged to have been sold was not sold upon
the prescription of practitioner of medi-
| cine
Mr.. Baker made an argument in support
| of his contention. To this Mr.. Mullowny
| replied The motion was overruled, and
| Mr.. Baker noted an exception.
Attorney Makes Request.
| After the jury was called into the box
| Mr. Baker asked that the attorney for the
United States elect which one of the three
! offenses alleged the defendant should be
| tried upon. This was opposed by Mr.. Null
| lowry, and his objection was sustained by
| the court.
The jury was then sworn, after which
Mr.. Mullowny made a statement to the
| jury, tel. ng hem that he expec ed to prove
| that Smith sold the poison which caused
| Miss Bruseke's death.
Mr.. Baker objected to the use of the
| words (which caused Miss Bruseke's
DEATH" and Mr.. Mullowny withdrew the
words complained of.
Detective c. w. Proctor was called the
| first witness, He related at length the
steps taken by him to investigate the case
| and said he learned that Mr.. Murray,
| clerk for the accused man. sold the poison
| in question.
The attorney for the defense asked that
the reference to Mr.. Murray be stricken out,
as there was no mention of his name in the
| information. Mr.. Baker argued that his
contention was founded on the law. The
| the position taken by Mr.. Baker, who, he
said, was too good lawyer not to know
that he had no authorities to sustain him
| in his contention. He insisted that all the
authorities were precisely the reverse of
what was stated by Mr.. Baker.
Mr.. Baker claimed that the government
could not, under the Information filed, hold
Smith for the sale Of the poison, when 1t
was evident that the proof would show the
poison was sold by one Murray.
Judges Interpretation.
Judge Scott said he Interpreted the phar-
macy law to mean that the proprietor of
drug store was responsible for all that took
place therein. He therefore overruled Mr.
Bakers motion. Mr.. Baker gave notice of
an execution and of his intention to ask
the Court of Appeals for a writ of error.
Resuming, Mr.. Proctor said he had a
conversation with the defendants clerk,
Mr.. Murray, Smith being present, during
which he told Murray that by his own adj
| mission the law had been violated in sew
e-al particulars. Murray replied that his
course in regard to the sale of the poison
to the now deceased girl was the same as
he had pursued in all similar sales.
Cross-examned by Mr. Baker, Mr.. Proc
tor said Smith remarked while the confer
ence was in progress that he tSmith) was
responsible for Murrays acts as his clerk
and INDUCED in quite TRADE upon Murray
for neglecting to comply with the phar-
macy law.
Mr.. James J. Baker, a letter carrier, cor
roborated what Mr.. Proctor had said con-
corning the conversation between the lat
ter and Murray In reply to a question
from Mr.. Baker, Baker said he was at Miss
Brusekes house when she committed sui
eide, but did not see her take the poison.
Counsel for defense asked that all refer
ences made by the witness to the girl COM
hitting suicide be stricken out, because he
only knew what he had been told oy an
other person. The request was granted by
Judge Scott.
Upon being further questioned by Mr..
Baker, the witness said he could not re-
member whether or not Smith took part in
the conversation referred to by Mr.. Proc
tor.
Clerks Testimony.
Harry Murray, the clerk in Smiths drug
store, testified that he sold the poison to
Miss Bruseke. Mr.. Mullowny questioned
Murray about the sale, and the witness re-
piled that he did not care to answer any
further questions concerning the tranSac-
ton and would refuse to do so.
The prosecution asked the court to COM
pei the witness to reply to his interroga-
tories which request granted, and the
Mr.. Mullowny then asked several ques-
lions relating to the sale, all of which were
answered by the witness.
Cross-examined by Mr.. Baker, Murray
said he was a registered pharmacist, and
that Smith was present when Mr.. Proctor
held the conversation with the witness. He
further said that he had been in the drug
business six years and had never seen the
word poison put on the wrapper Of a
bottle containing carbolic acid
At this point court took a recess for
thirty minutes.
Defendants Testimony.
Upon reassembling at 1:15 o'clock this
afternoon, Mr.. Baker made short address
to the jury, in which he said he would
claim that his client was not responsible
for the sale of the poison, as asserted in
the information
The defendant, William l.. Smith, was
then called to the stand. He knew nothing,
he said of the sale of the carbolic acid to
Miss Bruseke. He not a registered
pharmacist, but is studying as a pharma-
cist at Howard University. He depended,
he said, upon his clerk, Murray, for the
putting UP of drugs and prescriptions, and
his inst ructionS tO him were q he careful