New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1900-01-12

70 the police. She replied that she had left the
fiat &c attend her mothers funeral but that the
glass and spoon had remained locked in the cup
board.
Q.-Did the bottle holder match the toilet articles
OF owners did you get them? k@Dinerent places
bought some OF them--some We're given to me
on the night of December II, about midnight
Q.-You had been out to the theatre? A-Yes
on the package at the time? A.--There was some;
thing said about the writing being disguised and
s wonder who sent It.
NO NAME MENTIONED
Q.-was anybodys name mentioned? A-No.
. Q.-Now, what were the trst words you USED
I asked her what was the matter when saw the
e o4 ~ re She been m before YOU? A-she had
been Up about hour: at least she told me So
Odd you see Mr. Cornish on that morning ORR se
o.@Tdd understand you 10 say that you never
had any experience with bromo-seltzer? A.-1es
C.-Never took any bromo setter? All had
would have rad experience with it.
o.-Answer yes or no A.-No never took
o.-Dld you ever buy any bromo settler? A.-No
Q.-Are you sure that you never oought any
bromo setter at drug store at Sixty sixth-st ano
Madison-ave? Al am sure never have bought
Mrs. Rogers, do you remember how Cornish
was dressed when you saw him? Ale had his
Q.-what clothes had he on? A.Well. I can't
rereIn Der the colcr or exactly whet they Mere ne
had his clothing or he wouldn't nave come q bi
Into the dnng b. de might not 1ta hecs o haa mis-
Q;-Di6n't he come out with his pajamas on A.
II he had come out with his paiamas on would
Q.-Answer me. Did he come out with MS
Odd he have his outer clothes on over HIS
pejamas? Aim sure don't know Ia. -. .
pulled ais clothes on over his pajamas to go after
o-Wiii you testify that he did pull his clothes
On oyer his pajamas TO go out after the doctor?
o.-When you were living at No. 70 West Eighty
fourth-st- in 1885. your husband was not living
Q.-When did you separate? Am 1897
Glow soon after the separation dld MT. Cor
nish go to live in Eighty-fourth-st.? Al don't
Q.-Had you previous that time private letter
eSx IN pHGTT the IF name et 1i had
Q.-For how long? About three years wasn't III
AoNot so long as that .,,,u ,o4+o- ,,o., .,o,o,,
was kept by a man of the name of Murdoch? A
Q-And didn't yoa know this same man served
newspapers to Cornish at the same time? Al
left the Adelaide? Ave couldn't pay SO ex-
oIWasn't fact that the owner notified you oq
Of dnf Of n95s IN It Was simply IN
regard to Mr.. Cornish and man downst s.l,
some friends IN one night, and they made noise
MINTYRE BROUGHT IN.
o.-Do you remember who 1t was on the morn
ing of the 2sth who first mentioned the name OF
"a a.; 1e Me1 M Cornish n5
Q.-Had Mr.. Mcintyre been Jour counsel betoref
o.-Mrg. Rogers. where did you spend the sum
Ter going anywhere else.
o.1Did 5 You go to the Thousand Islands? A
o.-Didn't YOU go there at all? Al never have
oaHo WE frequenfy have You talked with Mr. Nc
1nfyre about the case? Awe have talked about
oW nSs did you last talk with Mr., MCINTYRE?
With him 1k since liT' came nasA to Ne%York saw him
at my hotel, the Amsterdam. o-..-,,
A.-Not in Hartford
Q.-Have you ever been there? Ayes; one
night last summer.
o.-You were living with Mrs. Hovey in Hart
ford were you? AZYes; 30
Odd you meet Mr. Cornish there? A.-No.
After the witness had said that she knew
Cornish's family well, including his sister. Mrs.
Sanders. Mr.. Weeks read from the testimony she
gave before the Coroner. wherein she had sworn
otherwise. Mrs. Rogers explained that she
in an excited state of mind on that occasion,
and that her memory was disordered.
In redirect examination Mrs. Rogers said in
the matter of the separation between herself
and husband she was in the right, and that he
made her an allowance of $50 a month. The
letter box she said, she rented with the knowl-
edge Of her mother and on the advice Of counsel
She hired it for the purpose of receiving certain
information about her husband. He was in the
habit. she explained. Of opening her letters. -.
Karl Z. TrOmmer, salesman, employed by
the Roessler Haslacker Chemical Company, who
called at Molineux's Office by request to take an
order for enamels, was the next witness. He
said his firm dealt in cyanides. but that nothing
was sold TO Moneux a result of his call
upon the defendant.
BARNET CASE AGAIN
Then Professor witthaus was called. He was
asked first to state the results of his analysis of
the box Of powders found in Barnets rooms but
Mr.. Weeks objected vigorously TO any introduc-
ton of matters apperteinng to Barnet's death.
He was. however overruled, and the witness
after explaining the tests he used said that out
Of 261. So grains of powder which he received he
computed there were 1922 80 grains of cyanide of
mercury. He had also analysed the liver taken
from Barnet's body when he exhumed and
produced therefrom hydrocyanic acid, and also
& trace Of Prussian blue, these denoting the
presence Of cyanide Of mercury. He found mer-
curry he went to say. in the kidneys but not
cyanide. In all he found about seyen-tenths OF
grain of mercury In all the organs He could
form opinion as TO the amount OF mercury
originally taken by Barnet. Going then &c
relate the results OF his analysis Of the bottle OF
poisoned bromo settler, the witness stated that
the contents of the bottle were made up of the
usual ingredients of bromo settler, mixed with
mercurial cyanide to a large extent. One anal
ysis had yielded over ~ per cent of cyanide
and the other produced 8. and another IL per
cent. but he was unable to compute the per-
centage Of cyanide in the whole bottleful- One
OF the Jurors asked If the chemicals obtained
from Barnet's body might not have been due
TO embalming, but the witness said he saw no
marks Of embalming on the body.
The trial was adjourned until 1870 o'clock this
morning.
4" This is truth the poet sings
That a sorrows crown OF sorrow