New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1900-01-05

poison package.
Mr. weeks produced a letter in the handwriting
OF John ID. Adams. which had been marked for
Identification and attempted to question the wit
to a conversation relative to it which he
is said to have had with Mr.. Carvalho. Mr.. os-
borne objected. and the Recorder sustained the OBJ
lection Captain McClusky said that he the
letter which Mr.. Weeks produced for the first time
on January T. 1899. He showed it to Mr.. Kinsley
he said and also called later at the office of Mr..
Carvaho with it. Recorder Goff here interrupted
and asked What Mr.. Weeks expected to show by
this line OF examination and not being satisfied
with Mr.. Weekss answer said he wished 1t to be
understood that the was not being tried at
such length and at great an expense to the
county for the purpose of making issue between
two sets of handwriting experts The jury the
Court said. would its proper value such
testimony.
COUNSEL CALLED TO ORDER.
Mr. Weeks proceeded to question the witness as
10 the method he pursued in obtaining and sub
hitting the writings the experts retained by the
prosecution. and also asked the witness If he had
marked the specimens in different colored inks
Mr. Osborne constantly objected 10 this line OF ex-
animation and ultimately the inevitable morning
wrangle took place between counsel, bringing
upon them a severe reprimand from the Court
With his face angrily flushed the Recorder threat
ened adjourn the and to consider the pro-
priety of treating the counsel as they deserved
He characterized their conduct as undignifed and
unprofessional. and more like overgrown school
boys than lawyers engaged in an important
trial Mr.. Weeks protested against the censure,
and said that the counsel for the defence did not
feel that they had In any way violated the pro-
prieties of the court. Mr.. Osborne said nothing.
DR.. Henry B. Douglass who attended Barnet in
the last days of his illness, called after Cap
tain McClusky. At the very first mention Mr. Os-
borne made of Barnets Mr.. Weeks vigor-
orsly objected, but was overruled, Mr. Osborne ex-
planning that the purpose of his examination was
TO show that Barnets physical condition and make
ri,a+iaY 1oixar
in the diagnosis sent to certain firm signed III.
e. Barnet The doctor described Barnet as being
about thirty-two years old six feet TALL of blond
type stout and with a full face. In answer to fur
Their questions from the Assistant District Attor-
ney DR.. Douglass said that he had in Barnets
room box containing form of effervescent salts
prepared by firm of patent medicine manufact
urers. The box, he said, similar to one pro-
duced by MIR. Osborne Mr. Osborne attempted to
get before the jury conversation which the wit
ness is said TO have had with Barnet relative
10 this box of salts. Recorder Gof would
moi allow the question, however, and Mr.. Os
borne turned the examination to the symp-
toms which Barnet betrayed during his last
Illness. The witness said he diagnosed the
OF diphtheria. He also observed. he said,
alterations in the mouth and throat, which
might have been caused by mercuric poisoning.
Because of these symptoms and Of conversation
ne had with Barnet he took a box of headache
powder which he found in the room to the firm of
Van Horn & Ellison for analysis DR.. Douglass said
cardiac astbenia, following diphtheria. He did
despite the fact that he had found signs of mer-
curial poisoning, because he was Of opinion that
Barnet did not die from poison, but from diph-
liberia.
Mr.. Weeks began his cross-exa nnination by sug-
costing that the mercurial symptoms might have
been caused by taking calomel but the witness said
ne had not prescribed this medicine. He did not
know, though. if any other physician had previous
ly prescribed calomel for Barnet. Repeated doses
of drug DIR sal he
Inflammation he had described, and then finally he
repeated his opinion that Barnet died from diph.
iberia and nothing else
In redirect examination DR.. Douglass said he had
heard of any of patients suffering from
mercuriai poisoning being treated for diphtheria.
NOT MERCURIAL POISONING.
Mr. Osborne questioned the witness about the
culture he made. The Doctor said he took some
of the matter from the patients throat and put it
in gelatine-a material furnished by the Board of
Health-and made culture.
o:-And. as matter of fact you didn't find
Rp at 6n you sav fq 3bnf mercurl poi
Q-Why. didn't you say you saw symptoms Of
liberation from the of mercury, I wouldn't
call it poisoning
Mr.. Osborne inclined to argue with his
witness. He thought that the liberation was poison
ing The Doctor thought it not. They finally
agreed that mercury caused serious irritation in
the mouth. and if anybody wanted to call it poison
ing he could.
nize as poison, DR.. Douglass? To me, lay
ma msb be an overdose foq one person might
not be for another. Hence. it wouldn't be poison
Q-But as a consequence of symptoms you found
terra you found in his throat and when you had
sufficiently developed them. did you not find diph-
iberia germs?
The witness admitted that, while he did not find
he had r0t fhe
in his mind that heart failure following dphtheria
the of death.
Guy Ellison. a chemical expert, next called
TO describe the results of the analysis he made of
the powder which brought to him by DR..
Douglass. He said he found cyanide of mercury
mixed with the powder submitted to him. De-
scribing the analysis. the witness said that he
placed a certain quantity of the powder in a test
tube in solution with hydrochloric acid. This, he
said, gave the odor of bitter Almonds which is
peculiar TO the cyandes. and is found strongest in
cyanogen The solution then allowed to cool,
and the various other tests applied to prove the
presence of mercury in the form of cyanide.
The cross-examnation of Mr.. Weeks devoted
to showing that calomel and other substances
might have been contained in the powder without
admitted that under the tests he applied he was
able say positively only that cyanide of mercury
present, and while other posons might have
been there he had not looked for them.
TEST MADE BEFORE THE JURY.
Replying to Mr.. Osborne. he said he was willing
TO repeat the test he made before the jury. After
the Recorder had ascertained from him that the
headache powder he about to analyze was in
the condition as when he received IL from
Dr. Douglass. he allowed proceed with his
test despite the objections of the counsel for the
defence
The witness back to the window behind the
Jury box and got test tube about six inches long
in it he had drop of distilled wafer and he shook