Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1901-11-30

pecfally where blood stains figured, and
| mad testified in court great many times
| after the defense had argued with the
| United states attorney that Dr. Schaefrer
| mad qualified as an expert the witness tes-
! tined that the 21st of last May he received
MIS-. Bonines wrapper from Detective
| fiatner, and was requested to make an eX-
| ANIMATION for blood stains. He was en-
gagged IN the work parts of fifteen or twen-
| 1y days. The witness first made a very
careful examination with a hand lens and
| later with a microscope He found evi-
| deEces of grease and dirt, but nothing that
/ even looked like a blood stafn
When the witness received the wrapper.
| so he testified, there was a tear under the
| arm, held together with a sa fety pin The
| tear had been enlarged since tha time
According to the witness five or six ex-
| perts have examined the wrapper. and II
| has been roughly handled.
| DIT Schaeffer told of examining the blood
| STAINS in Ayres' room, and said that the
stains on the carpet and other articles
| have faded very much since the witness
examined them the 10th of May.
Mr.. Gould then asked DIR. Schaeffer the
| following question:: IN the event two per-
sons had been struggling in that room, the
| smaller person with back to the larger; a
| pistol was discharged, blood gushed ove!'
! the shoulder Of the smaller person, VIII }
had on this wrapper, could the blood have
! been removed from the garment"
| Yes" was the reply, Chemically or Iy
| boiling in a vat"
But not by ordinary washing?''
| mo, sir"
: DR.. Schaeffer further declared that Mrs
Bonfne's wrapper had not been washed.
| DR.. Schaeffer was cross-examined at
| length by Attorney Fulton, for the defense
| regarding number of tests for discovering
blood other than those used by the wit
| ness. DR.. Schaeffer insisted that most OF
| the tests mentioned had been exploded
| long ago."
The Torn Wrapper.
Answering question propounded by Mr..
Gould, DR.. Schaeffer testified that Judging
| from the condition of Ayres' room any one
| going through the window and wearing a
! wrapper would have stained the wrapper
| with blood unless the garment was held
very carefully; and that if the hands Of
| the wearer were bloody stains from the
hands would in all probability be left on
the wrapper.
In connection with the cross-eXamnation
| of DR.. Schaeffer, the proceedings waxed de-
cidedly interesting when the witness i'm
passively declared that the wrapper could
have been torn by counsel and the ex-
perts employed by the defense DR.. Schaef-
| fer was emphatic in asserting that the
wrapper had not been torn while in his
hands beyond the enlarging of the rent
there when the garment was first handed
| to the witness, just one-quarter of an inch
| in order to test the stability of the fabric.
1t developed that Attorney Fulton, ac-
cCmpanied by two experts, called at the
office of DR.. Schaeffer some time ago and
examined the wrapper. DIR. Schaeffer re-
qEired his visitors to-accompany him from
| the room when summoned therefrom to re-
ceiVe a message through the telephone.
He constantly cautioned them to handle the
garment with the utmost care.
Did We not handle it with great care"
| inquired Attorney Douglass.
with care, but not with great care,
stated the witness.
Did you consider that We handled it
| carelessly?' the attorney insisted.
In manner that L would call care
lessly," replied DR.. Schaeffer.
What do you call careless?" then asked
Attorney Fulton.
"You did not wash your hands in chem
garment, as did, explained the witness
did that failure constitute careless
ness?''
Yes, sir: microscopicalIy speaking"
United States Attorney Gould arose and
disclaimed any intention on the part of the
government of accusing the defense of tear
ing the garment Intentionally for the pur-
pose of manufacturing evidence in the case.
Attention was next concentrated on the
velvet collar of Mrs. Bonines wrapper. At
torney Fulton asked if it was not possible
for a drop of blood on that collar to have
been removed and no trace left.
IF the spot was very minute, 1t could
have been removed from the velvet by an
expert, but not If a wash was used" stated
DR.. Schaeffer.
The defense asked a question embodytng
the supposition that Mrs. Bonine was we'll
versed In removing stains, and Mr.. Gould
objected unless the defense intended to
show that Mrs. Bonine was an expert in
that particular line.
Attorney Fulton characterized the reason
for the objection as ridiculous. Mr.. Gould
replied that he did not object to being
spoken of as ridiculous for the reason that
all the text writers and the majority of the
courts agreed with him regards the mat
ter at issue. The court sustained Mr.
Goulds objection.
Or
collar had not been brushed for several
weeks prior to the time the witness re-
ceived the garment. He admitted that the
skirt of the wrapper might have been
washed at some time.
"How recently was it washed?" Attorney
Fulton wanted to know.
I'm not an expert in the washing of
ladies' Skirts replied DIR. Schaefer
The defense pointed out to Dr. Schaefer
stain on the duck lining beneath the vel
vet collar.
isn't that blood?" the witness was ask
ed.
mo. SIR" he replied, 'qt is dirt"
Dr. Schaefer and an expert employed by
the defense each took piece Of the lining
1t Is expected that they will examine the
same and report thereon later
With the assistance of a Mr. Cox. Attor-
ney FUlton illustrated before the Jury the
relative positions of Ayres and Mrs Bonine
at the time the alleged struggle began, ac-
cording to the defendant. With Mr. Cox
standing directly in front of him, ATTORNEY
Fulton asked DR.. Schaeffer If 1t was not
possible for the attorney to fall forward
bleeding from the mouth at the time with
out blood getting on wrapper, If such was
worn by Mr.. Cox.
mo, SIR answered the witness, decisive
ly.
Attorney Fulton further examined the
witness regarding the possibility of Mrs
Bonine having been in a struggle with
Ayres and having emerged from the strug-
gle with little or no blood-stains upon her
garments. The answers were favorable to
the government.
An objection entered by Mr. Gould to the
form of question propounded by Attorney
Fulton drew forth some criticism from the
latter. This occasioned Mr.. Gould to iumn
to his feet and declare that he had thrown
all the light possible on the case He had
not hesitated. he said, to put on the stand
witnesses who had materially aided the de-
iense, the government, of course, knowing
just what those witnesses would saw. He
had thrown open the ffoodgates of infor-
nation; SO to speak, and the defense had
assured him that be was conducting the
case in manner that was above reproach.
The Dead Mans Father