Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1901-12-09

Of the same caliber, and otherwise similar
to the one taken from Ayres' room. Smut
ting on the cloth fired ut did not occur
when the muzzle Of the pistol was held at
q distance greater than nine or nine and a
half inches from the cloth The defense at
tempted to show by the witness that when
pistol ball is sent at an angle the powder
marks are often thrown to the obtuse an
gle, or side. and ofttimes no trace can be
Seen; and that in order to set fire to cloth
ing regardless of the distance of the muz-
zle the ball must go through the cloth or
come in direct contact with a frayed edge.
DR.. Carr declared that the burn on the
left sleeve of Ayres undershIrt was not
caused by the shot that inflicted the fatal
wound in the chest.
The defense contends that the chest
wound was first inflicted the arm wound
Second and the hip wound last. as the de-
PENDANT and the deceased were falling; the
sleeve was set on fire when the hip wound
was being inflicted.
The character of the powder marks on
AyreS chest, the burning of the shirt
sleeve and the scorch of the flesh on top of
the arm, precludes the doctrine, so counsel
for the defendant maintain, that the sleeve
was set on fire when the chest wound was
made and the arm was in an attitude of
defense.
Again an Argument.
DIR. Carr was asked to state whether or
not, in his opinion. the hip wound, with the
muzzle of the pistol held at a distance Of
from ten to twenty-four Inches, could have
been inflicted with the parties the floor
or in the act Of falling. and at the same
time have caused the marks the body Of
Ayres bore on the left arm.
AIR. Gould objected and a lengthy argu-
ment followed Before the issue was de-
cided the usual recess Of the court was
taken.
When the proceedings were resumed this
afternoon Mr.. Gould withdrew his OBJ
lection to the question, and DR.. Carr an
swered it by saying he thought the wound
could have been received described.
An inquiry was next made to whether
the witness had made any study to deter
mine If the wound could actually have been
Inflicted as indicated. The government OBJ
Hected and the court sustained the same,
temarking that he could not conceive of
how the answer to the question could be
competent.
Attorney Douglass thereupon attempted
to have the witness identify a photograph
showing the results of one of the expert
ments made by the latter.
Again Mr.. Gould objected, challenging
the defense to produce single adjudicated
case in the United States or Great Britain
In support of the competency of such tes-
tiUony
The defense offered the photograph for
the purpose of showing what has been done
can be done again. Attorney Douglass ex-
planned that if parties corresponding with
the defendant and the deceased could as
sumo certain position, then that position
could have been assumed by the defend
ant and the deceased during the struggle
which. Mrs. Bonine claims, occurred.
IL was not commended that the photograph
Illustrated precisely what occurred, SO said
Attorney Douglass, for Mrs. Bonine her
self did not know exactly regarding the
positions when each of the shots was fired.
Counsel admitted that the proposition was
novel one.
susfafns Government Counsel.
The court sustained Mr.. Gould's objection
against admitting the photograph in evil
dence.
DR. Carr testified that he was at police
headquarters the Goth of last May and
heard Mrs. Bonine make her statement
that afternoon. The witness was Of the
opinion that the wounds received by Ayres
could have been inflicted in the manner
lnen described by the defendant. Dr. Carr
was not permitted to answer a question as
10 whether or not the wounds would have
Deen inflicted in any manner other than
that described by Mrs. Bonine in her state
ment
The defense propounded certain questions
to show that 1t was not unlikely that the
blood alleged to have been on Mrs. Bonine's
wrapper came from outside the breast
wound rather than from Ayres' mouth and
that blood coming fast from the mouth
would cause death by suffocation rather
than by hemorrhage
Considering the position Mrs. Bonine oc-
cupied on the floor under the BODY OF
Ayres during the struggle Attorney Doug
lass asked the witness If Mrs Bonnie could
eAtrlcdleQ herSel1 without getting
considerable blood on her wrapper
Il object" interposed Mr. Gould
objection sustained ruled the court.
Identically the same question was ask
ed DR.. Schaeffer by the government" COM
mented Attorney Douglass
Inc records not being handy at the mo-
ment, the matter was passed for the time
being and the witness was examined as To
q phase of the case that 1t is not proper To
refer to IL print.
- Returning to the question last objected
10, doubt was raised as to the same having
been previously asked.
Mr.. Gould withdrew his objection and Mr.
Carr stated that he thought Mrs BONNIE
could have extricated herself from the DO
her wrapper.
This closed the direct examination Of DR..
Carr Mr.. Goulfs first question in cross
examination precipitated a controversy
Taking Mrs. Bonine's statement that the
blood poured over her right shoulder and on
her wrapper, would you expect to find more
blood on the wrapper than was found on
the lining of the collar by the microscopic
and other tests?' was the question asked.
Attorney Douglass objected strenuously
pgt the court overruleo the objection.
Dr. carr answered the question by saw
ing: L would have expected to have found
little more blood II the wrapper hadn't
been washed
The Blood On Wrapper Collar.
DIT Carr stated it to be his opinion that
the blood on the collar of Mrs. Bonine's
wrapper was received from the blood exud-
ing from the wound in Ayres' chest. He
admitted that it might have been caused
by a bloody hand taking hold of the wrap
per in taking of the garment
The death of Ayres was due to asphyxia-
tlon ana hemo-rhage, according to Dr.
Carr, the prime cause being asphyxiation
At this point an adjournment was taken
until tomorrow morning at 10 o'clock
GOING TO BOSTON.