Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1902-02-08
MAYS HEARING HAS BEGUN
Preliminary Examination Of Jeff May,
for Murder Of HAIRY Hibbs,
Begun Today.
Entire Morning Session Taken Up
with Testimony Of Dr.. Matchan,
as to Injuries.
Mrs. Hibbs and Other Witnesses Will
be Put On the Stand This
Afternoon.

The preliminary examination of Jeff
May, charged with the murder Of
Harry G. Hibbs, began this morning
before Justice Tibbils. The office of
the justice was crowded with the at
torneys, witnesses and spectators.
The entire morning Of the session was
taken up with the examination of DR..
W. G. Matchan, who was called to tes-
tify as to the post norton examina-
ton performed upon the body of
Hibbs, when it was exhumed, a week
after the burial. The examination
was made January 2S. a little over ten
days after his death.
DR.. Matchan testified as to the ma
ture of the injuries found upon the
body of the deceased young man, and
to the presence of t~hesfracture of the
skull, which was. not found at the first
examination of the, body. DR.. Matchan
described this injury and gave it as
his opinion that it was caused by some
blunt instrument, with which a blow
was struck. On cross-examination
Attorney Register for the defense went
into the details Of the matter closely,
asking many hypothetical questions
with regard to this injury. It was
not found on the first examination,
the witness stated, because the integ-
ument about the skull there was not
broken, and the slight discoloration
seen was thought to be due to cada-
veric lividity. Attorney Register
asked the witness whether he could
say that the injury, was not made after
the first examination of the body and
between that. time and the exhuming
of the body for a second examination.
The witness said he did not think so,
and gave reasons to base his belief
that the injury had been made before
death. There we're many questions
touching on this point, and on the
matter of how the blow was inflicted.
Attorney Register asked whether such
an injury might not have been made
by a fall and striking the head upon
some part of the well curbing, or upon
some other sharp object, and the wit
ness stated that such a thing was pos
sible. In response to other questions
the witness stated that he would not
pretend to ia just how the wound
was inflicted. With regard to the
exact cause Of death, whether it was
from drowning or from this blow,
there We're many questions asked.
The witness stated that from his ex-
animation of the lungs he thought
there had been some effort at breath
ing after Hibbs had fallen into the
water. He thought the blow had
been inflicted and the body had been
immersed in the water at nearly the
same time. The witness stated that
the fact that there was no break of
the integument over the wound in the
skull might have been due to the fact
that something such as a cap had in
terposed between the weapon and the
head, and he thought such a cap as
Hibbs had worn on that morning
would have been a good protection.
He thought if there had been nothing
between the head and the object with
which the injury had been inflicted
there would have been an abrasion.
Mrs. Maytie Hibbs was called 10 he
stand as the first witness and had been
asked only a few questions when DR..
Matchan's testimony was taken. The
inquiry was resumed this afternoon.
e our window disnlay of box naaer.