The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1907-09-05

humed. 1 go further and say that it is
even probable that an attempt would
be made"
No Technical Objection.
In the outset of the hearing in the af-
ternoon c. F. Hutchings opened his
statements upon the assumption that
| the court intended to issue an order for
examination almost Immediately He
| stated that he wanted the records to
clearly indicate the position the defense
assumed and that the exceptions be
noted in order that their presentation of
the case might not be embarrassed in
any manner upon an appeal.
We would like to hold our records
separate in the two cases, the equity
and law" said Hutchings to the court.
we had no idea that any steps would
be taken in the equity case. All we can
ask for now is to have fair record.
The court Immediately ordered that
with respect to both cases: That the
evidence shall stand and that either
party may offer such other evidence as
they may properly offer. And the court
orders that either or all parties may
offer such other evidence as they may
desire to make in either or both cases"
The court further vacated the former
order with reference to the equity case
and sustained the Jurisdiction of the case
There will be no exceptions allowed
on these technical points but exceptions
OF merit will be allowed" said the judge.
I am going into the merits of this
If you ask exceptions on mere technical
ities''
The attorneys for the defense put up
a game fight and in asking for a fur
tner nearing and an adjournment stated
that they proposed to explode the the
DRY of the alleged expert testimony of
the insurance company showing that
suicide had been contemplated, that the
claim that Perkins was not able f1nan-
cially to carry the insurance which he
assumed would also be upset, that the
professors of Michigan university with
whom Perkins corresponded regarding
the enectS of poison would be brought
here If necessary to give testimony up
setting the statements made that the
correspondence was commenced with
an idea of getting at a knowledge of
potsons in order to commit suicide.
What do you propose to offer in the
way of testimony to show what was
done with the package of morphine on
the morning he died?" asked the court
u.s. replied Judge Barker. I'VE don't
propose to say"
What of the Morphine
Il want to know clearly what your
answer will be tending to show what
was done with and what use was made
of that package of morphine repeated
the court. Whats your answer to
that?'
I'VE propose to show that he had a
legitimate use for it and that he
THAT is pretty vague. What 1 want
to get at is what use was made of
that morphine after it was purchased.
1t is enirely possible to substitute one
pearance. I don't say, 1 don't intima tie
that the package was substituted. But
you know that it could be done. It's
of great Importance to know what was
done with regard to that particular
package. don't ask you to show
whether he had any legitimate use for
the morphine. The fact that the goph-
ers were there is immaterial. I don't
care whether the gophers were in the
back yard or front yard. L ask you
now what became of that package"
TT was purchased for a legitimate
purpose. he hada legitimate use for
it, came back the answer.
do I understand the executors of
the estate decline to state that the
morphine was used for one purpose or
the Other?
'I don't propose to show what be-
came of that package but 1 will show
that he had a legitimate use for it, |
answered Judge Barker.
THAT L regard as highly immaterial. |
That is not the question: replied the /
court. The question is, what did he |
use it for. He might have intended to
destroy gophers but that is not the
Did he use it to destroy
gophers, or was it taken uD into the
body for circulation for its destruction,
or is it still intact?"
Its absolutely impossible for the
family to say, the family is entirely in
ignorance of what happened between
10 o'clock and at the time of the fall"
replied Samuel Riggs.
It's very important to show what
became of that package. 1t would be
the easiest thing in the world that an
other package would be substituted"
Il will say in behalf of the executors
and members of the family that the
package will not be substituted said
Riggs.
Judge McPherson'S Statement.
81 make no charges against any one,"
was the statement by Judge McPher-
son. Il was careful in my opinion to
negative any opinion of fraud here In
tact know that no fraud will be prac-