Oxford Democrat. [volume] (Paris, Me.) 1833-1933, 1908-03-24

hlied with bloody serum; other organ
normal.
Cross-examination by Mr.. Swasey:
In these wounds where you fount
pieces of wood, were they we'll defined
pieces of board, with smooth surfaces?
| There was no smooth surface on them
You couldn't tell what thickness o.
boards they came from?
Icould not.
Was the wound in the throat sufficien
to cause death?
| Under certain circumstances.
What circumstances?
If it was uncared for.
In how long time?
can't tell. should say from two t
four hours.
Mr.. Swasey asked DR.. Bradbury Il
take the knife in his hand, and bend his
arm naturally, bringing the knife to his
throat. he did 80, the point coming a,
almost the same point on his throat
which he had indicated as the point
where the instrument entered Radcliffe's
neck.
Would it be possible for Radcliffe,
standing with that knife in his hand, in
case of sudden explosion, to make that
wound in his throat?
1t would be possible.
And haven't you said that it was prob
able?
Probable? No, sir.
On redirect DR.. Bradbury said that
he should not consider it possible that
the whole wound could have been made
ia that way-the right-hand section of it
might have been.
DR.. j. G. Littlefield of South Paris
testified to going to the scene of the
explosion on the night of the 18th of
June, with Mr.. Wheeler, the coroner,
and the situation at the mine was fully
reviewed.
Were you summoned to the coroner's
inquest?
was not.
Did you engage in an autopsy with
DR.. Bradbury?
DR.. Littlefield described the condition
of the body in detail, as DR.. Bradbury
had already described it.
Cross examination: If Mr.. Radcliffe
was in the little dynamite house, and an
explosion occurred at bis left, would
you expect to find the limbs burned in
that way?
should expect to find them burned.
Mr.. Swasey put another hypothetical
question, but it was objected to and ex-
Guided.
Mr.. Swasey then had DR.. Littlefield
take the knife in his hand and bring it to
his throat, as DR.. Bradbury had done,
the point of the knife coming at about
the same point on the throat.
DIR. John F. Thompson of Portland
testified that in his practice he had OBJ
served numerous knife wounds in the
human body.
DR.. Thompson was shown the section
Of skin from Radcliffe's neck, and was
asked as to the character of the two
lines of the cut. He described the right
end of the wound as punctured wound,
and the other line as what he called an
incised or cutting wound.
DR.. Thompson also stated in answer
to questions that he had experimental
with the knife in the case on the skin of
one of the lower animals, making a pre-
cisely similar wound by a straight stab
followed by thrust to the left.
Other hypothetical questions were
asked of DR.. Thompson.
Could such wound have been caused
by flying missile?
1t might have been-probably not.
Asked of what the man died, under
the conditions testified to, DR.. Thomp-
son answered, by shock, hemorrhage,
and eventually by suffocation.
Is it your opinion that that wound
was self-inflicted?
In my opinion it was not. 1t appears
to have been made, in both of its parts,
with intent.
On cross-examination Mr.. Swasey ask
ed number of hypothetical questions
as to what would happen in case of an
explosion of dynamite, if the man had a
knife in his hand. Several of these
questions were objected to and exclud-
ed, as containing elements which were
not in evidence, and none of them were
of particular significance unless it was
the last one, which was at first excluded
by the court, but on further consider
alton was allowed to stand:
Surprising that the knife was held in
the hand of the dead man, and it was
drawn up by any reason as indicated by
DR.. Bradbury, and that puncture made.
and the man found dead with that cut in
his throat, are you able to say from that,
that it might not have been accidental?
No. sir.
On redirect DIR. Thompson stated that
in his hospital practice he had known OF
men sustaining by dynamite explosions
worse injuries to the lower limbs than
were described in this case, who are
alive to-day.
DR.. Charles D. Smith of Portland,
of the Maine General
Hospital, testified that he had seen the
specimens of potato and apple taken
from Radcliffe's stomach, and had heard
Professor Robinson's testimony. In his
opinion Professor Robinson's opinion
was correct, that the food had not been
in the stomach more than an hour.
Cross-examination: DR.. Smith, what
would be the effect of alcohol in the
stomach upon the rapidity of digestion?
1t would depend upon the character
of the liquor containing the alcohol.
State of Maine whiskey would have
very different effect from claret wine.
On further examination on this point
DR.. Smith stated that from the quantity
of alcohol found in the stomach he did
not think it seriously interfered with
digestion.
The evidence for the state was closed
about $50 Thursday night, and as it
was so near the hour of adjournment
nothing more was done that night.
Friday morning Mr.. Swasey opened the
case for the defence. After preliminary
remarks regarding the offence and the
status of the respondent, Mr.. Swasey
presented the claims to be made by the
defence.
Mr.. Everett will 60 upon the stand,
said Mr.. Swasey, and relate to you every
thing in connection with his relations
with Radcliffe and his labors at the
mine. Every particle of evidence which
we can produce will be laid before you
fully and frankly.
IL is USUAL ior tue ProoooueihS "etoihoy
OF attorneys to develop some theory or
theories as to how the crime was COM
mitted. In this case the prosecuting at
torueys have developed no theory. Have
you had any suggestion from the counsel
as to how they will argue the crime was
committed? don't know whether they
are going to argue that Radcliffe was
killed by being blown up, or by having
his throat cut, whether Everett cut his