The Detroit times., 1909-07-13
loyal IAN INSANE
! WHEN He SHOT
G0STAN|AN
~ DIR. ID. II. CLARK.
joctor Unable To Control His
} Actions at Time Of Court Room
Tragedy, Alienist TestiAes
For Defense.
Bases Diagnosis On Personal Exam.
nation and On 5000 Word Hypo-
thetical Question.

The battle OF the experts In the Boy
allan murder trial began In earnest.
Tuesday morning, when DR.. David X.
Clark. or St Joseph's Retreat. Dear
horn, was called to the stand by the
defense. Laying the foundation for his
S.000word hypothetical question. At
l torney Bumps asked number OF pre-
l.minary questions In reply to which
Or. Clark said he was graduate of
the medical department OF the Uni
versity Of Michigan. class of 1895. and
N his practice had devoted his atten'
lion especially to the study and treat.
nent OF mental diseases. He said ne
had been connected with the Dearborn
institution for the past III years, first
as resident physician and latterly as
n attending physician. His Detroit Id
dress Is No. BAT West Grand Boule-
ard.
DR.. Clerk testified that ne first saw
Or. Boyajian In the county jail some
me after the shooting at the request
OF the defense. BY invitation. Drs.
j. E. Emerson and Charles w. Hitch.
! { ock. who will be sworn as experts by
the prosecution, were also present.
4 and fourth member of the party was
II Or. johann Flintermann, another alien
ist employed by the defense.
Signs Of Degeneracy.
In the presence OF these men DR..
Clark said he had examined the de-
lendant on two occasions and had
found stigmata (signs) OF degenera-
iion The physical indications he enum-
i rated as follows Defective eyesight,
air growing low on the brow, dis
proportion In the length of the body
and legs, a fiattening on one side OF
the face and a deviation OF the tongue
u 10 the right The mental stigmata
II degeneration. according to the doe
iJrs report. we're: Marked superb
iality; distractabilty of the atten
ion; q marked abnormal movement Of
Ihe imagination which manifested It
elf In conversation with the result
nat while what the patient told was
he truth. taken all together. In Its ex-
lct details. 1t was untrue.
Attorney Bumps then began the read
1 lg OF the hypothetical question, wifi n
sas review of practically all the
estimony given thus far. During that
-iieged assault on Mrs Boyajian by
iostanian. DR.. Boyajian had another
seeping spell.
Concluding the question after 90
Ginutes' reading. Mr.. Bumps asked:
Now doctor. II this statement OF
acts be substantially true. taking
ITO consideration. the examination
hitch you made OF the defendant the
lquiry you have made into his ante
edents, history. character. and quail
lies OF mind; also taking into con.
liberation the stigmata OF degenera-
.on which you have here described.
GU may state whether In your judg-
nent this defendant at the time he
shot Hartoon Gostanian was rational
IT irrationalW
Squabbie Over Question.
Before the witness could answer.
Prosecutor Van Zile was on his feet
with an objection, declaring that many
Important facts, notably incidents
lending 10 support the prosecutions
theory that the shooting was pre-
neditated, had been omitted, and thai
certain testimony had been wrongly
Interpreted. The prosecutor went
through the question, paragraph by
which, in his opinion. should be re-
yised. and the court agreed with him
en- several points. Practically the en-
tire morning was taken up With The
revision OF the question.
This task finished. Attorney Bumps
asked DR.. Clark to step aside and put
on Louis Smith. who was formerly an
elevator operator In the Hammond
building to testify to an alleged
brain storm" as ttorney Bartlett
characterized 1t, DR.. BoyaJian's broth
or. Mardiros, had In the attorneys
office during the month OF May The
witness was we'll along with the story
when II developed that the incident
had occurred after the shooting and
Judge Connolly ruled out all OF his
testimony as having no bearing on the
case.
Attorney Bumps then took up the
reading OF the hypothetical question
in its amended form, and 20 the prom
osition was he rational or irrational?
DR.. Clark replied:
I'm my judgment he was Irrational. y
"In your opinion was the act one
over which the defendant had control
and was he capable of controlling him
self"
I'm my judgment he was unable to
control himself"
''WilI YOU state whether. In your
opinion, he was sane or insone?"
Saws BoysIian Was Insane.
I'm my Judgment he was insane"
Asked how he arrived at these con-
p qlusions. DR.. Clark went over Dr. Boy
aHan's history since infancy. dwelling
on the incidents OF his boyhood. his
sick spells. accidents. etc, from the
standpoint of the medical man. Whe-
Their the Oriental boil his mother had
\on her nose affected the son or not
depended he said, on whether the az
fiction occurred just previous to the
latter's birth. but he had been unable
IN learn anything definite with refer
cnce 10 the boil.
The doctor gave rather remark
able analysts OF DIR. Boyajian which
was highly interesting from a medi-
cal standpoint.
Prosecutor Van Zile took UP the
cross-examination shortly before i
O'Clock and the doctor was still on
the stand when court adjourned at