The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1909-03-30


that city for the past eleven years. He
stated that before going to Topeka he
practlced as a physician and surgeon
in Arkansas and Mineral, Kan, and
was graduate of several schools. He
stated that he was called to the un-
dertaking rooms by a message from
the undertaken, stating that Dr. Yates
of Junction City had arrived for the
purpose of holding post mortem on
the body of Jesse Wingf1eld. He stated
that he arrived at the undertaking
rooms and that Dr. Bowen of Christ's
hospital, and several other physicians
were there to attend the post mortem
DR.. Yates did the work and the wound
on the neck, several inches in length.
was closely examined. An examination
was also made of the wound in the
stomach and it was found that the
stomach had been opened. The body
was then opened and the entrails
taken out and traced and no false
teeth were found.
He was asked whether or not there
were modern methods known whereby
foreign substances could be located in
the esophagus without an operation.
This was objected to by the attorneys
for the defendants but was overruled
and he answered that there was by
the use of the X-ray machine.
He was asked If there was any other
method that could be used to locate
a foreign substance in a person with
use of probe.
The reading of the deposition of Dr.
Keith occupied the remainder of the
time until court adjourned and many
of the questions were the same that
had been asked the other witnesses.
DIR. Freeman on Stand.
Just before six o'clock last evening
the deposition of Coroner Keith of To-
peka was completed and DR.. Freeman,
one of the surgeons at Fort Riley, took
the stand for the plaintiff to be used as
an expert witness in the uses of the
X-ray machine.
DR.. Freeman was asked If he was
physician and sureeon. and stated that
he was.
He was asked where he practiced
medicine.
He stated that he spent nearly a
year in one of the hospitals in Wash
ington, d. c. aa,dnertl ETAOIN-
ington, D. C., and later spent a year in
the insane hospital at Washington. D.
c.. as surgeon and entered the army as
surgeon in 1902. Since he entered the
arm~ he has been stationed at various
army posts in this country and the
Philippine islands. He stated that in
many Of the posts where they were
quainted with the physicians of that
town and had consulted with them in
the diagnosis of cases.
This morning court convened at nine
o CLOCK, ana the duQ16nce was Sn1d1feT
than it has been any day since the
trial began The lawyers for the
plaintiff wished time to decide a point
| and the jury was excused for a few
| minutes while both sides stated the
| case to the court
DIR. Freeman was again called to the
stand this morning and gave his testi-
mony as an expert in the use of an x
ray machine. He was asked whether or
rot the hospital at Fort Riley was
equipped with an X-ray machine and
what kind, and If physicians outside of
the post were at liberty to bring patients
| to the hospital and have an examina-
ton made
This question was objected to by the
attorneys for the defense and the OBJ
lection sustained by the court.
The attorneys for the plaintiff then
commenced a long list of hypothetical
questions that had been asked DR..
Yates, the preceding witness.
! To each question an objection was
entered by the attorneys for the de-
fense.
| DIR. Freeman was asked to state the
length of time required to get a
skyograph of a subject, and this was
| objected to.
A lengthy discussion between the
attorneys took place. The court ruled
that the objection be overruled.-
| The examination of DIR. Freeman
was wholly technical
The plaintiffs case has about been
| concluded Drs. King, McClintock
| and Bowen will be the first witnesses
| for the defense.