Year: 1879

sonal friend of the President of the United States
and relied upon for years an expert by the
people of the State of Ohio If this charge unfair
insinuation Is pursued 1t may be necessary for the
State to bring witnesses to prove the high stand
ing OF the Professor AS to compensation, no agree
ment had been made, and the figure will finally be


Mr.. watrous-I disclaim any intent to reflect
upon the integrity of this gentleman. but do not
believe that the reputation of man can be I'M
by revealing the amount of his compensation. l
cannot help fearing bias for the figures am told,
he is to receive would be very apt to create pas IN
the average Yankee mind here in this little State or
little figures. His testimony. like all expert esti-
mony. is manufactured and prepared to meet ,he
wants of the State and all the authorities say that
such testimony should be scrutinized with extreme
care.


Mr. Waller argued that Professor wormley must
necessarily come in impartially, not only as an
honest man, but because the Court. and not nissi'
fixed the compensation
ence have never heard an inquiry as 10 the co,u-
pensatoE of expert. In this case IL IL hoe 70 10
considered that the amount of his compensation
can depend upon the result OF the case, ana .hele
fore the witness can have no real interest," IN tue
result. There has been no agreement WILT WITH tne
Court as vet as to the compensation OF Professor
Wormley; it is matter to be considered hereafter
We do not regard the question as relevant


Mr. Watrous took exception to the ruling ana
then succeeded in getting before the jury the point
sought to be made by the previous question THAT
tbe witness must be int uenced as he be paid
exorSitantiyl exo by asking the following-"Do you
not expect, and have you not been promised, ex-
pressly impliedly. 5000 per day while attending





pose this is covered by the previous ruling.
merely want to have this question go with the other
and have my exception noted to its exclusion by the
Court"


Professor Wormley said nothing. and the legal OBJ
stacle being passed the witness was questioned
further to his investigation of the samples of
arsenic and went into the details of sublimation,
the preparation of illustrations of crystals, &c.


MINUTE EXPERIMENTS.


At the afternoon session this testimony re.
sumed, and the witness exhibited to the jury the
quantity OF arsenic usually taken i'll preparing q
part Of the point Of pockstknife blade; but. so
finely ground is arsenic. that This bulk would con-
tain hundreds Of particles, crystals. fragments and
arsenical dust.


The defence next endeavored to show differences
(by the photography between two samples OF the
''Colgrove' arsenic, but the witness insisted that
while there q difference as to the number OF OBJ
iects visible they similar in character. For
nearly an hour Mr. Watrous interrogated the wit
ness on the preparation of the Slides and how the
small surface Of any Of them (one-fiftieth of
inch in diameter usually which is inspected might
again be found by the use or the 'Maltwoods 8
finder"


on redirect examination counsel put question
presenting human body having undergone the
same conditions after death as that of Mary STAN
nar and then asked il traces of arsenic were found
in the brain, how must it have reached there2 Pro-
fessor Wormley said that it would be by blood cir
culation and that 1t could not reach that distance
if put into the stomach after death. He had exam
ined MAN. cases Of arsenical poisoning, and was
satisfied that he was substantially correct on these
two points, The witness cross-exanlined at con-
siderable length as to the diffusion OF arsenic



and testified to the same purport other witnesses
on this subject.


1--WE will stop here" said Chief Justice Park at
half-past four o'clock p. NJ and the Court ad-
journed to Tuesday next, at ten A. NJ.


NEW EVIDENCE AGAINST HAYDEN.


A sensation created here this morning by the
HERALD announcement that the State had secured
and important piece OF evidence against Hay
dem that is the discovery that the nails in the left
heel of the boots worn by him on the day Of the
tragedy corresponded precisely with the relative
positions Of seventeen minute indentations on the
left cheek of the murdered girl. which had been
preserved in alcohol at Yale College. Counsel for
Hayden understood to claim that the discovery
fairly lead to the inference that it is man.
ufactured evidence. It is reported that, within
day or two, counsel for the defence and one of
their experts Professor Sanford, of Yale College.
will be permitted to examine the boot heel and
cheek, under the inspection of the States experts.
Diagrams Of the marks are also to be prepared,
showing their exact similarity by various measure
ments However, this is merely for additional
proof as the marks on the cheek are quite plainly
visible to the eye unassisted by magnlfying glass.