A Modern Wizard

by Rodrigues Ottolengui

  CHAPTER VI.

  DAMAGING TESTIMONY.

  On the following day the newspaper accounts of the trial, andespecially of the sharp cross-examination of Dr. Meredith, attracted atremendous crowd, which assailed the doors of the court-room longbefore the hour for opening. Every conceivable excuse to gainadmission was offered. Men claimed to be personal friends of theprisoner, and women brought him flowers. Some essayed force, othersresorted to entreaty, whilst not a few relied upon strategy, appearingwith law books under their arms, and following in the wake of counsel.Thus when the Recorder finally entered, and proceedings were begun,every available seat, and all standing room was fully occupied by thethrong, which, without any real personal interest in the case, yet wasattracted through that curious love of the sensational, and of thecriminal, which actuates the majority of mankind to-day.

  The first witness was called promptly. This was Dr. McDougal, theCoroner's physician, to whom had been intrusted the autopsy. He gave afull account of the operations performed by himself and his assistantsupon the body of the deceased. He described in detail each step of hiswork, and exhibited a thoroughness and caution which more thananything demonstrated that he was the expert pathologist which theprosecution claimed him to be. Indeed, it would be well in greattrials, if those having charge of autopsies would emulate the exampleof Dr. McDougal. He explained how, before opening the body, it hadbeen thoroughly washed in sterilized water, and placed upon a marbleslab, which had been scrubbed clean and then bathed in a germicidalsolution. Next new glass cans, absolutely clean, had been at hand, inwhich the various organs were placed as they were removed from thebody, after which they were hermetically sealed, and stamped with thedate, so that when passed into the hands of the analytical chemist,that gentleman might feel assured that he received the identicalparts, and that nothing of an extraneous nature, poisonous orotherwise, had been mixed with them. It was evident that this carefulman made a deep impression upon the jury, and that his statementswould have weight with them, not alone as to his own evidence, but bystrengthening the chemical report, since he had made it apparentlyassured that if poison had been found, it had not reached the bodyafter death. Finally, Mr. Munson brought his witness to the point ofspecial interest.

  "From what you observed, Doctor," said he, "are you prepared to assigna cause of death?"

  "I should conclude that she died of coma!" was the reply.

  "Can you state whether this coma had been produced by a poisonous doseof morphine?"

  "I should say that it was very probable that opium in some form hadbeen exhibited, in a poisonous dose."

  "State specifically why you have adopted that opinion!"

  "I found the brain wet, the convolutions flattened; the lungs, heart,liver, and spleen, distended and engorged with dark fluid blood. Thevessels of the cerebro-spinal axis were also engorged with blackblood, and the capillaries of the brain, upon incision, vented thesame fluid."

  "And these signs are indicative of opium poisoning?"

  "They are the only evidences of opium poisoning that can be discoveredby an autopsy. Of course a chemical analysis, if it should show thepresence of the drug, would go very far to corroborate thispresumption."

  "Then if the chemical analysis shows the actual presence of opium,would you say that this patient died of opium poisoning?"

  "I would!"

  "Doctor, it has been suggested that she died of diphtheria. What isyour opinion of that?"

  "I found evidences in the throat and adjacent parts, that the womanhad had diphtheria, but, from the total absence of false membrane, Ishould say that she was well on the way to a recovery from thatdisease, at the time of her death."

  "Then from these facts do you think that she died of opium poisoning?"

  "I think it most probable, judging by what I found after death."

  "It has been testified by the physician in charge of the case, thatthe symptoms of morphine poisoning were sufficiently marked for him todeem antidotes necessary prior to death. Would not that corroborateyour own conclusions?"

  "If correct, it would substantiate my opinion."

  Considering the very positive and damaging nature of this evidence, itwas thought that the cross-examination would be very exhaustive. Tothe surprise of all, Mr. Bliss asked only a few questions.

  "Dr. McDougal," said he, "did you examine the kidneys?"

  "I did."

  "In what condition did you find them to be?"

  "They were much shrunken, and smooth. Non-elastic."

  "Is that a normal condition?"

  "No, sir. It is a morbid condition."

  "Morbid? That is diseased. Then this woman had some kidney disease? DoI so understand you?"

  "Unquestionably!"

  "Can you state what disease existed?"

  "I should say Bright's disease."

  "Might she not have died of this?"

  "No. There was evidence of the existence of Bright's disease, but notsufficient to adjudge it a cause of death."

  "But you are certain that she had Bright's disease?"

  "Yes, sir."

  "That is all."

  Professor Orton then took the stand for the prosecution. Under thequestioning of Mr. Munson, he described himself to be an expertanalytical chemist and toxicologist. He said that he was a lecturingprofessor connected with the University Medical College, and clinicalchemist for two other schools, besides being president of severalsocieties, and member or honorary member in a dozen others. Then,proceeding to a description of his work on this particular case, heexplained in almost tedious detail his methods of searching formorphine in the organs taken from the body of the deceased. Some ofthese tests he repeated in the presence of the court, showing how, bythe reaction of his testing agents upon the matter under examination,the presence or absence of morphine could be detected. Having thuspaved the way towards the special evidence which he was expected togive, his examination was continued as follows:

  "Now then, Professor," said Mr. Munson, "you have proven to us veryclearly that you can detect the presence of morphine in the tissues.Please state whether you examined the organs of the deceased, and withwhat result?"

  "I made a most thorough examination and I found morphine present,especially in the stomach and in the intestines."

  "Did you find it in poisonous quantities?"

  "The actual quantity which I found, would not have been a lethal dose,but such a dose must have been administered for me to have found asmuch as I did find."

  "Well, from what you did find, can you state what quantity must havebeen administered?"

  "I cannot state positively, but I should guess----"

  "No! No! I object!" cried Mr. Bliss, jumping up. "You are here to giveexpert testimony. We do not want any guess-work!"

  "Professor," said the Recorder, "can you not state what was theminimum quantity which must have been administered, judged by what youfound?"

  "It is difficult, your Honor. The drug acts variably upon differentindividuals. Then again, much would depend upon the length of timewhich elapsed between the administration, and the death of theindividual."

  "Then in this case your opinion would be a mere speculation and notcompetent," said the Recorder, and Mr. Bliss seated himself, satisfiedthat he had scored another point. But he was soon on his feet again,for Mr. Munson would not yield so easily.

  "Professor," said he, "you said in reply to his Honor, that you couldnot answer without knowing how long before death the drug had beenadministered. Now with that knowledge would you be able to give us adefinite answer?"

  "A definite answer? Yes! But not an exact one. The drug is absorbedmore rapidly in some, than in others, so that one person might taketwo or three times as much as another, and I would find the sameresiduum. But I could tell you what was the minimum dose that musthave been administered."

  "Well, then, supposing that the drug had been administered about threehours before death, how large must the dose have been, or what was theminimum quanti
ty that could have been given, judging by what youfound?"

  "I must object to that, your Honor!" said Mr. Bliss.

  "Your Honor," said Mr. Munson, "this is a hypothetical question, andperfectly competent."

  "It is a hypothetical question, your Honor," replied Mr. Bliss, "butit contains a hypothesis which is not based upon the evidence in thiscase. There has been absolutely no testimony to show that morphine wasadministered to this woman about three hours before death."

  "We have a witness who will testify to that later," replied Mr.Munson, and this announcement created no little sensation, for herewas promised some direct evidence.

  "Upon the understanding," said the Recorder, "that you will produce awitness who will testify that morphine was administered three hoursbefore death, I will admit your question."

  "We take an exception!" said Mr. Bliss, and sat down.

  "Now please answer the question," said Mr. Munson, addressing thewitness.

  "Under the hypothesis presented I should say that the minimum dosemust have been three grains."

  "That is to say, she must have had three grains, or more?"

  "Yes, sir; three grains or more."

  "What is a medicinal dose?"

  "From a thirty-second of a grain to half a grain, though the latterwould be unusual."

  "Unusually large you mean?"

  "Yes. It would be rarely given."

  "Then would you say that three grains would be a lethal dose?"

  "It would most probably prove fatal. One sixth of a grain has beenknown to produce death."

  "One sixth of a grain has proven fatal, and, from what you found, youconclude that three grains had been given to this woman?"

  "Yes, provided your hypothesis as to the time of administration iscorrect."

  "Oh, we will prove the hypothesis."

  "Then I should say that three grains had been administered."

  "Three grains or more?"

  "Yes, three grains or more."

  "You may take the witness," said the Assistant District Attorney, andMr. Bliss at once began his cross-examination.

  "Professor, as an expert toxicologist now, leaving analyticalchemistry for awhile, you are familiar with the action of drugs in thehuman body during life, are you not?"

  "Of poisonous drugs. Yes, sir."

  "Of poisonous drugs of course. Of opium and its alkaloids especially,is what I mean?"

  "Yes, sir. I have studied them minutely."

  "Now then in regard to morphine. You said to his Honor, awhile ago,that this drug acts variably upon different individuals. Is it nottrue that it also acts differently upon the same individual at varioustimes?"

  "Yes, sir, that is true."

  "And is its action affected by disease?"

  "It might be!"

  "Supposing that the drug were administered continuously, might it notoccur, that instead of being absorbed, the morphine would be retained,stored up as it were, so that the quantity would accumulate?"

  "Yes, the records contain reports of such cases."

  "Well, now, suppose that a patient had some kidney trouble, such asBright's disease, would not morphine be retained in this way?"

  "I have never seen such a case."

  "Never seen it! But you have read, or heard of such cases?"

  "Yes, sir. That is the claim made by some authorities."

  "By good authorities?"

  "Yes. Good authorities."

  "And these good authorities claim that morphine, administered to onewho has Bright's disease, might accumulate until a poisonous dose werepresent?"

  "Yes, sir!"

  Thus was made plain the object of the line of cross-examination thathad been followed with Dr. McDougal. It became evident that thedefence meant to claim that if Mabel Sloane died from morphine it wasbecause it had been stored up in her system, in consequence of thediseased kidneys. Satisfied with this admission from the prosecution'sexpert, Mr. Bliss yielded the witness, and he was re-examined by Mr.Munson.

  "Professor," said he, "supposing that in the case of this girl,morphine had been retained in the system, suddenly destroying lifebecause a poisonous quantity had been thus accumulated, would youexpect to find it, after death, in the stomach?"

  "No, sir, I would not."

  "How long a time would be required to eliminate it from that organ?"

  "Ordinarily it should be eliminated from the system entirely withinforty-eight hours. Certainly after that length of time, it should notappear in the stomach."

  "And yet in this case you found morphine in the stomach?"

  "Yes, sir."

  "So that to be there, it must have been administered within two days,and could not have been there as a result of accumulation beyond thattime?"

  "I should say that the presence in the stomach proves that theadministration must have occurred within two days."

  Upon re-cross Mr. Bliss asked a few questions.

  "On your original examination, Professor, you said that you foundmorphine in the intestines and in the stomach. Where did you find thegreater quantity?"

  "In the intestines!"

  "If, because of kidney disease, morphine were retained in the system,where would you look for it after death?"

  "In the intestines."

  "That is all."

  The next witness was a young woman. Her examination proceeded asfollows, after she had given her name and occupation.

  "Now, Miss Conlin, you say you were engaged in your capacity ofprofessional nurse, to care for Miss Sloane. Were you on duty on theday of her death?"

  "Yes, sir. Day and night."

  "You were present when the doctors called in the afternoon then. Whatdid they say of her condition?"

  "That she was very much better. The membrane had entirely disappeared.Dr. Fisher thought she would be up in a few days."

  "Did Dr. Medjora call during the afternoon, or evening?"

  "Yes, sir. He called about five o'clock."

  "Did you remain with your patient throughout his visit?"

  "No, sir. Dr. Medjora said that he would stay until nine o'clock, andthat I might go out for some fresh air."

  "Did you do so?"

  "Yes, sir. I was glad to go."

  "Did you not consider it wrong to leave your patient?"

  "Why, no, sir. She was getting better, and besides, Dr. Medjora beinga physician could care for her as well as I could."

  "When you went out did you state when you would return?"

  "Yes. I said I would be back at nine o'clock."

  "As a matter of fact, when did you return?"

  "About half-past eight. It was eight o'clock when I left my home."

  "Did you go at once to your patient's room?"

  "Yes, sir."

  "And enter it?"

  "Yes, sir."

  "What did you see when you entered?"

  "I saw Dr. Medjora bending over Miss Sloane, giving her a hypodermicinjection of morphine!"

  "How could you tell it was morphine?"

  "He washed out the syringe in a glass of water, before he put it backin his case. I tasted the water afterwards, and distinguished themorphine in that way. Besides, I found several morphine tablets in thebed."

  "What did you do with these tablets?"

  "At first I placed them on the mantel. Afterwards, when Dr. Meredithsaid that Miss Sloane was dying from morphine, I put them in a phialand slipped that into my pocket."

  "Was that the same phial which you brought to me?"

  "Yes, sir."

  "Is this it?" He handed up a phial containing four pellets, which wasadmitted in evidence, and identified by Miss Conlin.

  "Did you tell Dr. Medjora that you had seen him administer themorphine?"

  "No, sir. At the time I thought it must be all right, as he was herfriend, and a physician."

  "Did he know that you had seen him?"

  "No, sir. I think not."

  The witness was then given to Mr. Bliss for cross-examination.

&
nbsp; "Miss Conlin," he began, "who engaged you to attend Miss Sloane?"

  "Dr. Medjora."

  "What did he say to you at that time?"

  "That a very dear friend of his was ill, and that he would pay me wellfor skilful services."

  "Did he pay you?"

  "Yes, sir."

  "During her illness what was the general behavior of Dr. Medjoratowards her. That is, was he kind, or was he indifferent?"

  "Oh! very kind. It was plain that he was in love with her."

  "I move, your Honor," said Mr. Munson, "that the latter part of thatanswer be stricken out, as incompetent."

  "The motion is granted," said the Recorder.

  "You said that the Doctor was always kind," said Mr. Bliss, resuming."So much so that you would not have suspected that he wished her anyharm, would you?"

  "I object!" said Mr. Munson.

  "Objection sustained!" said the Recorder.

  "Now, then, we will come down to the administration of thehypodermic," said Mr. Bliss. "You testified that you saw Dr. Medjoraadminister the hypodermic. Are we to understand that you saw Dr.Medjora dissolve the tablets, fill the syringe, push the needle underthe skin, press the piston so that the contents were discharged, andthen remove the instrument?"

  "No, sir. I did not see all that."

  "Well, what did you see?"

  "I saw him taking the syringe out of Miss Sloane's arm. Then hecleaned it and put it in his pocket, after putting it in a case."

  "Oh! You did not see him push the syringe in, you only saw him take itout. Then how do you know that he did make the injection, if one wasmade at all?"

  "Why, he must have. I saw him take out the syringe, and there was noone else who could have done it."

  "Then you saw him put the syringe in a case, and place the case in hispocket, I think you said?"

  "Yes, sir."

  "What sort of case was it?"

  "A metal case!"

  "Was it a case like this?" Mr. Bliss handed her an aluminum hypodermiccase, which she examined, and then said:

  "It looked like this." The case was then marked as an exhibit for thedefence.

  "In what position was Miss Sloane when you saw the Doctor leaning overher?"

  "She was lying across the bed, with her head in a pillow. She wascrying softly!"

  "I think you said that this occurred at half-past eight o'clock?"

  "Yes, sir. About that time."

  "At what hour did Miss Sloane die?"

  "At eleven thirty!"

  "That is to say, three hours after you supposed that you saw Dr.Medjora make the injection."

  "Yes, sir!"

  "Did you leave the room again during that time?"

  "No, sir."

  "Not even to get the coffee which Dr. Meredith had ordered?"

  "No, sir. I made that on the gas-stove in the room."

  "Well, then, during that last three hours did you, or any one else, inyour presence, inject, or administer morphine in any form to MissSloane?"

  "No, sir; positively not."

  "Such a thing could not have occurred without your knowledge?"

  "No, sir."

  "Now, your Honor," said Mr. Bliss, "I would like to ask theprosecution whether this is the only witness upon whom they depend toprove the hypothesis that morphine was administered within three hoursprior to the death of Miss Sloane?"

  "That is our evidence on that point," replied Mr. Munson.

  "Then, if it please the court, I move that all that testimony ofProfessor Orton's following and dependent upon the hypotheticalquestion, shall be stricken from the records."

  "State your grounds," said the Recorder.

  "Your Honor admitted the question upon the express understanding, thatthe hypothesis that morphine had been administered within thespecified time should be proven. The prosecution's own witness tellsus that no such administration occurred during the last three hours ofthe life of the deceased. The proposition then hinges upon what thiswitness claims to have seen as she entered the room. She admits thatshe only saw Dr. Medjora remove a syringe. She did not see him insertit, and she could not possibly know what the contents of that syringewere."

  "I think," said the Recorder, "that the question whether or not hertestimony shows that Dr. Medjora administered a hypodermic of morphineis a question for the jury. The evidence may stand."

  "We take exception," said Mr. Bliss. After a few moments consultationwith Mr. Dudley he said to the witness: "That is all," and she wasallowed to leave the stand. This ended the day's proceedings.