Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2019 with funding from Duke University Libraries https://archive.org/details/trialofmrselizabOOwhar ON THE CHARGE OF REPORTED AND PUBLISHED 1 TRIAL HOWARD 3T„ NEAR BALTIMORE ST., BALTIMORE, M[ BOARD, $2.60 PER EA’S'. I>ealer.-' in Standard Whiskies PROPRIETORS OF THE PICKWICK CLUB WHISKEY, And Sols Agents for Rninart Pere et Fils, Reims, Celebrated Cor. Pratt and Charles Streets, BAVT mORE, MD k TRIAL OF Mrs. Elizabeth 6. Wharton, ON THE CHARGE OF POISONING- GENERAL W. S. KETCHUM. TRIED AT ANNAPOLIS, MD. .December, 1871—January, 1872. REPORTED AND PUBLISHED BY THE BALTIMORE GAZETTE. > THE ALLEGED POISONING CASE IN BALTIMORE. ARREST OF MRS. ELIZABETH 6. WHARTON. " ■■ ■ Great excitement was created in Baltimore in July, 1871, by tlie rumor that Mrs. Eliza¬ beth G. Wharton was charged with poisoniug several persons, visitors at her house. The lady, charged with the crimes, moved among the most highly respectable, wealthy and influential circles in Baltimore, and ex¬ treme caution had been exercised by her friends and the officers of the law in keeping secret the facts of the case, for fear, doubtless, that there might be exaggerated and injurious reports. On the 23d of June General Ketchum, an old army associate and friend of the late Major Wharton, and intimate with his family, arrived at the residence of Mrs. Wharton, on Hamilton Place, intending to spend a few days. On the 24th of June, the day after his arrival, he was taken suddenly ill, and died on the 28th. During his illness he was attended by Dr. P. C. Williams. While General Ketchum lay ill Mr. Eugene Van Ness, for years on inti¬ mate terms with the family, called to spend the evening. Shortly after his arrival Mrs. Wharton offered him and several other per¬ sons, who were present, glasses of beer, which she said contained drops of gen,tiau (a strong tonic), and her hospitality was accepted. In i brief time Mr. Van Ness became very sick ind had to remain in her house. His family vere notified,and Dr. Chew was summoned to ittend him. As the sudden death of General Ketchum tad excited remark, the unexpected illness of lr. Van Ness also created a suspicion of crime, it this time General Ketchum had not been uried, hut his remains had been removed to Vashington by his friends. Professor William I. A. Aikin, of the Maryland University, was reciuested to analyze his stomach, and after a patient performance of his work, reported twenty grains of tartar emetic. In tho mean time Mrs. Wharton had continued her prepa¬ rations to leave on Monday night, July 10th, for Europe, via New York, intending to sail on the Wednesday following. On the 10th July, 1871, the following war¬ rant was issued: “Please issue bench warrant, on the oath of Deputy Marshal Jacob Frey, for the appre¬ hension of Mrs. Henry Wharton, residing at 263 North Entaw street, Baltimore, upon the charge of feloniously, willfully and of her malice aforethought, poisoning, killing and mudering General Ketchum, of the United States army, 28th June, 1871 Issue also bench warrant against the same party for attempt¬ ing to poison Eugene Van Ness, on the 24th of June, 1871, on the oath of Deputy Marshal Frey. “Frederick Pinkney, “Deputy State’s Attorney for the city of Balti¬ more.” Marshal Frey immediately visited the house and laid the warrant and notified Mrs. Whar¬ ton, Miss Nellie Wharton and two colored ser¬ vants in the house that they were in custody. Messrs. I. Nevitt Steele and John H. Thomas were promptly engaged as counsel by Mrs. Wharton’s friends. They requested Judge Gil- m or to be present in tbe city to receive an ap¬ plication for bail, if they thought proper to make it. His Honor complied with the request and decided to refer the case to the Grand Jury. Shortly after Mrs. Wharton was regu¬ larly presented and committed to jail. Her daughter was allowed to occupy her prison 2 THE ALLEGED P0LS0N1NG CASE IN BALTIMORE. room with her, and the two remained there until the case came up for trial at Annapolis, to which place it had been removed by the prisoner’s counsel. Mrs. Wharton’s husband, son of Judge Wharton, of Philadelphia, was a graduate of West Point and au officer of the army. He died in 1867. Mrs. Wharton was Miss Eliza¬ beth G. Nugent, of Philadelphia,and is sister of Dr. Nugent, now of Pittston, Pa. Early in 1870 Major Harry W. Wharton, Jr., of the United States service, and only son of Mrs. Wharton, died at his mother’s residence. His life was insured for a very large amount in well known Life Insurance Companies. The full amount of these policies was paid to Mrs- Wharton. The evidence in the case of General W Scott Ketchum is contained in the following report. He was connected with the Qua ter- master’s Department, was a widower^and left two children. In the case of Mr. Eugene Van Ness, who was Clerk in the House of Alexander Brown & Sons, bankers, and who was an intimate friend of Mrs. Wharton’s, and said to be very familiar with her accounts, it was stated that while on a visit to the residence of the ac¬ cused, on the 24th of June, he drank a glass of beer, after pouring into it a few drops of tinc¬ ture of gentian. He was immediately taken ill, and carried to a bed-chamber, where he was attended by Dr. S. C. Chew, and also by Mrs. Van Ness, his wife, until the Friday fol¬ lowing, when he was removed to his home. Also that a glass of beer, directly from the hands of the accused, was offered Mr. Van Ness, and laid aside; that its contents were afterwards subjected to chemital examina¬ tion, and found to contain fifteen grains of tartar emetic, an antimonial poison, composed of tartrate of potassa and antimony, ten or fifteen grains of wind will produce death. This occurrred on the* 28 th .of June, the day of Genera' Ketchum’s death, in the same house. Dr. Wil¬ liams communicated these facts to the Mar shal of Police, and to the brother-in-law oi General Ketchum, Paymaster General Brice at whose instance a post mortem examina-] tion was made of the stomach of deceased, re¬ sulting iu the reported discovery of twenty grains of tartaremetic, which remained in the stomach after the continued vomitings of tin deceased. TEI AL 0 F O S. E. G. VHAETON, ON THE CHARGE OF POISONING GENERAL W. S. KETCHUM. In Saturday morning, December 2d, 1871, Mrs. G. Wharton, who since the date of her arrest Sjd been confined in the Baltimore City Jail, was :tified that she was to be removed to Annapolis ! ] trial. .’he message of the Warden was received by Is. Wharton with composure, and her last night i lis custody was passed quietly. On Saturday i rning at the hour named Warden Irvin as- uded to Mrs. Wharton’s room in the main fVer of the jail, and requested her toaccom- [iy him. She and her daughter, dressed in [ timing and wearing heavy veils, were in read- 1 3s, and without delay the party descended to t first floor. Here they were joined by Mrs. J. [ wford Neiison, of Harford county, who, from [ beginning of Mrs. Wharton’s incarceration, b been her most devoted friend. In a few a utes more the bars of the prison gate had ) a passed, and all were in readiness for the ! '.mencement of the JOURNEY TO ANNAPOLIS. hack had been procured by the friends of J Wharton, and was in waiting. Warden Ir- r : assisted Mrs. Wharton, Mrs. Neiison and Miss ^ Yton into the vehicle, and, following, seated ii self by the side of his prisoner. The time of 1 Wharton’s departure had been kept secret, J with the exception of half a dozen police 1 ers, who, after delivering prisoners to the i were on their return to the Middle District I on House, no one witnessed the scene. 1 IT drive to the steamer Sam’lJ. Pentz, which had been selected by the Warden as the means of conveyance to Annapolis, was accomplished in good time, and was devoid of any incident of in¬ terest. During the passage to Annapolis Mrs. Whar¬ ton’s spirits seemed better than at any time since her arrest, and she evidently enjoyed the view and scenery of the bay. The ordinary sub¬ jects of the day’s news formed the topics of her conversation, but she was silent as to her ap¬ proaching trial, and no allusion was made to the occasion of her journey. At half past 9 o’clock the steamer reached Annapolis. It had become known that Mrs. Wharton would probably arrive by the route of the bay, and fifty or sixty persons were assembled on the wharf to get a look at the unhappy woman whose trial during the present week will be “the event of the day” in that quiet community. Alex. B. Hagner, Esq., associate counsel of Mrs. Wharton, and her old friend, Dr. Stewart, of the United States navy, were in wait- ing upon the wharf to receive her. As soon as she had left the boat the crowd gathered towards her, but there was no unbecoming demonstra¬ tion. She appeared considerably annoyed by the attention she had attracted, but quietly entered a carriage which had been kept in waiting, and was quickly followed by her daughter, Mrs. Neii¬ son and Mr. Irvin. The vehicle was then driven rapidly to the county jail of Anne Arundel county, situated on Calvert street, about a half mile from the wharf. The ;; ' REPORT OE THE TRIAL. FIRST DAY. Annapolis, Md., December 4, 1871. As was anticipated, the commencement of the rial of Mrs. E. G. Wharton has occasioned much xcitement in this city. The court room was rowded during the entire proceedings to day, nd everything indicated the deep interest felt in he case. A large number of ladies were con¬ tact, attendants Many of the most prominent itizens of Annapolis were in the court room to- ay, and the interest evidenced is earnest, but erv calm and respectful. At ten minutes before 10 o'clock Mrs. Wharton rrived in a hack In front of the courthouse, and 'as accompanied by her daughter, and Mr. and [rs. J. Crawford Neilson, Sheentered the court )om, leaning on Mr. Neilson’s arm, without elay, and too'k a seat in the witness’ box and to le right of the Judge’s Bench. Her entrance as accomplished in a very quiet manner, and no articular excitement followed. Upon the opening of the court Chief Justice filer called cases No. 7 and 8 on the criminal Dcket, removed from Baltimore city, and in¬ ured of the State’s At.lorney if the State was ■ady to proceed to trial. Tne State’s Attorney ■.plied that he had not called the list of the ate’s witnesses, and that he moved that the ■isoner be first arraigned, as she had not been ■raigned in the Criminal Court of Baltimore, id that it be on the first indictment, namely, for e murder of General Wm. Scott Ketchum. Mr. eele, counsel for the defence, signified the as- nt of the prisoner’s counsel, and the Chief idge ordered the Sheriff to place the prisoner the bar. Mrs. Wharton arose leisurely, and king the arm of her counsel, Alex. B. Hagner, iq , proceeded towards the prisoner’s box, the owd giving away as she passed. She removed t veil before leaving her seat, and for the first ne revealed her countenance to the gaze of e crowd. Her daughter followed her closely, d Deputy Sheriff Basil followed at a pace, hen she reached the prisoner’s box she quietly ok her stand, and her daughter, deeply veiled d with her head slightly bowed, stood close to r left, but outside of the box. Mr. Steele then piested the Chief Judge to allow the prisoner take her seat, as the indictment was lengthy d her health feeble. Judge Miller said the urt would consent after the reading of the at count of the indictment. As Mrs. Wharton md in the criminal box she wore a composed d sad expression. She showed no emotion, t seemed calm and resigned. Occasionally, wever, a nervous movement of her lips and es showed that it was a painful and trying occa- n to her. The crowd pressed toward her, and stared with earnest curiosity. Some stood upon the benches that they might obtain a better view of her. As soon as the court had consented to the re¬ quest of Mr. Steele, Colonel Sprigg Harwood said to the prisoner, in the usual court formula, “Raise up your right hand.” At these words she looked at'him steadily , and drawing her right hand from her muff, raised it to her shoulder. The reading of the lengthy indictment, naming her as Elizabeth G. Wharton, then followed, and at the conclusion of the first count she was al¬ lowed to seat herself. A half hour was consumed in the reading ef the indictment, and when the momentous question, “What say you, guilty or not guilty?” was asked, Mrs. Wharton answered in a clear voice, but little tremulous, “Not guilty.” She then left the prisoner’s box and took her seat immediately in rear of her counsel, with her daughter to her left and Miss Rosa Neilson and Mrs. J. Crawford Neilson to her right. Without delay she drew down her veil and she and her daughter sat close to each other, both appearing much relieved at the change in their positions. After the long list of witnesses had been called, the Judge ordered the names of the first twelve jurors on the regular panel to be called, and Colonel Harwood proceeded to obey the or¬ der. At this moment Mrs. Wharton removed her veil aside and sat calmly awaiting the call of the jurors. She seemed less agitated than her daugh¬ ter, who kept her veil down, and it was noticea¬ ble that she manifested none of the nervous in¬ terests the proceedings which usually charac¬ terizes persons on trial for their lives. The selection of the jury was then proceeded with, and after a number had been challenged, and several had been excused, the following eight were selected: J. Franklin Deale, foreman; George M. Taylor, Jr., Stephen Beard, Benjamin R. Davidson, Jas. A. Bruce, Lloyd Brown. George Johnson, Jr., and Chas. C. Stewart. The court then adjourned for the day. The trial, of course, excites intense interest. The management of the case will doubtless show much ability and skill on both sides, and the court will be called upon to decide many delicate questions as to the evidence offered. Judges Hammond and Hayden will be present to morrow and until the conclusion of the case. As the character of the alleged crimes becomes devel¬ oped by the testimony, the attendance upon the trial will probably be considerably increased. Many of the details have never been published, and the contradictory statements which have been given have served to heighten the curiosity of the public to learn the fullest particulars. 6 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. SECOND MAY. Annapolis, Md., December 5,1871. The proceedings to-day in the trial of Mrs. E. G. Whartjon were marked by increased and more earnest interest. The court room was even more crowded than on yesterday, the large number of witnesses in attendance considerably augment¬ ing the spectators. Judges Hammond and Hay¬ den were on the bench to-day, and, as was antici¬ pated, the counsel engaged have shown their de¬ termination to avail themselves of all the ad¬ vantages they conceived the rules of evidence would allow. Hon. A. K. Syester arrived yester¬ day afternoon, and, together with a large number^ of the witnesses for tne defence, is stopping at' the Maryland Hotel. He qualified this morning before his Excellency Governor Bowie as Attor¬ ney General ol Maryland, and has been actively engaged to-day with the State’s Attorney. The first business ot the court was tne comple¬ tion of the panel. After some lit tle delay the fol¬ lowing four jurymen were selected, this complet¬ ing the twelve: John H. Sellman, R. W. Sheck- ells, George W. Watkins and Robert H. Welch. The Chief Judge then charged the jury, telling them that, the trial would probably be long and tedious; that they must consider themselves set apart from the rest of men, and thatno papers or ! anv communications could be allowed them. Mrs. Wnarton, leaning on the arm of Deputy Sheriff Basil, then proceeded to the prisoner’s box, her daughter following and seating herself at her side. Colonel Harwood, the clerk of the court, then said: “Elizabeth G. Wharton, stand up and hold up your right hand ” She stood up, with the same composed look which had distin¬ guished her conduct on yesterday, and gently removing her heavy veil, stood with her hand raised before the jury and court, awaiting the second reading of the indictment. She seemed very calm, but, as on yesterday, it was evidently a struggle with ner. Colonel Har¬ wood then, in a loud and clear voice, read to the jury the lengthy indictment for the murder, by poisoning, of General William Scott Ketchum. The fearful issue was now made up between the State of Maryland and Mrs. Wharton, the law ) of the State declaring the crime of which she was thus formally accused to be punishable with death, and the jury being denied, by the law, the right to bring in a secondary verdict. The Chief Judge now ordered the State’s At> torney to proceed with his opening statement to the jury. Mr. Revell arose, amid profound si¬ lence, and said: May it please the court, and you, gentlemen of the jury: The oath that you shall well and truly try, and a true deliverance make between the State of Maryland and the prisoner at the bar, • has been so solemnly taken by you that I feel that I can add nothing to impress it upon you. Knowing you personally, and acquainted with your high character, I feel, too, that no word of, admonition is necessary from tne. While you will be called upon in the discharge of your high and solemn duty— solemn as the grave and as momentous as life—to extend the shield of the law to prevent wrong to the prisoner, you will be called upon to protect also the State of Mary¬ land. The State’s Attorney then remarked to the jury that the case had been removed from Baltimore city, and came before the jury as if it had t curred in the county of Anne Arundel, and brie stated the four counts of the indictment. The li on the subject of the indictment is brief a simple. The 137th section ol the Code of Mai land, chapter 21, declares all murder by poise ing to be murder in the first degree. He th read from Wharton on Homicide, giving t legal definition of murder. The question betwe the State of Maryland and the prisoner was o of murder in the first degree, or nothing—libe or death. He then proceeded to introduce to t attention of the jury the main facts of the ca The State would show that Major Harry 7 Wharton, the late husband of the accused, w an intimate associate of General Ketchum in t Sixth Regiment of the United States Armv, a that the intimacy between General Ketchum a Major Wharton’s family continued alter the dea of Major Wharton, and led to business relatio General Ketchum loaned Mrs Wharton the si of S2,600, and took her note. The iast interi paid on the loan was on the 25th of January la and it was known to the accused that inter was again due oa the 17th of June last. On 1 16th or 17th of June last Mrs. Wharton went Washington to see General Ketchum about t note, and assigned as a reason for not paving tj interest that her bankers had disappointed b On the Saturdav previous to his death Gene Ketchum left Washington in perfect health, a in company with Mrs. Chubb, an intimate frier and arriving in Baltimore, went immediately the residence of Mrs. Wharton to take leave her before her contemplated departure for E rope, and for the purpose, as he declared, of c lecting the amount of the note he held. On t evening of the day Gen. Ketchum arrived Mrs. Wharton’s he was taken violently sick. T State would prove that Mrs. Wharton had, at administering medicines which made Gene Ketchum each time violently sick, administers final dose to him before the hour named for h to take medicine by Dr. Williams, who was attendance upon him, and exhibited an ea< desire to administer it. Mrs. Wharton did t leave the scene of her tragic act until Gene Ketchum in his agony commenced to tear throat and stomach. The stomach of Gene Ketchum was carefully analyzed by Prof. Aik and twenty grains of tartar emetic found, 8 there were no indications in the brain, liver heart ot \y natural disease. Mrs. Wharton p chased two quantities of tartar emetic on i day of General Ketchnm’s death. The St would also prove that Mrs. Wharton made c tradictory statements in reference to her mo ments, and that she went so far as to try to duce a witness for the State to make a statenn to the Grand Jury in Baltimore that was not tr The State would show by the testimony of doctors who attended General Ketchum, and experts, that General Ketchum could have d from nothing but poison Mrs. Wharton was. the time of General Ketchum’s death, very mi straitened, and she had been trying for so time to raise a letter of credit before’ leaving Europe. A human life had been foully tak and the testimony for the State would conn Mrs. Wharton, beyond a doubt, as the princl actor. Mr. Steele informed the Jury that the cour for the defence would reserve their stateme If he might be allowed to use a homely phrast THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 1 laking of so “eloquent” an opening statement, would say “the bark was worse than the bite.” would say nothing further at present, but the ence was confident that it would be the duty, well as the pleasure of the jury, after hearing the testimony, to render a verdict of ac- ttal. Irs. Eliza 0. W. Chubb, of Washington, was t called and testified—I reside in Washington (, and have lived there over thirty years; I am raged in the Treasury Department. [Here the ness was stopped until the fire had been fixed, it operation causing considerable noise. [After ne delay she continued—I knew Gen. Ketchum ■y well, and had known him for seven years; I ;e known the accused for twenty-two years; the 24th of June last I went from” Washington Baltimore. 'he witness was now asked if Gen. Ketchum :ompanied ln-r, and Mr. Steele objected, but er some slight discussion, she was allowed to itinue: leneral Ketchum accompanied me, and ap- ired to me to be very well; I had seen him trly every day before we went together to Bal- lore, and he appeared very well; I was in the fit of seeing him daily; I never heard that he i been sick the week before; we left Washing i on the 10:40 A. M. train, and went directly \o s. Wharton’s residence alter reaching Baiti- re; Mrs. Wharton met us at the door; she told Mr. Van Ness was lying ill in her house; soon er arriving the General left his bag and went vn town to purchase some tobacco. At the table both General Ketchum [and I ate very irtily, remarking that we felt very hungry; s. Wharton presided only a few minutes, when ■ was called away; she did nothing at the ile except to give each of us a cup of tea; I l’t recollect whether or not that was repeated; en supper was over General Ketchum and I at to the third story, as Mrs. Wharton’s house s crowded by Mr. Van Ness’ relatives and nds: we sat together in his_ room and talked il nearly 11 o’clock, when t bade him good ht; while we were there Mrs. Wharton came 1 asked if we were comfortable and if we ited anything; in the night General Ketchum i taken sick; I cannot tell the hour; I did not him, and cannot say how he was taken sick; only circumstance was that he came down rs oace or twice; some one remarked that the leral was sick; there was a number around and |.’t know who said it; I cannot say how long he i down stairs; the next day (Sunday) he came m and partook of breakfast; he remarked the had not been well the previous night; he ( gned no cause and did not say how he was . cted, except to say that he had been sick at stomach; he complained, however, of giddi- (3; Sunday morning, after breakfast, he went i of the house and was gone nearly an hour; I i the house and did not return until after tea I: evening; he told me that morning that he i not well enough to go church with me, and I.. I would have to go without him; I returned tveen 8 and 9 o’clock that evening; the Gen- t seemed brighter and better, and was sitting i le dining room, talking; several were in the in, but I don’t think I can recall the name of f one; we sat and talked, and retired about 11 nek; some lemonade was offered by Mrs. iirton to us, and he and I partook of it; I 9 k she asked if we would like to have some; the General remarked that be was afraid of the acid, but that if “a stick was put in it,” he would drink; some brandy was offered. Mr. Steele—I suppose a “stick” meant brandy. Mr. Revell—We have examined no experts about a “stick” in lemonade; we know nothing of “a stick” of our own knswledge. This caused some laughter, which the court promptly checked. The witness continuing—A gentleman came in to speak with Mrs. Wharton, and I am under the impjession thatit was a Mr. Moale; thelemonade was prepared by Mrs. Wharton, in the dining room, almost at my elbow, and we were talking to her while she was making it; Gen. Ketchum sat half lacing Mrs. Wharton, and talking to her; she was making it on a sort of buffet, or sideboard; in my turning.to speak to her I could see the vessels in which she was preparing it; Mrs. Wharton handed it to us on a small waiter or a plate, I don’t remember which; both glasses were together and I suppose I took the one nearest me; I don’t remember who took a glass irom the waiter first; trandy was suggested, but I don’t remember who brought in the brandy or who went after it; the General poured brandy into his glass, but none was poured into mine; that was, I think, about 10 o’clock, and we did not retire until about 11 o’clock; I heard that General Ketchum had been taken sick during that night, but I had no conversation with him, nor did I see him after I bade him good night; I heard him coming down stairs; it was in the night, but I have no idea of the hour; I next saw him on Monday morning, just before breakfast, and he complained of being unwell; he again complained of a sick stomach and giddiness; he complained of nothing else; I heard him once or twice sick at the stomach, as if he was throwing up; I don’t remember the numher of times I was in his room that day; he continued unwell all day long, and in the afternoon consented to have a physician, and I went for Dr. Williams, and brought him over; I had suggested once or twice that he should have a physician; Mrs. Wharton had also urged upon him the necessity of having a physician, and asked me if I would" go for one; on Tuesday morning I left the house twenty min¬ utes of 7; on my return to Washington i first went to General Ketchum’s room and talked with him through the keyhole; he told me he was better and would come over on the 11 o’clock train and take dinner with me; Dr. Williams pre¬ scribed a bottle of medicine for Gen. Ketchum; late in the evening Mrs. Wharton come down and said that going into the General’s room and not seeing the bottle she had knocked it off a chair and broken it; I suppose that was an hour or two after the medicine had been prescribed; Mrs. Wharton said she was going to the druggist’s to have it renewed, and I offered to go for her; she said the broken vial had been picked up and thrown into the slopjar; I don’t remember whether she said she or a servant had thrown it in the slopjar; she said she wanted the medicine replaced before the time came for General Ketchum to take it according to Dr. Williams’ directions; Mrs. Wharton asked me to get for her aiittle tartar emetic for her breast; I then went to Gosman’s drug store; 1 told the clerk that I wished medicine for a gentleman at [Mrs. Wharton’s who had been prescribed for just an hour before by Dr. W’iliam’s; I got the medicine for General Ketchum and paid for it; I also asked 8 THE WHABTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. for a little tartar emetic for Mrs. Wharton; the clerk asked me if Mrs. Wharton wished it for her breast; and I told him she did; he then said some¬ thing in an undertone to a boy, and after awhile gave it to me; Mrs. Chubb here folded a piece of paper, measuring about 2J iuches square, and said the Daper containing tne tartar emetic was about that size. Continuing, she said: I returned and Mrs. Wharton and several ladies were at the supper-table; I put General Ketchum’s medicine on the mantel, and said audibly, ‘‘here is General Ketchum’s medicine,” I laid the tartar emetic on the mantel, also; that night, after we had gone up stairs together, I saw Mrs. Wharton shaking the little package over a mustard plaster, and I saw her throw the paper in a slop-jar; I was lying on the bed and could see her distinctly; I also saw her apply the plaster; she was standing at the washstand when she silted the tartar emetic on the plaster; the gas light was burning rather dimly, but I could see her well; 1 remember the occurrence oi nothing else during the evening; Mrs. Wharton and I oc¬ cupied together the back room, on the second- storv; General Ketchum occupied the third-story front room; Mrs. Wharton did not retire any night; she was up off and on all Saturday, Sunday and Monday nights; I saw the servant taking General Ketchum a cup of tea and a slice of toast on Monday, but I saw nothing else taken to him: Susan Jacobs was taking it to him; Mrs. Whar¬ ton asked me, since I purchased the tartar emetic and after her arrest, if Icould identify the person lrom whom I had bought the tartar emetic; I told her I could, and she said it was important that I should have my mind clear on that subject, and not confuse one purchase with the other; she impressed upon me the importance of my Deing able to identify the person from whom I had made the purchases. Mr. Revell—“Was anything said about another purchase?” Mr. Steele objected; the cross-examination was going, he thought, too far, when the issue was one of life or death, and Judge Miller said he thought the cross-examina¬ tion becoming too general. Mr. Revell said he mei ly desired to have the mind of the witness refreshed. Some desultory discussion followed, and the witness continued: We both felt assured that but one purchase was made, and Mrs. Wharton said that as I was a stranger in the store, and several other pur chasers were present at the time I was there, it was particularly necessary that I should be able to identify the person who gave it to me; I did not have any conversation with Mrs. Wharton on any other subject; the conversation took place in her own house a day or two after her arrest; I think she was arrested on Monday evening; I went to Baltimore, by invitation of Mrs. Whar ton, to see her before she went to Europe, but the conversation about the tartar emetic did not occur at that time; when I reached Baltimore I found her in her house; I don’t remember any other conversation about the tartar emetic; I don’t think any one was present at the time of the conversation; I did not see Mrs Wharton out of her house on the Monday previous to the death of General Ketchum, except in the alternoon, when she went with me and returned with me. Mr. Revell, having written out an interroga¬ tory, proposed to read it to the court, and know whether or not the court wonld rule it out as one going too far as a leading question. Mr. Hagner objected, and Mr. Steele furthe objected in some strenuous remarks. The written question was then passed by Mi Revell to Mr. Thomas, who sat nearest to him. Mr. Syester said the State only desired to ri call to the recollection of the witness what ha escaped her. The court considered the questio for several minutes, and Judge Miller announce the decision ofthe bench substantially as follow! 1 The rules that govern the asking of legal ques! tions have been in a great degree modified, an it has been left almost entirely in the discretion of the court. Tue object was to get at the who] truth, and the discretion ofthe court was goii erned by the circumstances in each case. Th; court did not conceive that there could be an. objection in asking the question, considering tb manner and character of the witness on th stand. Mr. Revell then asked the written questiot “Did Mrs. Wharton or did she not make am statement to you to the effect that she haj bought tartar emetic on the Monday precedin. the death of General Ketchum ?” Mrs. Chubb promptly replied: “She made n remark about it as far as I can remember, excep that she never bought any tartar emetic.” The witness was next asked by Mr. Syester she remembered having any conversation wit General Ketchum on his way to Baitimore as t his object in going to Baltimore. Mr. Hagner said quickly, “We object,” an Mr. Syester said to Mrs. Chubb. “Don’t answe" that question yet.” The court asked Mr. Syester to state how hj intended to follow up the question. Mr. Thomas begged leave to suggest that ' would be better for Mr. Syester to make h . statement only to the bench, so as to avoid an prejudice, if there be possibly any prejudiciJ which might arise in a discussion of the questioj before th j jury. Mr. Syester said the same question of law it volved in the question he had propounded wouli come up in a subsequent stage of the case, anl he was willing that tne question should be waive for the present if the counsel for the detent would consent that the witness should at anothd time be recalled to testify on the point raised. I Judge Miller said it made no difference wilt the court at what time the question was argued Mr. Syester then stated to the court that t:J State proposed to show by the witness that Gel Ketchum went to Mrs. Wharton’s to colle money which she owed him. and that he to< with him the note of Mrs. Wharton for S2.6C and the State would lurther show that. Mi Wharton’s note was alone missing from the li of General Ketchum’s assets as made up by hid The counsel for the State had laid no ambuscad and proposed 10 conduct the case according the strict rules of evidence. Mr. Steele said tl counsel for the defence imputed no improp motive, but desired to confiue the examinatii to such questions as were strictly legal. Judge Miller said that the conn understood th) the State desired to show that General Ketcbti was going to Baltimore to collect monev. M Steele said the defence objected,and Mr. ThomJ proceeded to stale the legal grounds of thi objection. If theevidence was admissible at altl was only admissible as a part of the resgestai Every declaration accompanying every act wl j admissible in evidence, and only when decld| THE WHARTON-KETCHTJM TRIAL. 9 tory of the intention when the intention was in self a part of the issue in controversy. He then sferred to the case ofCourtland vs. Patterson, Foster, p. 280, declaring that the intention was laterial to the issue. He next quoted from Cole vs. Whitely, 3d [ill and Johnson, Page 197; Patton vs. Ferguson, INew Hampshire, page 528; 3d Parker’s Criminal .eports; Peopie vs. Williams, pages 88 and 107, ad State vs. Duler; Phillip’s N.C. Law Reports, age 2il. Mr. Hagner followed forthe defence,and quoted om 1st Greeenleaf on Evidence, 98 sec.; Pat. m vs. Ferguson, 18 New Hampshire.; 528; ,h Cnshing; Lund vs. Tineboro’, page 376; ;t Gill, page 140; Whiteford vs. Burkmeyer, and L Md.; Crawford vs. Beall, page 233. At the conclusion of the argument the Court ijourned until the usual hour to-morrow morn- ig. Mrs. Wharton /tnd her party remained for n or fifteen minutes and then quietly left, itractlng less attention than on yesterday. She as leaning on the arm of Colonel Brantz Mayer, id walked with a firm step. During Mr. Revell’s aening statement to the jury, she sat with her lildown, but kept her eye steadily fixed upon m most of the time. She had been visited lnjail by a number of her iends, who are residents of Annapolis. Her >om is comfortably furnished, and she enjoys the .me privileges that were afforded her in Balti- ore, TTMlSElh A.Y. Annapolis, Md., December 6, 1871. The trial of Mrs. Wharton progresses slowly, id the interest manifested lacks to day the ex- ,ed and sensational character which marked it i yesterday and the previous day. It is evident e trial will be along one, and the general dis- sition is to be patient. Mrs. Wharton entered the courtroom a few nutes before 10 o’clock, leaning on the arm of eriff Chairs, and was followed by her daugh- ', who leaned upon the arm of Mr. J. Craw- 'd Neilson. Mrs. and Miss Neilson accompa- 3d her, also, Mrs. Nugent, the wife of her other, Dr. Nugent, of Pennsylvania, and the i rty took the seats they occupied at the com- mcement of the trial. Jpon the opening of the court Mr. Steele called 3 attention of the bench to 2d Harris &Mc- inrv, page 120, Clate vs. Chas. Ridgely; 2d aes, N. C. Law Reports, page 364; 34 English mmon Law, page 313; 4 Bingham, pages 489 d 498; 33d Common Law Reports; 34 Common w Reports, page 32, and other authorities, )n motion of Mr. Hagner, Herman Stump, q., of Harford county, was next admitted as attorney of the court, and took his seat with i counsel for the defence. Jr. Revel! followed for the State, and said the estion before the court was one of great and a! importance to the State. It was important all its bearings, because it was the entering I . . wedge into the case. The resgest® must depend upon all the circumstances surrounding each particular case. While the counsel forthe State admitted the general principle of law that hear¬ say testimony is not admissible, yet they con¬ tended that this case presented an exception which came within the modifications of that principle. The testimony offered could not be brought in any other way, and was, he considered, in every way material and relevant. Mr. Revell then proceeded to quote from Armstrong vs. Hewitt, 4 Price, 218; Roscoe’s Crim, Evidence, p. 22; 3 Phillips on Evidence, p. 207; Kolb vs. Whitely, 3 G. and J.. 197; Starkie on Evidence (side page), 89; Kent vs. Lowen, 1 Campbell, C, 177; Hadley vs. Carter, 8 N. H., 110; Lepson’s vs. Little, 9 N. H. , 271; 19 Com., 205; 20 Vermont, 627; 14 N. H., 201. No general rule can be laid down as to what is the regestm, every case depending on its own features. Allen vs. Duncan. 11 Pick, 301; Pool vs. Bridges, 4 Pick, 378; 3 Phil, on Evidence, 589, Md., &c., 452, ana cases there cited. The Attorney General followed the State’s At¬ torney. He contended that it was competent to give to the jury every fact throwing light upon the whole transaction. The case was one of cir¬ cumstantial evidence, and every fact was im¬ portant, and no siDgle fact more important than another. Everything depended upon the credit to be given to the statement sought to be intro¬ duced. He knew that they were dealing with human life, but it must be remembered that all the bonds of society had been broken and vio¬ lated, and every transaction was material and relevant because it was a case of circumstantial evidence. Mr. Syester quoted in his argument from 29 Vermont, 19 Conn., Starkie onEv., p. 88; 9th New Hamp., 271, and reviewed authorities pro¬ duced yesterday, as follows: 18th N. H., 9 Cush¬ ing, 3d Parker’s Cri. Trials. Mr. Steele replied for the defence. He did not propose to say anything of the bearing and im¬ portance of the question, except as a legal one. The tendency in this country and in England was to circumscribe the limits allowed to hearsay evidence; it was vitally essential to the protec¬ tion of life, liberty and property. He then quoted from 3d Tenn. Reports, Queen’s Bench; Whiteford vs. Binkemeyer, Maryland Re¬ ports. It was better that ninety-nine guilty should escape rather than one rule of evideuce should be strained to convict a prisoner. It was better that Mrs. Wharton, if guiity (which, in God’s name, he hoped to be able to show she was not), should leave the court a living monu¬ ment of the unswerving determination of the bench to maintain unimpaired the strict rules of evidence, made and established for the protec¬ tion of human life, than that one established rule should be violated, even remotely. If the rules of evidence were to be considered as Mr. Revell had contended they should be applied in this case, the State would be left free to convict ev¬ ery prisoner. He next quoted from Jones’ N. C. Reports, and further argued in an earnest and able manner the legal question involved. During the discussion Mrs. Wharton sat with her veil down, and appeared calm and composed, but listened attentively. At the conclusion of Mr. Steele’s argument she leaned over to Mrs. Neilson, who sat immediately to her right, and they held an earnest conversation. 10 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL Judge Miller announced the decision of the court substantially as follows: The discussion has been exceedingly able, and the court sees the importance of the question raised. But one witness has been brought, and her testimony has not been concluded. The State is bound to establish the fact of the murder oi General Ketchum at Mrs. Wharton’s house, and the Stale officers allege that they must make out their case by circumstantial proof. If it should be proved that there was an antecedent debt be¬ tween the accused aud General Ketcbum, and that the note he held had not been found, it would be admissible for the State to establish it by competent proof. The question before the court was collateral, and the court was of the opinion that the un¬ sworn statement of General Ketchum was not admissible. When the documentary proof was offered anew phase of the case would come up, and the court would decide upon it. Mrs. Chubb now resumed the witness stand, and Mr. Syester said the witness was in the hands of the delence. Mr. Steele proceeded to cross- examine her, as follows: The day was a warm sunmer day when General K. and I came from Washington;! did notdine before leaving Wash- ington;Ido uol know that General Ketckum had dined; he told me he had not; wc arrived between G and 7 o'clock; General Ketchum went into Mrs. Wharton’s for a few minutes; then went out and returned in about three-quarters of an hour; we took supper that night; General Ketchum was at the table and ate very heartily; I cannot give the hour;about9 o’clock I should judge, but I can¬ not tell the exact time; General Ketchum ate nothing but some bread and butter and some raspberries; I cannot say how much coffee or tea he drank; I did not onserve; I cannot say whether or not biscuitsj were on the table; there was some bread; he did not eat very heartily of the raspberries;' I remember helping him once, but do not know how often he was helped. Mr. Steele—“Do you remember any reason assigned by General Ketchum for his eating so heartily ?” Mr. Syester objected, and after some discus¬ sion Judge Miller said the question might be asked. Mrs. Chubb continued—He said he was hungry, as he hadn’t eaten any dinner. Mr. Syester—“A good reason.” The witness continued—General Ketchum men¬ tioned on the cars that he had drank a great deal of ice water, but said nothing about it at Mrs. Wharton's. The State objected, and the court ruled the answer inadmissible. Mrs. Chubb continued—I met Gen. Ketchum at the cars in Washington, and he did not seem much fatigued; General Ketchum had nothing for supper that night except what we were par¬ taking of together, as far as I know; I was not made ill by anything I ate; after supper General Ketchum stayed in the dining room a little while, and then went up to the third-story front room: I don’t remember whether Mrs. Wharton was standing in the room or in the passage when we went up, she was standing somewhere near; I was with the General most of ttie time until he retired; I heard him lock his door; Gen. Ketchum went out on Sunday morning alier breakfast for a few moments to see an old army friend; when he returned he did not say where he had been; I did not return to Mrs. Wharton’s until after te: in the evening; General K. then told me he fel better; I don’t know what he took at tea tha evening; there were two glasses of lemonad. made; they were presented so that I would nat urally take the one nearest to me; they wen handed to both of us at once; I took one first and the one nearest to me; I was not asked ti take that one particularly, and I could have takei the other. Cross-examined by Mr. Hagner—I brought from the apothecary’s one vial and one package I did not see the druggist prepare the medicine I suppose creosote was in the vial, but I did no smell it; I cannot say how long General Ketchun was smoking; he was smoking part of the time and part of the time he was talking; he was sit ting in an arm chair; I think it was between half past 10 and II o’clock that I parted with him, bu I cannot be accurate; in the night I heard himg, down stairs only once; I heard him return ti his room; he was not down stairs very long; cannot give any idea of the time at which In went down stairs; I was waked by the noise o his going down. ' The witness was now asked t describe Mrs. Wharton’s house, and she said i was a back building house, with the front doo on the side opening into a passage, on either sidJ of which is a room; I can give no idea, said shq of the width of the passage, but it was a smal passage, wide enough, however, for a table; on< room on the first floor is the parlor and the othei a dining room; a small door opens from the dinl ing room into a passage leading into tne kitchen I occupied the back room, second story; some la dies were occupying Mrs. Wharton’s room at th| time; I was not present when Mrs. WhartoJ askeil General K. to send for a physician; he sai< two ladies were “one too many for him,” and h would consent to have a physician. Mr. Steele—“Have you any knowledge q General ICetchum’s coming down on Monda morning, with the intention of going to Washl ingt.on that day?” Mr. Syesr, r warned the witness not to answer and asked Mr. Steele to state his object in ask ing the question. After some consultation among the counsel fc the defence the question was not insisted upot and the witness was allowed to leave the stant Mrs. Meta Hutton was next called,and testifie —I live in Baltimore, and am the wife of N. H Hutton; I have lived in Baltimore nineteen year. 1 ! I was not at all acquainted with General Ketchua until I met him at Mrs. Wharton’s on Saturday the 24th of June, 1871. about 7 P. M. ;I hay] known the accused about seven years; I opeuej the front door for General Ketchum, and MrJ Wharton met him and asked him to walk ul stairs; he was not accompanied by any one a that time; I had seen Mrs. Chubb before tha time; I met Mrs. Chubb going into the gate Mrs. Wharton’s yard as I went there about 6 ft M ; Mrs. Chubb had been for medicine lor m brother, Mr. Eugene Van Ness, when I met hej my brother was at. that time ill in the house; Ge* Ketchum appeared very well; I was in his cod pany only a minute as he passed in; 1 saw him J the tea table when I went in, General Ketchul asked me to sit down and take some tea, andl declined; he said then I was a poor, nervoti creature; Mrs. Wharton gave me the cup of tefl ana I left the room; I was Id the room possibl three or four minutes; Mrs. Wharton was prt THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 11 siding} and Mrs. Chubb and Gen. Ketcbnm were the only persons there; I think General Ketehum said, ‘‘If you were as hungry as I am you would take some tea;’ I saw General Ketehum again that evening in his room in the third story; Mrs. Wharton and Mrs. Ghubb were present, aDd I called Mrs. Wharton from the room; I next saw him on Monday evening;he was then sick in bed; it was between 7 and 8 P. M.,but I am not posi¬ tive ;Mrs. Wharton was not present—only Mr Hutton; I went to call Mr. Hutton. Mr. Revoll—What did General Keteuum say n reference to the cause of his sickness ? Mr. Steele—We object; Mrs. Wharton was not present. The court said the question could be asked. Mrs. Hutton—He said he had been quite sick, tut felt better, and that Mrs. Wharton had poi¬ soned him with a glass of lemonade. Mr. Steele, indignantly—That is wrong; it was i, jocular remark of the old gentleman. The court ruled the answer out. Mrs. Hutton, continuing—He did not say anv- hing as to his symptoms; had no further conver¬ sion with him about his symptoms; next saw urn on the following Wednesday mornin^ - eached Mrs. Wharton’s between 9 and 10 o’clock rent through the dining room and gave a kettle it milk into the hands of a servant. Mr. Steele, nervously—I must beg you to con¬ duct tne case— Mr. Reveil, interrupting—We will try to con- uct the case properly. Some earnest conversation now followed be- ween counsel, and Mr. Revell said he waived he question he had asked for the present. Mrs. Hutton continued—I followed Dr. Williams nd Mrs. Wharton up stairs about 10 or half- ast 10 (Wednesday) morning; did not go imme- iatel.y into the room; waited at the door, and fter I heard them lay the General down I went i; he was lying on the bed with his eyes wide pen, and his arms stretched out; sat by the side t the bed, and began rubbing his hand; re¬ tained there until Dr. Williams gave me a pre- iription for the General; left the room, and died Mr. Sargent from my brother’s room, on le first floor, a.nd asked him to procure it fo» - ie, offering him my purse; Mrs. Wharton epped forward and said she wanted it charged > her account at Gosman’s; then returned to eneral Ketchum’s room and watched from the indow for Mr. Sargent’s return; when I saw m enter the gate I went down 10 receive the *!“ a male nurse; Mrs. Wharton came into tne room and offered to remain with me until the nurse came; she asked me what the doctor was giving him, and I told her I did not know what it was, but that I had to give him at 1 o'clock forty drops in two teaspoonsful of water; the General made some effort to rise, and Mrs Wharton left the room to call Mr. Snowden, who was m my brother’s room, down stairs; the Gen¬ eral made several efforts to rise, and I pushed 0n the b pd > Dr - Williams now re-en¬ tered the room, with Mrs. Wharton: the doctor erlnih 6 re “°y e the bags of ice from the Gen¬ eral o head, and I moved them; after that the I ^ en eral became perfectly quiet; Mr. Snowden ZTh C TV5 t0 the room i Dr. Williams stated that he had been unable to procure the nurse and would nave to leave me, and told me again to give the medicine at 1 o’clock; Mr. Snowden remained with me in the room; someone called me from the room to see my sister; Mrs. Whar¬ ton was not at that time in the room; Mrs Wharton came into the door and said she would r Mr ' Saos S? en an d Gen. Ketehum; she told me to go with my sister into a small room opposite and hear what she had to say• Loney; it was between 12 ana hall-past 12 that I went into the room to con s >ster; Mrs. Wharton came out into the passage and spoke to my sister about a n l,? 0 ram B . noe > and asked Mrs. Loney II she would take it down town with her; she said she would go and get it. and went for it: ^!fJ Va , S h be I° re 1 re u turDed to General Ketehum s F°°3 1 t @ des P atch 10 General Brice was oWen to Mrs. Loney; returned to General Ketchum’s Mrs. Wharton re- eriicine; Mr. Sargent went directly inlo my 'other's room and gave the medicine to my sis- r-in-law, Mrs. Van Ness; got the medicine and tve it to Dr. Williams; he asked me to procure m a dessert spoon and a tumbler of water, and went to the dining room for them and msft a iored woman, Ellen, who gave me a tablesnoon d teaspoon; took them up and gave them to '■ Williams, and saw him drop in the tablespoon e medicine, and take the teaspoon and put o teaspoonsful of water in the tablespoon; tea it I should assist in giving the medicine." u Dr Williams said no; took my seat by the ■neral’s side; Dr. Williams said he would give i directions, as he wanted to leave and get a rse; Mr. Hutton, General Ketehum and myself (re the only persons present; the direction was 'ty drops in about two teaspoonsful of water, to administered at 1 o’clock; Dr. Williams thought ught to have some assistance, and I directed , - -- iuuuu me medicine had f. e „ e ? h dr °P, ped ln a tea CU P> an d I told Mrs. Whar- S,’•here was too much in the tea cup, and that U was not the right dose; between two and . ta ° les P°° us T fu l were in the cap, as near as Mr. wh S t : atld 1 to , okso rae upon a tablespoon; ^ Ir B S -Jn har iri emarked that u smelt so strong she had added more water; told her I did nor C0Uld svvaUow that amount, and that we had better drop another dose in the spoon as the doctor had directed; Mrs. Wharton u P° n ttlat; dose being given, but I don’t know the exact words she used; said‘‘it is not yet time, at ail events;” when she first told me she had dropped the medicine I looked at my watch andit was notquite half-past 12; then took my position by the side of General Ketehum, with Mr. Snowden opposite, and I had remained there but a little time when Mrs. Wharton asked me the time, and I said -‘twenty minutes of 1,” and then again she asked and 1 said “eighteen min- she 'hen asked the third time, and I said “fifteen minutes ot 1;” then removed mv watch from my belt and passed it by Mr Snowden to Mrs. Wharton, telling her that as she was so anxious she had better keep my watch; she remarked, “may be your watch Is not right;” told her I had com¬ pared my watch with Dr. Williams’ at a few min¬ utes before 12 o’clock and it was right; she kent my watch until about five minutes of l’; she re turned the watch then by Mr. Snowden, remark! ing “it is five minutes of 1, let us give him the dose; the first dose gave him so much relief I am anxious he shall have another;” she went to the 12 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. bureau and brought the cup to the side of the bed; before she went to the bureau I toid her again I thought she had better let me drop an¬ other dose and she said, “Oh no, let us give him this;’’ she asked Mr. Snowden if he could give the dose; he said, “yes, Madame, my hand is steady, I will give it to him;” I asked Mr. Snow¬ den to lilt the General a little from the bed, and Mrs. Wharton handed him a tablespoonful of the mixture from the cup; we had some difficulty in getting the General to open his mouth; Mrs. Wharton told Mrs. Snowden, after his mouth was opened and the spoon inserted, not to remove the spoon and she would pour the bal¬ ance into it; she then poured it in; Mrs. Wharton remained standing by the side ol the bed, with the cup and spoon in her hand; after a little while (ten or filteen minutes I should judge) the General began to be very uneasy; first he began slapping my shoulder; I was sitting on the side of the bed,'bv him; then he grasped, with both hands, the back of his neck, then the front of his throat, his stomach and his chest; (Mrs. Hutton here showed how he placed his bands to his throat); he cried out, “oh! oh! oh! don’t! don’t! dont!” he made his throat bleed; I got off the bed and went to his feet and endeavored to take hold of them; Mrs. Wharton was still standing at the bedside; endeavored to fake hold of his feet, and he kept crying “don’t! don’i! don’t!” asked Mrs. Wharton if she did not think he was going into convulsions, and I thiDk she said “I think he is;” I said “I am going for a doctor;” Mrs. Wharton asked me to let a coiored man, who was in the room, go for the doctor, but I questioned him and found that he did not know where Dr. Williams lived, so I went myself; Mrs. Wharton left the room just as I left; she still had the cup and spoon in her hand; she had held them all the time in her hand; don’t know where she went; ran down stairs out into the street and into Dr. Williams’ bouse; it was then before half- past 1, probably twenty minutes past 1; went into the doctor’s office, wrote a message on his slate and ran back into the street; Dr. Williams’ office is alittle more than a square from Mrs. Wharton’s house; a doctor’s buggy was standing near; thought it might be Dr. Williams’; questioned the driver and found it was not., then saw Dr. Williams coming up the street, and asked him to goto Mrs. Wharton’s to see General Ketchum, as bewas in convulsions; the doctor did not come with me, but went to his own house fora mo¬ ment; returned to Mrs. Wharton’s and went at once to General Ketchum’s room; found Mrs. Hut¬ ton was there with Mr. Snowden and the colored man; Mrs. Wharton had told nte the colored man was a triend of Susan’s, the servant, and she had sent for him to nurse General Ketchum; Dr. Wil¬ liams arrived almost immediately after my re¬ turn, and on his motion I left the room; re¬ mained in the passage for some little time, and then went back into "the room; General Ketchum was then under the influence of chloroform, chloral or something of the sort; remained with him until afew minutes before he died; left the room about a quarter of 3; think he died about 3; at about a quarter of 3 I went down to call Dr. Williams; he was in the second story back room; returned to the room, possibly ter. minutes after 3, and General Ketchum was’ dead; Mr. Hutton and Mr. Crawford Neilson were in the room at that time; I have no recollection how General Ketchum described his sufferings; remember, however, that he said he was suffering; never heard him speak after I left him to go for Dr. Williams; was present on Monday evening when Mrs. Chubb was requested to go for medicine; Mrs. Wharton entered the room and said she had broken a bottle of General Ketchum’s medicine; there was a noise in General Ketchum’s room, and Mrs. Wharton came down stairs and said she had broken a bottle of Genera! Ketchum’s medi¬ cine; the noise was that of a fall; it was not the noise of a fall of a bottle of medicine; it sounded more as if some one had jumped on the floor; Mrs Wharton was a good deal excited when she entered the room; I suggested that, she should procure the label from "the bottle and send it to the druggist; she said the label had been de¬ stroyed; told her if she would go to the apothe¬ cary’s and state that the medicine had been bought for General Ketchum by direction of Dr. Williams she could have it replaced; Mrs. Chubb offered to go and Mrs. Wharton directed her to Gosman’s, tejling her, also, to bring her some tartar emetic; she said she had a pain in her chest and wanted some to make a plaster; Mrs. Chubb went out for the tartar emetic; at the tea table Mrs. Wharton asked if Mrs Chubb had re¬ turned, aud said she was worried about her, as it was getting late; I told her if she wished me to do so I would request Mr. Hutton to go for Mrs. Chubb, and she said she wished I would; as I went to the door to ask Mr. Hutton to g\ Mrs. Chubb came up the steps; saw her with parcels in her hands as she passed me on the steps; I don’t know what she did with them; when Gen. Ketchum’s son came for his clothes I told Mrs. Wharton they were packed; that was late in the evening of the day General Ketchum died; asked her if she knew where General Ketchum’s vest was, and she said it was in her closet or ward¬ robe. At this moment the hour of adjournment hav¬ ing arrived, the witness was requested to sus¬ pend, and the court adjourned until to-morrow at 10 A. M. The following additional medical witnesses for the defence have been summoned from Balti¬ more. namely: Drs. Ed. Derossett,John Morris. Wm. H. Baltzell, Peter Gorich, H. R. Trist and Harvey Bird. OPENING STATEMENTS OF COUNSEL. The following is the opening statement of Jas. Bevel! Esq., the State’s Attorney, delivered yesterday, and re ported in full by Mr. Clephane, the stenographer em ployed in tke ease, in connection with Mr. Young. REMARKS OF MR. RE CELL. Mr. Bevell arose and said: With the permission of vonr Honors and yon, gentle: men of the jury—The oath that you have taken that yo| shall well and truly trv, and true deliverance make btl tween the State of Maryland and the prisoner at the bar, whom yon shall have in charge, and a true verdia render in accordance with that evidence, so help yo[ God,” 1 as been so solemnly administered to you by th clerk that I feel that no language of mine can more forcibly impress you with that great and solemn re sponsibilitv before God and man under the oath which you have just taken. And l will hardly feel it incmnl bent upon me, from my knowledge of the jury whiolj has been empannelled in this case, from my kuowledgi. of the high character for integrity of each of the get tlemen who constitute that panel, known as they arc hi me personally, to add one word of admonition or sa THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 13 one word to you witli reference to this great, solemn and awful responsibility which devolves upon you in this most important trial. But, your Honors and gentlemen of the j ury, while it is y our duty, on the one hand, to interpose a harrier of protection against wrong and injustice, yet it is equally your solemn and sacred duty to protect the in¬ jured honor of the State, and by voui verdict to uphold and maintain the best government and the dignity of the laws of the State. This solemn and momentous duty is yours—a duty as solemn as the grave, as momentous as life. Gentlemen of the jury, the indictment you have heard read in this case was found by the Grand Jury of Baltimore city, as you are aware, and the case was removed to this juris¬ diction under the high prerogative and constitutional right of the accused, upon suggestion and affidavit to the Court that she could not in that jurisdiction have a fair and impartial trial. The case then comes before you, gentlemen of the jury, as if it had occurred within the jurisdiction of this Court. I may, gentlemen, upon the threshold, state to you that this indictment, which has already taken so much of your attention and time, contains foul counts, which I will simplify by in- ’orming you of their substance. The first count in the ndictment charges death from the administration, on he 28th of June, 1871, of tartar efnetie with yellow jas- nine; the second count, death from the administration, >n the 28th of June, 1871, of a poison, unknown to the urors, with yellow jasmine; the third count, death rom the administration, on 24th of June, 1871, of tartar m'etic with lemonade; on the 26th day of June, 1871, artar emetic with tea, and on the 28th of June, 1871, artar emetic with yellow jasmine. The fourth count barges on the 24th of June the administration of poison mknown with lemonade; on the 26th of June, 1871, joison unkown with tea, and on the 26th of June, 1871, loison unknown, with yellow jasmine. Such, ;entlemen, are the charges in this indictment, finch the State is called upon to sustain in yhole or in part, it being competent for you to find a ■erdict for the State upon satisfactory proof of the legations contained in any one of these counts. The aw of the case, gentlemen of the jury, which I propose o put y ou in possession of, is short and simple. By lie 137th section of the Code of Maryland, chapter 30, ; is enacted “that all murder which shall be perpetrated y means of poison, or laying in wait, or by any kind of •illful, deliberate and premeditated malice, shall be lurder in the first degree. The question of law, then, which will arise in this ise are simply these: First, whether it was a case of lurder; second, whether- if murder, it was by poison, he question of fact is. who administered that poison; ho occasioned that death! Now, murder is defined to e—I read from Wharton on Homicide—“where a per- m of sound memory and discretion unlawfully kills ny reasonable creature in the peace of the Comrnon- 'eelth, and with malice, prepence or with forethought, spressed or implied.” It is, in other words, the unj ,wful killing of another with malice aforethought, ex- 5 ■'Teased or implied. But, you discover, the e is in lis an ingredient that malice is the gist of the inquiry, id if there is malice in the case then it is a case of urder, and it is for you to inquire in your prosecu- ans for murder whether it be a case of murder in the :st or second degrees, because the statutes of ilie ate make it murder in the first degree—if you find it as a murder. If you find the ingredient of malice in lis act, then, gentlemen of the jury, it is a case of urder. and being murder, if you find that this murder as occasioned by poisoning, it was murder in the ;st degree. That is the question, g ntlemen. What is e issue between the State of Maryland and the ac- i used in this case? It is a question of murder in the first degree—it is a . lestion of liberty or death. Gentlemen of the jury, : e law, as I have endeavored succinctly to lay it down, the only law on which the State will rely in this case, d after having made this brief exposition of it I will jtroduceto vour attention the main facts and salient ■infs upon which the State relies when it shall come fore you to ask at your hands a verdict of guilty. We pect to show, gentlemen of the jury, that the de- ased, General Ketehnm, and Major Harry W. Whar- a, the husband of the accused, were lormerly con- ; eted with the old Sixth Regiment, United States In- rtry, and that their relations were of an intimate aracter and existed up to the time of Major Whar¬ f’s death, which occurred some years since; that after ■le death of Major Wharton, the husband of the accu- i, the intimacy existing between the families was continued up to the time of this sad tragic occurrence, and this intimacy led to business relations, busi- iness transactions between the accused and Gen¬ eral Ketchum; that two years before the death of General Ketchum. at the instance of the accu¬ sed, he loaned to Mrs. Wharton a sum of money amount¬ ing to some $2, 600 , liavingparted, ather solicitation, with some bonds which he had held, and this money was loaned at the rate of 10 per cent, per annum. We expect to show that th's amount was secured by note of Mrs Wharton, for that amount; that interest was paid from time to time uponthatsum, which would have annually amounted to $ 260 , and that the agreement between them was that it should be paid in semi-annual installments We expect to show you that several of these semi¬ annual installments of interest were paid, and that the last payment which was made was on the 25th of Janu¬ ary, 1871. We expect to show yon also, gentlemen of the jury, by satisfactory and competent testimony, that this indebtedness had not been discharged up to the death of the lamented Ketchum. We, on the other hand, wi.l show and establish clearly to your minds that an entry, and not onlv the existence of an entry, but that a knowledge of such entry was brought home to the accused in this case; that there was an entry made that the next installment of interest would be due—princi¬ pal and interest would be due--on the 17th of July 1871 We expect to show you, gentlemen oi the jury, incon- testibly, that at that time this sum of money was due Gen. Ketchum; we expect to show you further, and it will come up in evidence, either brought out by the State or as part of the resgestse, that when Mrs Wharton’s attention was called to this matter when the books were i resented to her wiiich contained the evidence, beyond a doubt, that the apology which she made, denying the indebtedi ess, was that the mind ot Genera} Ketchum was blurred; that it had ceased to perform its functions; that memory was at fault'that she had notice, from time to time of this fact, and as¬ signed as a reason for the discharge not having been entered on his book, that in conversation with hioi and in intercourse she had had with him, he could not keep the thread of his discourse. We will show to you that notwithstanding this declaration, stated as an excuse’ why this entry-had not been upon the books, that the mind of General Ketchum was as strong and active as it ever was during the whole period of his life. We shall further show to you, as I think, by evidence that we think will he admissible and competent, that on the 16th or 17th of J une, 1871, although Mrs. Wharton claimed that tins note had been paid partially on the 17th of July 1870, and the remainder on the 17th of January, 1871, she went to Washington, by agreement with General Ketchum, for the purpose of arranging about tiiis very note, and assigned to him, as a reason for her inability that her bankers had disappointed her. We expect to’ show you, gentlemen of the jury, further, that on the occasion of General Ketchum’s visit to Baltmore city to Mrs. Wha> ton’s on the 24th of June, 1871, that he left the city of Washington in the full enjoyment of perfect health; that he reached Baltimore on the afternoon of Saturday, in company with Mrs. Chubb, a mutual friend of Mrs Wharton and General Ketchum; that he went to Baltimore for the pnrpose of collecting this amount for the purpose of furnishing a house which tie hadiecently purchased in Washington, and to take leave of Mrs. Wharton, who then contemplated taking the European trip. We expect to show that he arrived in that city in the full enjoyment of health; that after he reached the house ot Mrs. Wharton he went down town and came back, alter haying purchased some tobacco, and that he took tea at the house of Mrs. Wharton; that Mrs Wharton presided over the tea table that evening a certain length of time, and left the General and Mrs Chubb at tbe table; that after a certain time he retired to his room; that daring that night he was taken very sick. We expect to show you that this sickness continued with changing symptoms from that time to the time of his death, which occurred on Wednesday, about 3 o’clock in the afternoon. I shall not attempt to detail to von, gentlemen the various symptoms with which General Ketchum’was affected on that occasion. The medical testimony which will be introduced to you on the stand on the part of the State will fully disclose the character of the disease under which he suffered, and the symptoms provoked by that disease, whatever it may have been whether from natural causes or from other than natu¬ ral causes. We expect to show you that during that time Mrs 14 THE WHARTON-KETGHUM TRIAL. Wharton administered to him or gave to him at various times tea, lemonade, water and dually what purported to 1)6 yellow jasmine, wliicli h&d t>6en prescribed by j)r Williams We expect to show to you that after the administration of each of these doses, or a short time afterwards, that the General became very siclc, and that there was a recurrence of those symptoms which existed all through the course of his sickness— svmptoms which existed at the period of his death. We exrect to show to you that on the occasion of the fliiini uistrat ion of this last dose of medicine, the peculiar circumstances under which it was admin¬ istered that Mr. Snowden and Mrs. Hutton were in the’room of the deceas’d performing a work of charity in nursing him and administering to his wants, and that Mrs. Hutton, for some reason, had occasion to leave the room; that Dr. Williams had been there in the morning and administered to him a dose of yellow jas¬ mine—perhaps about 11 o’clock—with directions that if he did not return before 1 o’clock another dose vat to be given to him—about forty drops of yellow jasmine; that it was to be given with so many teaspoonfuls or tablespoonfuls of water This was communicated by Mrs Hutton to Mrs. Wbartou at tlie time, bit a the same time tlie strict injunctions of the doctor were that it should not be given till l o’clock. That when Mrs. Hutton temporarily left the room where General Ketchum was lviiig, Mrs. Wharton proceeded to pour a liquid into this cup; that Mrs. Hutton returned in about an hour—half-past 12 —and seeing what she was doing, , remarked, “I have prepared the General’s medicine;” | ‘•dropped out his drops;” but that the time to take it | had not come vot. SShe then exclaimed. "Why, that is not the raeoicine.” She saw by the quantity and ap¬ pearance it was not the medicine that had been admin¬ istered by Dr. Williams on that day. Sheremonstra’.ed with her and said, “You are wrong about it; there is too much of it.” Mrs. Wharton replied that it seemed very strong and she thought she would add a little more water to it. She then inquired the time, and ap¬ peared extremely anxious to administer this medicine at once, but at Mrs Hutton’s remonstrance she did not do so. She again asked the time; it was then 20 minutes to 1 o’clock. She again asked the time; it was then 18 minutes to 1. Once more she asked; it was 15 minutes to 1. She betrayed a great degree of anxiety to admin¬ ister this dose, f inally Mrs. Hutton took oft her watch she had attached to her dress, and gave it to Mrs. Wharton on account of This anxiety. At last Mis. Hutton again offered to drop the medicine, but Mrs. Wharton declined, saving ”no, we will give Inin this.” Again Mrs. Hutton offered, hut Mrs. Wharton refused ta permit it to be done, and Mrs. Wharton being hostess and Mrs. Hutton the visitor, she, of course, had noth¬ ing to say, and Mrs. Wharton was permitted to give this medicine. We expect to show, then, that it was five minutes to l o’clock when she administered this medicine and Mrs. Hatton, thinking theinterval of five minutes made lit¬ tle or no difference, permitted it to he done. The medi¬ cine was carried over, and Mr. Snowden ass sted in raising the General up from the bed, that he might he able to take it. A teaspoon Oi tablespoon was ius rted in bis lips that it might be poured from the cup into the spoon, which acted as a funnel for the conveyance of the liquid. In about fifteen minutes more very disagreeable symptoms began to manifest themselves. All tliai time she held within her bani\s this cup, never parting with if from her hands once. When the symp¬ toms of convulsions and quiverings and the tearing and laceration of his throat couimoi ced—tearing so violently as to make it bleed—then it was that Mrs. Wharton left the scene of that tragic act, and that was the last time, we expect to show, that she ever saw Geueral Ketchum alive. He died about 3 o’clock that day. We expect to show that the body was removed after death to the house of Mr. Weaver, and that there a post mortem was had; that the stomach was taken out aud conveyed to Dr. Aikin, who skilfully, accurately and carefully analyzed it; that there was found in the stomach of General Ketchum at least twenty grains of tartar emetic; that there was no indication about the liver, heart, lungs or brain, or any organ of life, that there was anv natural disease there, nor was there anything through tlie period of his illness indicative of the fact of the presence of this tartar emetic in the stomach of General Ketchum; that from the admistra- tion of poison he died, and from no other cause what¬ ever. We expect, furthermore, to show that on the Monday previous to this said event Mrs. Wharton purchased two quantities of tartar emetic, one in the morning of that day, perhaps between the hours of 8 and 8 o’clock, aud the other by Mrs. Chubb, under Mrs. Wharton’s direction, sometime in the afternoon of that day. We expect, moreover, to show the many contradictory statements which were made by Mrs. Wharton with reference to this matter; that she even went so far as to attempt to cause one of the witnesses on the part oj the State to represent the facts to the Grand Jury which had no existence, which would have been an- truthtul; and that this witness peremptorilv declined to do aoything except what was trathful and would ho borne out by the testimony on the oath which she gave before the j iry. We expect, therefore, to show the opportunities which she had for the administration of this medicine. It was in her own house. She didn’t retire that night, aud didn’t go to bed on the nights of Sot iiiday, Sunday, Monday and Tuesday; ’site was in and out of the room which Mrs. Chnbb occupied, and which she partia'ly occupied at that time, all the time through the period that she remained-Saturday, Sun- i day and Monday nights. We expect, furthermore, to show that in some punch, which had been prepared in that house during this j period, there was found tartar emetic to the amount of eight or ten grains, by the same analysis by Dr. Aikin. We expect to show by the opinions of certain witnesses, and experts amone medical gentlemen, that Geueral Ketchum could have died from no other cause than that of poisoning. We expect also, to show that tlie ci cum- • stauces of Mrs Wharton were quite contract, d. and that she was endeavoring at this time get up a letter of credit for her European trip; that she attempted to borrow mouey at extravagant rates, and we shall argue • before you th’atibe motiveiu destroying the life of Gen. j Ketchum was to get pos=ession of the note, which wo > think we can show to you by circumstances, even to the ’■ most minute detail All his bonds, all his hills receiva. hie and everything of that character, were found, cor- • respondingly in the minutest details, except the one for this note of $2,600, which could not be found, and never has been found among any of his papers. We expect to show you that a human life has been foully sacrificed; that the murder has been committed by poison. The . evidence of this case will point clearly to the prisoner at, the bar as being the actress who administered that >1 poison. REMARKS OF MR. STEELE. At the conclusion ol Mr. Revell’s statement, Mr. Steele arose and said: Gentlemen of the Jury—In accordance with the prac¬ tice in cases of this kind, the counsel for the defence wi'l reserve the right to make an opening statement ■ until some subsequent stage.of the case, when we shall have heard what evidence w.ill he offered on the part of, tlie State. We cannot well reply to the opening state-1 ment of the counsel for the prosecution at the present time, owing to the fact that portions ot the evidence alluded to may not be admissible. The law may not permit certain portions to be introduced. Other por- tions, again, may not be proved If I may use a homely ph’ase, I will say, gentlemen, that “the bark of an opei iug statement is sometimes worse tnan its bite,”i and so it may be with the eloquent opening of my friend. We must wait until the evidence is offered, so that we may know what we have to meet. In the meantime, it is not pioper lor me to sav more tovou than this, that I we hope and believe that we shall be able to present tol yon a case, when you have the evidence on both sides,! iu which you will find it your duty, as well as your pleasure, to iv.nder a verdict of acquittal. A further! statement, gentlemen, we hope to have the privilege ot ( making to you at somo subsequent stage ot the trial. FOURTH DAY. Anxapolis, Md., December 7, 1871. The great trial is fully as tedious as was antieiJ pated, and as yet neither side has shown any disposition to 'hurry. The interest is growing more intense as the testimony developing the corpus delicti is being giveu, and the deep sH ience which prevails while the witnesses are on THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL 15 the stand shows with what anxitey even those who are mere spectators regard all that is said. Yesterday, as Mrs. Hutton was detailing the circumstances of which she was cognizant, the jury, court aDd spectators listened most atten¬ tively. Mrs. Hutton gave her testimony yester¬ day very calmly and eveu deliberately, and her manner’, tones and language were all very im¬ pressive. She was by no means an eager witness, and several times explained her words to the State’s Attorney with an apparent desire to con¬ vey no improper inferences. Mrs. Wharton was veiled during the whole of yesterday’s proceedings, as were also her daugh¬ ter and Mrs. Nugent, the wife of her brother, Dr. Nugent, ol Norristown, Pennsylvania. Of course her countenance could not be seen to any ad¬ vantage through the covering which concealed it from gaze, but by her manner it was evident that site was calm.’ Her daughter seemed con¬ siderably agitated, and snowed her intense anx¬ iety. Mrs~ Nugent sat immediately in rear of Mrs. Wharton, and she, too, though deeply veiled, showed some nervousness. Mrs. Wharton's counsel were keenly alive to the importance of the testimony which was be lug given, and Messrs Steele and Hagner were ever on the alert. Mrs Neilson and Miss Rosa Neilson, who sat near Mrs. Wharton, the former immediately to her right, were also anxious lis¬ teners. It is the impression that Mrs. Chubb's testimo¬ ny was not so strong for the State as it had been anticipated it would prove, and the decision of the court on yesterday against the admissibility of the unsworn statement, of General Ketchum was considered a gain for the defence. There is i good prospect of a fierce war between the med¬ ical and chemical experts Professor Wormly, of Ohio, has not yet ar- ■ived, and it is not known at what particular •ime he will come. Nearly a dozen doctors and ■xpert.s have, however, been summoned for the letence, and the short-hand reporters have pro¬ dded themselves with Duuglison’s Medical Dic> ionarv, in anticipation of the necessity of fre- (uent. reference to it. in writing out the testimony n full. Paymaster General Brice, the brother-in- aw of the iaie General Ketchum, and the two 011s of General Ketchum. are constant attend- ,nts, and yesterday i he brothers seemed much .fleeted as the painful account of the last sick- ,ess of their father was given by Mrs. Hutton, t was, indeed, well calculated to stir the blood of ,ny hearer, and particularly when Mrs. Hutton eneat.ed the final and agonizing cries ot the dy- tg man. The Chief Judge again warned the jury on esterday to be very careful td abstain from all onversation, except among themselves, in ref- ; rence to the case, and said the court would se- erely punish any one who attempted to hold in ny improper mannereommunicatiou with them, r aQy juror who allowed any communication to Ijeheld with him. The beauty and fashion of nnapolis is each day largely represented, as are Iso the Naval Academy and St. John's College, nd the fair attendants are among the most eager nd attentive. A number of the officers of the Naval Academy re also present daily. Upon the arrival of Mrs. Jharton’s carriage this morning in front of the court house she was met by Mr. J Crawford Neilson and escorted by him to her accustomed seat. As on yesterday, she appeared deeply veiled. Her devoted daughter, Mrs. Nugent, Mrs. Neilson and Miss Rosa Neilson accompanied her. It was noticeable that the number of la¬ dies had been increased, all the seats provided for them being occupied. General C. W. Field, Col. James Howard a.nd J. Harman Brown, Esq., were present to-day. Frank Leslie’s special artist arrived this morn¬ ing, and has been busy sketching the scene in the court room. The great trial is evidently at¬ tracting much attention throughout the country. All of the principal New York dailies coniain lengthy accounts, and several received here yesterday made editorial mention of the importance of the ease and the in¬ terest felt in the proceedings. The medical gentlemen have thus far been patiently awaiting their turn. No doubt, the lengthy legal argu¬ ments have proven especially tiresome to the eager experts. Soou after the opening of the court Mrs. Hut¬ ton was recalled to the witness stand, and Mr. Eevell said he had on yesterday waived a ques¬ tion about the making of a tumbler of milk punch in Mrs. Wharton’s room, and in her pres¬ ence, and of which Mr. Van Ness partook with¬ out experiencing any bad effects, and he now proposed to ask the witness to tell the jury ail she knew about the punch alluded to. Mr. Steele, promptly—“Do you mean to con¬ nect Mrs. Wharton with it?” The State’s Attorney said it was a part of the resgest®, and Mr. Steele objected to its intro¬ duction. The counsel for the defence, after sometime had been consumed in bringing into the court room a number of law books, proceeded to argue the question of law involved. Mr. Hagner opened for the defence, and said the jury had been empanelled to try the one charge—the felonious and willful killing of Gen. Ketchum—and the defence was prepared to meet that charge. But it was now sought to inject into the case before thejury and court testimony only relevant to another case. Judge. Hammond interrupted, and said he did not understand that it was proposed to prove that any of the milk punch was given to Mr. Van Ness. Mr. Hagner and Mr. Steele briefly explained their understanding of the question, and Judge Miller asked Mr. Syester to more fully state the object of the counsel for the State. Attorney General Syester said the State pro¬ posed to show that in the vessels that were in that house, in daily use and used for medicine for the sick in that house, that there was found tar¬ tar emetic, and found on Wednesday, the day General Ketchum died. The State would, at an ■ other time, undertake to show than Mr Van Ness was at that time lying ill in Mrs. Wharton's house, and would show how far his symptoms corresponded with those of General Ketchum. , Mr Steele said the defence of course objected and said the inference sought to be introduced was that, Mrs. Wharton was connected with the poison alleged to have been found in the milk punch. 16 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. Mr. Syester said that, as a matter of course, the State proposed to connect Mrs. Wharton with the poison found in the milk punch. The defence objected to the introduction o, the testimony, and Mr. Hagner proceeded to ar¬ gue the question at considerable length, and was listened to by the bench with great attention, both the counsel and court, evidently earnestly appreciating the importance of the testimony sought to be introduced by the State. Mr. Hagner quoted irom tne following author¬ ities:' Wharton Crim. Law, §§824,640, notes 635 631: 15 New Hampshire, 169. State vs. Kenton; 18 Ohio (old), 222, Com. vs. Barton; 8 Cox’s C. C , 411, Reg. vs. Holt; 8 Cox C. C., 397, Reg. vs. Winslow;! Leigh,575, Walker's oase;2 Cush, 590, Com vs. Wilson;5 Cottar. 696, Cole vs. Com.; 3 Greet, on Ev„ §19; 1 Hill. 316. Carev vs. Hotel- lery; 12 Eng. Cora. Law, 295, R. vs. Smith. Mr. Thomas followed Mr. Hagner, and quoted: One presumption cannot be founded on an¬ other. McAleer vs. McMurray, 58 Penna., 126-135; Douglass vs. Mitchell, 35 Penna., 446; Potter vs. Ferguson, 18 N. H., 528; 1 Siarkie’s Evidence, 757. Even in indictment for forgery, when a pre¬ vious uttering of forged paper is off-red to prove guilty knowledge, it is inadmissible unless proven bv positive, not circumstantial, evidence. Rex vs. Milord, 1 Reese & Ryer, 244. Upouthe conclusion of Mr. Thomas argument Judge Miller said the mind of the court was clear on the point raised. Mr. Steele said he desired to submit other au¬ thorities, but would, of course, defer to the wish of the bench. The Chief Judge said he thought it would be consuming time unnecessarily, and announced the decision of the bench substantially as fol¬ lows: Mrs. Hutton has proved that a dose of medicine or mixture was given to General Ketchum about 1 o'clock on Wednesday, and that he died at 3 P. M. that day. It is certainly competent for the State to prove that tartar emetic was in Mrs. Wharton's possession on that day. Mr. Steele begged leave to remind the bench that the question, as presented, was general in iis character, and not specific, and was proceed¬ ing to address the court in support of his view of the legal bearing of the question, when Judge Hammond, interrupting, said he did not understand that the State proposed to show that Mr. Van Ness partook of ihe milk punch, but that tartar emetic had been discovered in a certain tumbler of milk punch in Mrs. Wharton’s house. He thought it was competent for the State to prove that Mrs. Wharton had had an op¬ portunity to use tartar emetic from the fact that it was in her house, and that she. as the lady of the house, had it under her control. Mrs. Hutton, who during the argument had left the witness stand and taken a seat near the counsel for the State, was now recalled. Mr. Revell said to her, “ Be good enough to state all that occurred in reference to the kettle of milk you gave to a servant, and what you know of the milk puflfeh.” Mrs. Hutton continued—Dr. Chew ordered a milk punch for my brother. Mr. Hagner—“We object.” Mr. Revell—“Please state where the mill! came from.” Mrs. Hutt ra—I brought it from my house on Wednesday, the 23th of June, aud gave it to a servant to take to a refrigerator down stairs; as sisted Mrs. Van Ness in preparing the milk punch; took a tumbler from the sideboard, anc Mrs. Van Ness objected to a tumbler aud pro¬ posed a wine glass; some one proposed a doublt! punch:am notsure who it was; Mrs. Van Nest prepared the punch and placed half on the side, board in a wine glass, aud the other half in .1 tumbler, in a small nursery reirigerator in th 1 dining room; that was the last I saw of it. Mr. Revell said be proposed to ask Mrs. Hut ton it the punch in the wiae glass had any ba effect when it was drank by somebody. Mr. Hagner—“We will admit thatithadn- pernicious effect,” aud to this Mr. Revell agreed Mrs. Hutton continued—I know nothing o what became of the tumbler, except that I saw if in the third story between 12 and half-past lj o’clock; Mrs. Loney had it; there was a sediment in the bottom of the tumbler; nothing but a con versationoccurred; saw Mrs. Loney place thl tumbler in her pocket; Mrs. Loney is my sisteij To the court—It. was a small tumbler. Coatinu ing—I am the sister of Mr. Van Ness; while) was gathering the General's clothes Mr. Crawl ford Neilson and a colored woman were preseal the General’s clothes were placed in a bag—I coat aud a pair of pants were all; could not liaij the vest, and have never seen it; Mrs. Whartol said it was in her closet or wardrobe; the Gener; had acarpet travelling bag,Mr.Crawford Neilso^ gave her the key to the bag, and I, after packing his clothes, gave the key to Mrs. Wharton; Mr j Wharton assigned no reason for the vest bein' in her closet or wardrobe. Mr. Syester said the witness wa3 now in thl hands of the defence. Cross-examined by Mr. Steele—The nursertl refrigerator stood upon the hearth in the diniu room; the door of the dining room is near to tla front door of the house; the front door wi opened frequently, as a good many persons wel¬ coming in and out; somebody was generally I the passage to prevent the ringing oi the beli; i door led Horn the diuing room into a passa;.. leading to the kitchen; the nursery refrigerate looked like an oblong tin kettle, it was n locked, but was closed with a tin cover setting d the top; the glass containing half of the puue was placed in the refrigerator; Mrs. Loney can up stairs with the tumbler between 12 aud ha past 12. and it was then I went into a room to wuich I was directed by Mrs. Wharton and bi a conversation with Mrs. Loney; gathered up tl General’s clothes, and Mr. Neilsou put them the bag, and I handed them to him;didn’t see til first punch given to Mr. Van Ness, but left l room before it was administered;more than tv- hours intervened before I saw the turnblj which, as I have said, Mrs. Loney brought i stairs at the time I had the conversation wlj her; Dr. Williams came to see General Ketchu about 10 o’clock that morning; that, is, at lea: the first time I know of; he prescribed for Ge Ketchum. but was there an hour before he a. ministered anything to him; he ordered ice ton putto his head;he directed me to give the G* THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 17 eral forty drops in two teaspoonfuls of water at 1 o’clock; he remained some time to see the effect of the first medicine he gave General K.: Gen¬ eral Ketchum made efforts to get out of bed: that, wasafew minutes after Dr. Williams had left; think Dr. Williams remained longerthan fifteen minutes; we compared our watches, and it wanted a few minutes of 12 o’clock; Dr. Williams said he would return, but don’t remember that he said he would return at 12 o’clock; ten or fifteen minutes after the dose was given to General K. by Mrs. Wharton he began to put his hands to the back of his neck, his throat, his chest and his stomach, as described yesterday; no blood ran down from his throat, but it was scratched with his nails so as to draw the blood; the telegram to General Brice was given to Mrs. Loney at the time she came un with the tumbler;itwassent between 12 and halt- past 12; Gen. Brice was a brother-in-law of Gen. Ketchum; thiDk I said to Mrs. Wharton when I told her it was not time to give General K. medi¬ cine that it was not time, “at all events;” I smiled when I handed the watch to her finally, and I used the words “as you are so anxious.” Mrs. Hutton was now allowed to retire from the witness stand, and Mr. Syester called Dr. P. C. Williams, who, being sworn, testified as follows: I reside in Baltimore, and am a physician there: have practiced there eighteen years; hold no of¬ ficial connection with any medical institution: did not know General K. until I saw him at Mrs. Wharton’s on the 25th of June last; saw him in the afternoon between 3 and 4 o’clock; he was sitting on a sofa in a third story room of Mrs. Wharton’s house; he was much nauseated, and had a weak, rapid pulse, and vomited every few moments; I ordered him to bed, and prescribed two drops of creosote and a tablespoonfnl of lime water, and that to be repeated every two hours until he was relieved; think I gave the direction to Mrs. Hutton, but am not positive; Mrs. Hutton was alone in the room when I ar¬ rived; saw no one else there; took the prescrip¬ tion to Gosman’s, and sent the medicine; did not seethe medicine administered; saw him the next morning at about 10 o’clock; that was Tuesday morning; reached his door and found it ajar, and saw that he was asleep, made sufficient noise to wake him; he said he was much better, and ex¬ pressed his determination to return to Washing¬ ton that morning; he said he had intended re¬ turning with Mrs. Chubb, but had overslept him¬ self; lie said he had been waked by Mrs. Chubb knocking at the door and asking him if he was ready; as far as I remember his reply was that he would join her later in the day; gave him no medicine, as we both agreed that it was not necessary; he insisted upon paying me; I left him, expecting him to leave for Washington; saw him again on Wed¬ nesday morning, having received a message from Mrs. Wharton, through a servant, about 10 o'clock, that he was worse, and she desired me to come at once to see him; found him lying on a sofa on his right side, his feet supported by a chair, and his face turned to the back of the sofa; after failing to arouse him by speaking I touched him to arouse him, but he made no reply, and a slight convulsive tremor passed over him, from head to foot; the room being dark I pushed open the shutters to examine him'more minutely; upon examination I found his head and face very much congested; his face was red; not a biuish red, but of a color suggesting a purple tinge; roused him and asked how he was; he replied, “tolerably,” and then relapsed into his previous condition; addressed him some commonplace questions to test him, and I got a muttered reply, and he re¬ lapsed again into the same state;ffie said nothing about his sufferings, and I don’t think he was capable of speaking a sentence; decided to put him to bed, and called Mr. Hutton; let his feet fall from a chair upon which they restea, and raised him to a sitting posture; he was unable to walk to the bed; we raised him to his feet; when I got him to his feet I was surprised to find his arms and legs were stiff and rigid, and being taller than either of us he stooped; we had to slide his feet along.-and in that way got him into bed; we sat him upon the edge of the bed, lifted his feet and put him in bed; have no recollection of his saying anything or uttering any sound after we took him from the sofa; we undressed him and I ordered ice to be applied to his head; wrote a prescription for a half ounce of the tincture of yellow jasmine, and gave directions on the pre¬ scription—“forty drops every two hours in two teaspoonsful of water;” Mr. and Mrs. Hutton were present when I gave the direction; reached Mrs. Wharton’s about 10 o’clock on Wednesday morning; wrote the direction on the prescription; went down stairs to notify Mrs. Wharton of Gen¬ eral Ketchum’s illness, and converse about the propriety of telegraphing for his friends or rela¬ tives; told her of General Ketchum’s condition: asked her ii there were any near relatives who she thought should be notified; it was between half-past 10 or 11 o’clock; Mrs. Wharton said she would immediately notify General Brice; Mrs. Wharton asked me if Mr. Hutton had given me a bottle she had entrusted to him to give to me, and I told her he had; produced it and she asked me if I did not think it contained laudanum. [Here Dr. W. handed to Mr. Syester a small bottle.] I told her I thought it had contained laudanum; she then detailed the circumstances under which that bottle had been found,and asked that the fact of its having been found ought not to be known further than was necessary, as it might give rise to an uu- pleasant impression that General Ketchum had killed himself; she said the bottle had been found the evening before; she then went on to say that she and the servant, Susan, had gone to the Gen¬ eral’s room to make up his bed, and requested the General to change his' position from the bed to the sofa, and that as Susan pulled off the bed clothes something rolled upon the floor; General Ketchum called out, “look out, you will break my watch;” she looked and saw the watch on his person; they completed the making of the beds, and left the General lying on the sofa; she went on to say that some time atterwards Susan came and said, “You know, Mrs. Wharton, something fell out of the bed, and the General thought it was his watch, but I afterwards went up to see what it was and found this bottle”—giving her the bottle; the bot¬ tle is precisely now as when I first took it; on the cork was printed “Coleman & Rogers;” there is such a drug house on Baltimore street, between Light and Calvert streets; it is probably a mile and a quarter from Mrs. Wharton’s; after this conversation I returned to General Ketchum’s room, and finding the medicine had been brought I asked Mrs. Hutton to bring me a tablespoon and a teaspoon, and she went for them; the Gen¬ eral was at that time in a semi-comatose state; my first impression was that he had congestion 18 TEE WEARTON-KETCEUM TRIAL of the brain, threatening apoplexy; I examined him with some care; Ifound thepupilsof hiseyes of natural size, but insensible to light; that is, when I opened the eye, there was but slight sen¬ sibility to the light.: continued of that opinion until Mr. Hutton and I raised him to his feet; then dismissed that idea, as I found that instead of giving way to the floor he was rigid' and stiff in his limbs; I then feared paralysis; we put him to bed, and I went down stairs; said to Mrs. Whar¬ ton -Tm glad we have found this bottle, for it explains his condition on yesterday, and if he has taken nothing but laudanum he will recover;” had discovered no evidences oi a dangerous amount of opium having been taken; administered the dose of jasmine; had he taken a dangerous amount oi opium the pupils of his eyes would have been contracted, and I should have expected to have found a very different character of breath¬ ing; would have been slow and laborious; failed, too, to And the muscular relaxation which would have resulted from a dangerous amount ol opium; have seen a good many cases in which overdoses ot opium have been taken, and speak from expe¬ rience, when I went to give the General the first dose I found his teeth so clenched that it was very difficult to introduce the spoon into his mouth, and if he had been under the influence of opium that would not have been the case, but the mus¬ cles would have been relaxed; remained to watch the result of that dose; in about filteen minutes his appearance began to improve, his color was better, and the appearance of his eye notably better; 1 sat by his bed and watched for some time the effect of the medicine; when I gave the dose at 11 o’clock I gave the direction to repeat the dose at 12 o'clock if he continued in the con¬ dition in which he then was; I directed, after ob¬ serving the effect of the medicine, to give the dose at 1 o’clock; went to the house to look for a nurse, but failing to obtain one, I returned and so informed Mrs. Wharton, and at the same time I told her I had given directions for a dose of forty drops to be given at 1 o’clock; found it necessary to use a catheter; Mrs. Hutton came for me as she described,and when I went into the room I found the General in convulsions; that was about 1 o’clock; bad feared urinic poison; put him under the influence of chloroform, bv in¬ halation, that I might use my catheter; tested the urine and found it perfectly healthy; the convul¬ sions were very peculiar, and there seemed to be an effort to throw himself from side to side; saw deep scratches on his neck, and a few on his fore¬ head; found his stomach also scratched; the skin was practically torn off; not wishing to trust the inhalation of chloroform to inexperienced per¬ sons, I gave him thirty grains of chloral; when I returned to the General I remarked to Mr. Snow¬ den :-‘I fear the General has been poisoned;” that was about 2 o’clock; when my mind was in this condition of doubt and suspicion Mrs. Hutton called me aside, and we had a conversation. (The defence objected to the conversation being given, and the Doctor desisted.] I was sent for to see Mrs. Loney, and she took from her pocket a tumbler; I took out a minute portion of the sediment from the tumbler on my knife, and put it to the roof of my mouth; found it contained i strong metallic taste, audit also burnt my tongue the taste was so strong that it persisted in nr mouth until I got my dinner, about 5 o’clock; thei remarked to Mrs. Loney (here the Doctor wa again stopped by the defence); returned to Gen eral Ketchum's room with my doubt- very mucl changed into a conviction that he had been poi soned; found General Ketchum growing rapidlp worse; left General Ketchum’s room to notif;, Mrs. Wharton of the General’s impending death left her room to return to General Ketchum’s, am I met a gentleman coming down stairs, and he an swered me that the General was dead; passed oi up stairs and soon satisfied myself that he wa I dead;knew a telegram had been sent to Genera < Brice;looked in General Ketchum’s pockets anc ( took liis watch, rings and oi.her valuables, whicl j I found, and gave them to Mrs. Hutton; examine! the coatand pants, butsawno vest; hunted forth! vestsoasio be able to discover anything valua ble in his pockets; found in his pockets a pocket book, a watch and a knife; waited for some time hoping General Brice would arrive, but feelin; very tired 1 went home and requested to be in formed of his arrival; saw General Brice tha night at 9 o’clock at Mrs. Wharton’s; then told him—(here the defence quickly interrupted, am/ the doctor was not allowed to relate what hi said); we made the post mortem examinatior about 11 o’clock on Thursday morning; Dre' Chew and Miles assisted me in the post raorten ( examination; the body had been removed to Ja cob JVeaver’s, the undertaker, on Ross street; w. removed the skull, took out the brain, but failed to discover anything to explain the c use of hi; death, we then examined the liver, kidneys ant spleen, and found them all healthy; we then ap plied a ligature above and below the stomach ami removed that also with its contents; we next re moved the bowels, opened them and found noth ing especially noteworthy except occasiona points of congestion; we had a slight discussiot as to the propriety ot opening the chest to exam ine the heart anil lungs, but we did not oper them; subsequently, when the Grand Jury fount an indictment, we proceeded to Washington, hac the body exhumed and found no evidences o disease in the heart or lungs: we placed thi stomach in a glass jar and sent it to Dr. Aikiit by Dr. Chew; we found the spinal column coni tained nothing we could regard as a cause o, death; in the brain we discovered minute, littli red points, which the book speak of as puncti form congestion; concluded that these lilt! points were rather the effect of some other cans' than that which resulted in his death; it migh be looked for after a prolonged death struggle there was no effusion of blood or of cerum in any part of the brain; the jar in which the stomacl was placed was perfectly clean, and came from Marion’s drug store. Here the Court adjourned until to-morrow a> 10 A. M. Mrs. Wharton sat during the who! day with her veil down and appeared very comj posed. THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 19 FIFTH Annapolis, Md., December S, 1S71. Though the testimony against Mrs. Wharton appears to be thus far of a strong character, and the fact that much of it has been circum¬ stantial, does not appear to have weakened its force, she appears as calm as when she first entered the court room, and though her features are concealed by the heavy veil which she constantly wears, her manner in¬ dicates that she is composed and resigned Her daughter. Miss Nellie Wharton, appears nore anxious. The interest in the great trial appears to in- irease, aud the attendance on yesterday and :o-day shows the eagerness of the people to earn the whole story. The seats assigned to adies are filled to overflowing, and the gen¬ ie sex are especially attentive, even to the u'gumeuts of the counsel. The intimation liven in the Gazette of last Saturday, that it night become necessary to grant admission >y tickets, caused a good many to stay away luring the first two days of the trial, as the nipression had gotten abroad that fifty cents vould he charged for admission, hut the ■rowd will now probably continue to fill the jourt room each day. A few minutes before 10 o’clock Mrs. Whar- on, with all of the ladies who accompanied ier yesterday, entered the court room and heir arrival created the usual stir. Mrs Vkarton and her daughter were, as usual ressed in black and heavily veiled, and no hange in the manner of the prisoner or her aughter could he seen. Professor Harry flute, of St. John’s College, was present, with *rs. Warren, of Baltimore, Reese and Genth, f Philadelphia, and Professor McCullough, of fashington-Lee University, and the medica nd chemical witnesses for the State sat to :ieir left. Upon the opening of the Court Dr. P. C. hi lianas was recalled to the stand, but efore his examination commenced the Chief ndge again warned the representatives of the azette, Sun and American to be very careful > make no comment upon the testimony in ae hearing of the jury, and threatened to re- ove any offender. Mr. Hagner then re¬ vested the Court to instruct the Clerk to an- nince that all witnesses summoned for the ifence, except the medical and cnemical itnesses, were excused until Tuesday next, id the announcement was made accordingly. Dr. Williams then resumed—I first visited meral Ketchum on Monday afternoon, the t.li of June; his pulse was feeble and rapid, cheating weakness, and I distinguished it >m a pulse I would he likely to encounter a case of poisoning from opium by its ickness; on Tuesday his whole condition d improved, and his pulse was much better; Wednesday I found his condition very tical; his pulse was then quicker and feeble, t the general characteristics were the same on Monday; I saw no symptoms of poison- I from laudanum; an ordinary medical dose opium is exhausted in about nine hours; if ' 2 an overdose the patients die in a state of total insensibility; the ordinary symptoms of poisoning from an overdose of opium would be extreme pallor, muscular relaxation and the pupils of the eves firmly contracted and insensible to light; the breathing would be exceedingly slow and laboring; I have seen a great many cases of poisoning from overdoses of opium; I saw no evidences in General K.’s case of symptoms that would indicate a fatal dose, but I draw a distinction between adan- erous and a fatal dose; they might have been, ut I did not see them; tartar emetic is a poi¬ son if taken in too large quantities; the amount of an overdose of tartar emetic would depend upon 'the fact whether or not the pa¬ tient ha,d been accustomed to take it; beyond five or six grains is ordinarily an overdose; the yellow jasmine I obtained from Mr. Gosman, and I presume it was made by him; I have used it for t.en years in my practice; it is made by the maceration of four ounces of the root in twelve ounces of diluted alcohol; I have used it on myself; the symptoms of an over¬ dose would he a wide dilation of the pupil of the eyes; the eyelids would become par¬ alyzed so that it would be impossible for the atient to open his eyes; the skin would be atked in perspiration, owing to the general relaxation; the breathing is not affected in the earlier stages of its action, nor does the heart become affected in its _ action until a late period; then the breathing becomes hurried and quick, and the heart acts in a correspond- ■og way; I ought to state that in consequence of the dilation of the pupils the sight becomes impaired; I did not notice on any of my visits to General K. any of the symptons of an overdose of yellow jas¬ mine; I gave him the first dose on Wednesday al^out 11 o’clock; 1 do not think Mrs. Wharton was present when I gave it: at 1 o’clock Mrs. Wharton told me General K. had seemed worse after taking the second dose; she said he had become more restless, and was threat¬ ened with convulsions; I expressed surprise and said I could not account for that result from the jasmine: “because.” said I to her “You observed the effects of the first dose, how it soothed and quieted him, and I would expect a similar result from the second dose;” she said she could not account for it but that as yet such had been the effect* she admitted that the first dose had quieted him; the last dose I gave him was one of chloral in a cup, a dessert spoonful of the solution, and about a wine glass of milk; he was then having violent convulsions, and I administered the medicine with my own hands; I dipped it up with a spoon, and I had difficulty in getting the spoon into his mouth; he bit upon the spoon so that his middle front tooth was loosened; if he had had an overdose of opium or jasmine the jaws would have been relaxed; had the vial of laudanum been full it would have been a fatal quantity to most people; that is to persons not accustomed to its use; it is impossible to sav i 0W j f i n » General Ketchum would have lived after taking an overdose of laudanum oi that quality, as it varies so much; I had inferred when I saw him, from the informa¬ tion 1 had obtained of his sickness on Satux- 20 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. day night and Monday, that he had been suf¬ fering from cholera morbus; at least I found the irritability of stomach attending cholera morbus: there was not at that time in Balti¬ more more than the ordinary liability to cholera morbus; I should say that it was almost certain that anybody taking an over¬ dose of opium on Tuesday would have been in a dangerous condition on Wednesday morn¬ ing; I saw no such manifestations when I saw him on Wednesday; tartar emetic is used against febrile symptoms, or else as an emetic; on the subject of the effect of an overdose of taitar emetic I have no experience, except in this case; the symptoms are very uncertain usually; ac¬ cording to the authorities there would be in the case of an overdose of tartar emetic heat, pain and constriction in the throat, accompa¬ nied by a very strong metallic taste; there may or may not be vomiting; some times it is profuse, and again, even when large quantities have been given, no vomiting; there would also be pain and griping in the stomach, and usually extreme muscular relaxation up to a certain point; then we find a stiffness—what the books term a tetanic condition—espe¬ cially about the neck, arms, and legs; sometimes the stiffness and rigidity is mani¬ fested at a very early period of the effect from an overdose; then there would be a red¬ dish, bluish, livid appearance about the sur¬ face resulting from its action upon the heart, weakening the force of that organ so as to leave passive congestion throughout, the venous system; upon the pupil no decided ef¬ fect is produced; of course this condition of things is accompanied by a stupor, more or less profound, varying in extent; there is apt to be rather an increase than a diminution in the amount of urine; I never ordered porter 4>r General Ketchum, and said nothing to Mrs. Wharton about giving him porter; on this subject I am perfectly positive; when I examined the body at Washington I found no indications of uriuie poison if he died from apoplexy or paralysis, the post mortem examination would have re¬ vealed that fact; anterior to the post, mortem examination I suspected that he had died from poison—simply poison ; in fact my opinion was that he had died from poison ; by the evi¬ dences of the post mortem my previous opin¬ ion was strengthened ; the evidences were all consistent with the theory of poisoning from tartar emetic; I know of no instance in which yellow jasmine has produced convulsions, and my own practice has been to prescribe it to prevent convulsions; in some respects the symptoms produced by tartar emetic and by cholera morbus are similar; at certain periods of the action the symptoms of one might be mistaken for the other; tartar emetic is very soluble; more soluble in tea than in water; in lemonade its solubility would be equivalent to its solubility in water; the effect of tartar emetic and laudanum would be to prevent both vomiting and purging; I was present when the stomachwas delivered to Dr. Aiken, and it was in the same condition as when first put in the jar; I should say that eighty drops of yellow jasmine would not be an over- close; 1 have frequently taken myself a tea¬ spoonful, and in one instance I prescribed that amount to be taken every two hours; where yellow jasmine is administered the mind remains clear until the heart becomes weakened; forty drops of the tincture of yellow jasmine in two teaspoonfuls of water would give a color somewhat resembling pale sherry; forty drops in two tablespoonfnls would make it relatively paler and weaker. [The Dr. was now called upon to produce yel¬ low jasmine. and took from his side pocket a small vial of the tincture. At the request of Mr. Revel], he then dropped forty drops in a little water in a tumbler,and showed it to the jury. The first juror took a tablespoon con¬ taining the mixture, and it was passed around among them and examined. The Dr. next put forty drops of yellow jasmine and two tablespoonfnls of water into a tumbler, and that too was shown to the iury.l The witness was now turned over to the de¬ fence, and was subjected to a rigid cross-exam¬ ination by Mr. Steele.substantially as follows: When I saw General K. on Monday I ascribed his irritability of stomach to cholera morbus, I gave the prescription of two drops of creo¬ sote in a tablespoonful of lime water to meet that condition; that relieved him; if he hat had at that time tartar emetic in his stomach or it had been .absorbed in his system, th« creosote would have had no ettect, so far as 1 am informed, but the lime water might hav< had a neutralizing effect; tartar emetic i- rapidly absorbed into the system through tin ! kidneys; General K. did not tell me that hi had been very much fatigued on Saturday . or that he had drank a great deal of ice water; on Tuesday morning he was mucl better and said he would have gone to Wash ington on that day with Mrs. Chubb if he ha< not overslept himself; he asked me to get hi pocket book from his pantaloons in a closet > few feet from his bed; he then paid me form.' services; he had not up to that time com plained of headache or dizziness; Genera Iv. told me had had cholera morbus on Satnr day and Sunday nights; I examined his tongu on Wednesday at the time of my first visit: i was natural, and he protruded it without dil ficalty; I prescribed the yellow jasmine to re move his congested condition; I feared then might be congestion about, the brail I would not say that yellow jasmin is a depressent: I call some medicine depressent, but I am not prepared t| call yellow jasmine of that class. LM Steele, here produced the Baltimore Atd cal Journal for March, 1871, and asked D Williams if he still entertained the vieg then expressed, and to which he replied in tit; affirmative. Continuing—"I was one of the firt physicians in Baltimore to use yellow jai mine, and my friends sav it is‘a hobby’wit me.” Mr. Steele—“Medical science is const r.uted of a good deal of theory.” Dr. Wi liams—“ I hope some facts, too.” Continuit* —General K.’s face was of a livid color who I saw him first on Wednesday; I ordered fort) drops of yellow jasmine in two teaspoonfnl of water: General K. was quiet on Wednesila until I shook him; then there was a sligl convulsive tremor, which passed over bj whole body; I attributed his attempt to jura TEE WEARTON-KETCEUM TRIAL. 21 ut of bed to the disagreeableness of the ice rhicb I had ordered to be applied to iis head,and I ordered itremoved; his convnl- ions were not of the ordinary character; the onstant effort of the convulsion was to throw iiin from his back to his left side, and he ut- ered sounds which indicated great pain; after had partially roused nim he at once relapsed □to a semi-comatose state; he continued in bis semi-comatose or semi-conscious condi- ion; in that condition his sense of pain would iot be, of course, so acute as it would be in lerfect consciousness; when I first spoke to ,Irs. Wharton of General Ketchum's conrli- ion I simply told her that he was critically 11, and that his friends ought to be sent for; considered him very ill ami remained there vith him two hours; when I tested the irine by the usual test of heat and nitric acid did not suspect poison; I tested for albumen, ,nd not for antimony; I found no albumen; I do iot remember that Istated to Dr. Aiken when took the stomach to him what medicines I lad prescribed for General Ketchnm; I did not ntimate to him that the poisoning of General fetchum had been by strychnine; I simply old him I suspected poisoning, and had not as- ociated strychnine with the poisoning; there re no symptoms exclusively and invariably haracteristic of any poisoning; I never saw a ase of poisoning from tartaremetic, and what have said on that subject has been derived rom my reading; when I saw Gen. Ivetcbum, hortly after 1 o’clock on Wednesday, I re- arded him as hopelessly ill; tartar emetic ound in his stomach after death, and ot absorbed into his system, could not ave caused his death; I would not say bat General Iv. was moribund when I saw im on Wednesday at 1 o’clock. (Here some esultory discussion took place between the ounsel and the witness as to the proper use f the the term “moribund.”) Continuing—I bould say that when a man was uttering roans such as General K. was uttering, the resumption would be that he was suffering reat pain; I found no blood upon his clothes: oth on the neck and abdomen the skin was cratched and the blood was exuding; they •ere bloody without having any blood Tun¬ ing from them; at Washington we took out nly a few inches of the marrow in the spinal olumn; I did not examine or- inspect the leinbranes of the spinal marrow beyond that istance; no blood was found on the sheath of he spinal column; no blood was effused from le brain, in the ordinary sense of the word ffnsion; the little points I spoke of yesterday •ere numerous; I should say they were of a ark red—brownish; they might have been ost mortem; I cannot say whether they were ate mortem or post mortem; the presumption that they were ante mortem; Prof. Miles samined them with a microscope, but I did ot; the post mortem examination was prac- cally conducted by Prof. Miles; if I had nown General Ketchnm was under the influ- ace of tartar emetic, I would have given him ellow jasmine; in the present status of ledicine, I would prefer not to state any heory as to the modus operandi of yellow ismine; I do not here, under oath, adopt le theory I expressed in the Balti¬ more Medical Journal of last March; I did not give Gen. Ketchnm yellow jasmine a9 a stimulant; I do not admit that tartar emetic is a depressent; I suppose tirat some cases of poisoning by tartar emetic could not he distinguished from cholera morbus, that is, up to a certain period. Mr. Steele here desired to read to the witness a statement of a fact from Wharton and Stille’s Medical Jurispru¬ dence, but before reading it passed it to Mr. Syester, at his request. Mr. Syester said he had no objection to the closing sentence being read to the witness. The authority quoted said it would he hazardous to express the opin¬ ion that the symptoms of tartar emetic poison¬ ing and of cholera morbus were different, and Dr. Williams said he agreed that it would be hazardous. Mr. Steele uowread from Taylor on Poisonings, pages 520 and 521, in reference to the general effect upon the pupils of the eyes. Dr. Williams said it was recognized as high authority. Mr. Syester interrupted, and said he objected to the introduction of the hooks as authorities. Mr. Steele said he did not propose to use the books at that time as authorities, hut would, as far as he was then advised, go before the jury with them. Judge Miller said the Court would then decide the question of the right, to use them as authori¬ ties. The cross-examination of the witness was then resumed, and Mr. Steele read from the last mentioned authority an opinion as to the common English cholera, and Dr. Wil¬ liams expressed his opinion with qualifica¬ tions. Some persons, he said, could be poisoned by eating crabs, and others again by eating oysters, and the causes would vary. (Here, Dr. Williams went, into quite a lengthy explana¬ tion of the different classes of cases.) Continuing—The gullet and oesaphagus were healthy, with certain limitations, when we examined them at Washington. Mr. Steele again quoted from Taylor as to the evi¬ dences of poisoning in post mortem examina¬ tions, and Dr. Williams again explained at some length. Continuing—Cholera morbus is apt to prevail in Baltimore during the sum¬ mer months; there was cholera morbus exist¬ ing in Baltimore at the time of General K.’s death; 1 would not say it was prevalent. Mr. Steele now read from Dr. Williams’ testimony, as reported in the Gazette of to-day, in ref erence to the post mortem examination, and questioned him further in reference to what was then discovered. Dr. Williams again tes¬ tified that he had failed to discover in the lungs, brain, heart or liver, any evidences of death from other than natural causes. Dr. Williams was further examined at some length, but mostly as to points of theoretical bearing. Dr. Samuel P. Chew, of the Maryland Uni¬ versity, was next called, and testified—I have been a practicing physician for 13 years, and I have been Professor of Materia Medic a in the University of Maryland for V or S years; I was requested by Dr. Williams to be present with him at the post mortem examination of General Ketchum’s body at Mr. Weaver’s, on Thursday, June 29; Professor Miles made it in chief, and Dr. Williams and I were present; we first examined the abdomnal viscera, liver, spleen and kidneys; then we examined 22 THE WHARTON-KETCHUH TRIAL. the alimentary canal; we found in the alimen¬ tary canal some evidences of congestion, not very well marked, however—not unmistak¬ able. but wo did not consider them very sig¬ nificant: the alimentary canal contained a considerable amount of whitish pulpy sub¬ stance, streaked with bile; also a scaly sub¬ stance on the mucus, which, in health, as in doath, is always scaling oft; after applying ligatures to the stomach Dr. Williams and I placed it in a glass jar which we had sent for , from Marion’s drug store: it was capable of holding about three pints of fluid, and was j perfectly clean; it had contained iris root; | ■we proceeded to examine the cavity of the skull, removing the cranium and then the brain, and found some evidences of conges¬ tion in the cerebral tubes? portions of brain and upper portion of the spinal column were taken away by Professor Miles for examina¬ tion with the microscrope; the congestion was punctiform, occurring in spots; I took | the jar, tightly corked, to the chemical labo¬ ratory of the University of Maryland, leaving it under lock and key; on the follow¬ ing day I went there to meet Professor Aiken, and Dr. Miles opened the stomach, and the fluid contents were left with Prof. Aiken for examination; I was present when the body was examined at Washington on the 13th of July; the body had been exhumed before our arrival; we examined the chest and removed the heart and lungs; they were found to be in a per¬ fectly healthy condition; we found no change in any organ which we thought conld indicate a disease sufficient to produce death; I did not attend General Iv. during his sickness; when we opened the stomach at the University of Maryland, there was some congestion about the lower part of it, but no evidence of ul¬ ceration; I heard the testimony of Dr. Wil¬ liams as to the symptoms of General K.’s sick¬ ness; from the narration of these symptoms as given by Dr. Williams, and my own observations of the changes in the or¬ gans, I should say the case was a very obscure one. and I could not as sign a cause for death; I cannot give a fixed opinion; I mean an opinion as an established conviction of my mind; it is my opinion from what I have heard Dr. Williams narrate ou this stand, and from what I observed in the postmortem examinations, that he did not die from natural causes; the quantity of tartar emetic necessary to occasion death is exceed¬ ingly variable. Some discussion now ensued as to the right, of the witness to give his opinion, and the Chief Judge decided that he could give his opinion when founded either on his observa¬ tion or reading. Continuing—A quantity of twenty grains would generally produce violent symptoms, and might produce death; two grains have been known to produce death, and half an ounce not to produce death; the symptoms are various, whether it acts as an irritant on the bowels, or sedating the heart, and thus leading to venous congestion; in some cases there will be violent vomiting and purging; in others, rigidity of the mus¬ cle of the neck, jaws, abdomen and extremi- ti •), with convulsions; the symptoms may be explained by reflected irritation of the ner¬ vous system; when given in poisonous doses it produces pain in the abdomen and also burning aud constriction in the throat: the pulse is depressed generally by the aetiou of tartar emetic; it may cause giddiness; I do not know of any case in which insensibility was produced when giveu in poisonous doses. The hour of 3 P. M. having arrived, the Court adjourned until to-morrow at 10 A. M. The examination of Dr. Williams was very rigid, and doubtless the same test awaits ail the medical witnesses for the State. Mrs Wharton and Miss Wharton were calm and patient, and soon after the adjournment of the Court left for their prison room. Mrs. Nugent was again present to-day, and evidenced great interest. Mrs. and M'ss Neilson were also in their accustomed seats. The tedium of medi¬ cal testimony is promised for the next two days. SBXTES DAT. Annapolis, Md., December 9,1871. Now that the medical testimony for thf State has been reached, the great trial is te¬ dious, aud but little occurs of special interest to the lovers of the sensational. The dramatic incidents of the case will be further narrated next week, and then the testimony will doubt¬ less be listened to by the spectators with the same eagerness which was observable on tkt the three first days. Mrs. Wharton, with her daughter and thf ladies who have constantly accompanied her was present promptly to-day. Miss Boss Potts, of Washington, was also present with her within the bar of the Court. Upon the opening of the Court Dr. Samue' C. Chew was recalled to the witness stand aut testified : In my opinion, from the symptom: of General Iv’s case, as narrated by Dr. Wil liams, and from what I observed, the case wa; not one of poisoning by opium ; I did not fine any indications of Bright’s disease. A tumbler was given to me by Mrs. Loney on the evening of Wednesday, June 23, coa taining a sediment, in the house of Mrs Wharton ; the sediment was a whitish de posit, and somewhat moist; I carried tin glass home with me aud lock, ed it up in a medical case| on the 30th of June I carried that tumbler ty a German chemist; so far as I can judge torn General K.’s symptoms, as narrated by )r. Williams, nothing would have been bet- er than chloroform, followed by chloral. The witness was then cross-examined by Jr. Steele—Instances of death have frequently iccnrred from the administration of chloro- orm; chloral is very soluble; some cases have ieen reported of death apparently resulting rom the administration of chloral, but it is onsidered safer than chloroform; some phy- icians have, however, expressed the opinion hat its use was dangerous, Dr. Smith, of Bal- imore, among them; I think chloral was first sedin Germany in 1867; it was used in this ountry soon after; I have never noticed any letallic taste about tartar emetic, but, as you ia> imagine, have not tasted it often; ; operates by local irritation and by absorp- iou; it is generally absorbed; after absorption would probably be carried chiefly to the ver, and might be found there unless elimi- ated by the kidneys; the elimination is very apid; it has, however, been found in the liver r hen administered some time before death, ud may also be found in the kidneys; the tar- ir emetic found in General K.’s stomach was ot, in my opinion, the cause of death; in the rocess of absorption tartar emetic passes !so into the blood, and it might be found iere; the authorities say it is most likely to sfoundiu the liver; it might also be found i rhe lungs or the alimentary canal; > the post mortem examination the liver id lungs appeared to the unaided eye 1 be perfectly healthy; Orfila says he id observed a decided effect upon the ngsof dogs from tartar emetic; cases have 'en reported in which the system tolerates a pry large dose; it was given by Kazori and mnecke in doses amounting to 30 grains and awards iu 24 hours; it is used less now in leumonia than formerly, and has not, within y medical experience, been considered as iving any specilic influenceover pneumonia; was used formerly in large doses, with the ew of checking the inflammatory process; it now given in small doses,as a sedative to the ■art, and as an expectorant; from the syrup- ms alone,as narrated by Dr. Williams,I would it say that death had resulted from other an natural causes; the opinion I expressed sterday was formed from the narration by Williams of the symptoms, taken in con- ction with the post mortem observations aich I made; my opinion that General jitehum did not die-from natural causes was fmed from the fact that at the post mortem j) found iu no organ such changes as would ve produced death ; there was not, as far as mow, any analysisdnade of the liver or kid¬ neys ; there is a striking similarity between some of the symptoms of poisoning from tar¬ tar emetic and of cholera morbus ; there are no symptoms exclusively and invariably at¬ tending upon poisoningfrom tartar emetic; the symptoms of poisoning from opium are very much more uniform, but they may vary in some respects; I do not remember seeing con¬ vulsions from opium poison, hut I knowfrom my reading that convulsions , may occur in opium poisoning; it is common to administer opium by injection beneath the skin; the same process can he used with tartar emetic, but tartar emetic is not used medicinally in that way: the post mortem, taken alone, did not bring my mind to the opinion that General Ketchum died from other than natural causes; tartar emetic causes the pulse to become weaker on account of irs sedative action upon the heart, and it may make it more frequent, but I question whether it makes it fuller; there are three doors to th 9 labratory of the University of Maryland, in which I left the jar containing the stomach of General Ketchum; the chemical hall is the same as the laboratory; the keys are kept by Professor Aikiu; I do not know that there are any duplicates of the keys, except those kept by the janitor; but it is my opiuioa there are not. Dr. Chew now drew a sketch of the labora¬ tory of the University of Maryland, and ex¬ plained it at some length to the jury. Continuing—I put the jar upon the large table in the laboratory; I called the jauitor, and in that way got access to the room; the jar was not sealed, but was corked; the cork could have been extracted without difficulty; I did not observe particularly, except that it was a clean, white jar; not a green bottle' jar, according to my recollec¬ tion; I suppose it was about 3 P. M. when I left the jar there; rather before than after 3; I made an appointment with Prof. Aikiu to meet him, Drs. Williams and Miles there in the afternoon of the 30th of June; we met about 5 o’clock; I did nod ob¬ serve the glass with enough particularity to say whether or not it was of the kind in the manufacture ot which lead is used: I think only the membranes of the upper part of the spinal column—about two inches in extent— were examined at the post mortem; the ner¬ vous centres were examined more particularly by Prof. Miles; I think there may be symptoms during life referable to congestion, and yet no evidences of congestion discovered at a post mortem examination; on the 2fth of June last the weather was, according to my recol¬ lection, very warm; I do not remember any special prevalence of cholera morbus at that time in Baltimore. Mr. Steele—“If a man about 60 years of age, after going a good deal about the city of Washington during the day, drank a good deal of ice-water, and ate a hearty meal,would you say that he would be specially subject to cholera morbus?” Mr. Syester objected, and Mr. Steele said he wouid postpone the question. Continuing—Malarial fever generally begins to show itself about that time (June 24), and increases as the summer advances; malaria is 24 THE WE A R TON-KETCIIUM TRIAL. supposed to be an emanation from decomposi¬ tion of vegetables, etc.; we know nothing of it except from its effect. Mr Steele—“Medical science is progressive, is it not?” Dr. Chew—“I think so.” Mr Syester—“I hope there are some things which are certain in the practice of medi¬ cine?” Dr. Chew—“I think there are some things iD it absolutely certain.” Mr. Steele—"Even lawyers differ.” Mr. Syester—“Not. in all things.” Mr. Steele—“Well, to make it stronger, even clergy differ, very decidedly. Mr. Syester now cross-examined the witness and he testified—Our knowledge of malaria is based only upon its effects; I put a very small fragment of the sediment in the tumbler in my mouth, and it tasted acrid as it dissolved; Dr. Smith has, I think, expressed an opinion upon the danger of using chloral; if tartar emetic was administered through the skin it would not be likely to be found in the stomach, but it would affect the stomach. Mr. Syester proceeded to read from Beck’s Medical Jurisprudence, vol. II, about the effects of tartar emetic totesttheopinion of the witness. Con tinning—There are differences in the symptoms of a patient laboring from an over¬ dose of opium and one laboring from an over¬ dose of tartar emetic; when the stomach was delivered to Dr. Aikiu the ligatures were not, changed; I found everything precisely on Fri¬ day as when I bad left it there on .Thursday; congestion sometimes accompanies paralysis or apoplexy, but in the sense I attach to apoplexy I do not think congestion causes apoplexy: the name of the janitor is Peter Smith. Mr. Eevell requested a subpeeua to be issued for Peter Smith, audit was issued at once by the Clerk. Mr. Thomas now read to the witness from Taylor on Poisonings, to the effect that con¬ vulsions sometimes ensue after the taking of an overdose of laudanum, and the witness agreed to the opinion. Professor F. T. Miles was next sworn, and testified—I reside iu Baltimore; I have been a practicing physician 20 years; I am now Pro¬ fessor of Auatomy and Clinical Professor of Nervous Diseases iu the University of Mary¬ land; I was for six or eight years Professor of Anatomy iu the Medical College of South Car¬ olina; on the 28t,h of June I was called upon by Professor Chew, and was requested to as¬ sociate myself with him and Dr. Williams in the examination of the body of General K., who he told me bad died under suspicious cir¬ cumstances; we went about 11 o’clock the next day to Weaver’s; the general appearance, of the body was that of rigidity; there were red marks on the side of the neck and over the belly; they looked as if they had been scored by the finger nails; we. opened the abdominal cavity, took out the liver, cut it into pieces, and examined it; we took out pieces of the intestine, which we slit open, washed and held up to the light; I selected pieces which showed a red tinge externally, marking that they were coujested, of which many patches appeared along the intestine canal, and presenting the appearances I have always fonnd in the intestine where the mu¬ cous membrane has beefi highly irritated; in the intestine was a whitish, pulpy sub¬ stance, which we found along the track of the intestine, inside; with the assist¬ ance of Dr. Williams or Chew the stom¬ ach was tied at its two extremities, and so removed; the spleen was examined, also the kidneys, taking each out and making a careful examination with the naked eye; the brain was next examined; we cut through the scalp, which was not tinged with blood, re¬ moved the top of the skull, first exposing the outer membrane of the brain; I examined the membrane for congestion, hut found no mark of •congestion; the popular name of the outet membrane is dura mater: that membrane is connected by veins with the brain: upon tile removal of the dura mater the brain with its other membranes was exposed, and here the appearance of venous congestion showed it¬ self, the veins of these membranes covering the brain being filled with dark blood; there was no cereous fluid under these mem branes, the brain was then taken from the cavity of the skull, and examined partic¬ ularly as to the arteries which supply it. and the substance of the brain itself; I carefully cut iuto aud dissected the brain, and through¬ out, on the cut surfaces, found those dark- points of blood which indicate passive con-' gestion—that is, the veins were filled with blood; in the two lateral cavities of the brain (lateral ventricles) there was no nnusua) amount of fluid, nor, indeed, iu the other ven¬ tricle: without opening the spinal caual, I cut out about, two inches of the upper extremity of the spinal'cord, which presented nothing abnormal; I examined the membranes at tin upper part of the spinal cord to see if there was any effusion of fluid around the spinal cori more than normal; there was none the stomach was placed in a glass jar, willed had been sent for frout'Marion’s drug store; it was corked tip and delivered to Dr. Chew; 1] saw it the next day at the Laboratory of tin University of Maryland; I took it out and ex¬ amined it; it appeared to me to be in the, ideu t.ical condition in which it was placed in tin! jar; we did not examine at Mr. Weaver’s the orgaus of the chest; I went to Washingtoi with Drs. Chew and Williams, and examiner the organs of the chest; taking them out, 1 laid them on a hoard, and observed them par] ticularly; I opened the four cavities of til- heart to see that the valves were iu a perfecj state; the lungs were examined by_ toucll aud cutting into them; they appenreni perfectly healthy; the heart was perl fectly healthy; I found the liver norj mal—no martc of disease; nothing that showed a diseased condition of it; the open' mg of the stomach at the laboratory was in the presence of Drs. Aikin, Chew, William! and myself; we first poured out about threj ounces of opaque brownish fluid; the interio of the stomach presented nothing ven marked; the portion most dependent presented a dull reddish col 'r;so far as my post mortem ex amimation went.it devolved no cause of deatl from natural causes; from the narration oi General K.’s symptoms and what Isaw at the post mortem examination, my opinion is tka ( THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 25 Gen. K. did not die from natural causes:! have had a good deal of experience in post mortem examinations, but none in cases of death from chole-a morbus; apoplexy, in the ordinary ac¬ ceptation of the English term, would have implied a clot of blood in the brain; no such clot was found; some writers distinguish a serous apoplexy; I did not find that form; I have never examined the brain of any one who had died from an overdose of laudanum; active congestion would almost always leave traces in the braiu, discoverable either to the naked eye or microscope; I found' no such traces; I deemed the examination of two inches of the spinal cord sufficient, after learning a detail of the symptoms from Dr. Williams; I never made a post mortem exam¬ ination of a person who had died from an overdose of tartar emetic; I would ex¬ pect more pain • in the irritant poison of tartar emetic, and a more powerful de¬ pressing effect upon the heart than in cholera morbus; I have never seen a person die from cholera morbus; Niemyer, a very high authority, says it is rarely fatal except in cases of children or old persons; I think the symptoms narrated by Dr. Wil¬ liams and the observations I made of the body of Gen. Ketchum, did not indicate death from an overdose of laudanum. The witness was now turned over to the defence and Mr. Steele proceeded to cross- examine him. Continuing—An overdose of tartar emetic would produce vomiting, purg¬ ing and pain; the tartar emetic found in Gen. Ketchum’s stomach could not have produced death; it _ operates by absorption; we would find it in the tissues generally, the liver and kidneys, when absorbed: there was no analyis made as far as I know of the tissues, liver or kidneys; I examined pieces of the brain by the micro¬ scope at my house; if antimony had been given General Ketchum and absorbed, I pre¬ sume it could have been found by a proper analysis of his liver or kidneys; I could not say, from the symptoms narrated by Dr. Wil¬ liams, what was the cause of death; the nega¬ tive evidences of the post mortem examina¬ tions would not alone be sufficient upon which I could base an opinion as to the cause pf death; they did not disclose a cause of nat¬ ural or unnatural death; I cannot recall any liases reported of death from nervous func¬ tional disorders which were diseased condi¬ tions, and were not discoverable by a suffi¬ cient post mortem examination; death might ;esult from the effects of malaria and no obvious Causes be discoverable after death; I have had ‘io experience in cases of poisoning from tartar imetic; Orfila speaks of tartar emetic having t marked effect upon the lungs of dogs and a omewhat similar effect upon the human lungs; exceptional cases of convulsions from opium wisoning are reported; I have no knowledge 'f a peculiar type of disease being in Wash- ngton at the time of General Ketchum’s leath; cases of death from the administration f chloroform occur; I can recall but one or wo physicians who think the use of chloral Langerous. | Re-examined by Mr. Syester—There are j ases reported of a half-hour or more before the effects of tartar emetic, after being intro¬ duced into the stomach, are observable; the usual time is very much less than half an hour; 30 grains of chloral is a moderate dose; I have given as much as 60 grains; without pledging myself to do it under the same circumstances, I see nothing improper in Dr. Williams’ having administered chloral and chloform to General Ketchum; Taylor de¬ scribes tartar emetic as producing convulsive movements; rigidty of the limbs aud muscles about the neck and jaw is also spoken of; also a burning sensation about the throat or the pit of the stomach;* some authors report the appearance of the face as livid, and some as pale, but of the latter I am not sure; there are cases reported of death iu which lesions were not discoverable by post mortem examinations. Professor Wm. E. Aikin was now called, and testified—I reside in the city of Baltimore, and am by profession an analytical chemist; I have been since 1837 Professor of Chemistry in the Maryland University; I was called upon by Professors Chew aud Miles, I think on the 30th of June last, aud given a glass jar con¬ taining the stomach of Gen. K.; I understood the request was to ascertain if anything was there of a poisonous character; my idea was that I was called upon as a chemi¬ cal expert to satisfy myself if there was anything injurious in the stomach; I was to • use all the appropriate tests that would lead me to a certainty; that I un¬ derstand to be the duty of a chemical expert at all times; before beginning such work a chemical expert always seeks for something to guide his researches; the symptoms of the case are all important as determining him what he shall search for; I was governed by the information I received from the medical gentlemen who wait-ed upon me; from some circumstances the idea of strychnine was pre¬ sented to me. and from other circumstances the idea, of arsenic; those two things were mentioned before I proceeded to make any in¬ vestigation, and to the best of my knowledge nothing else; I proceeded to the work, the jar having been handed me by one of the three gentlemen; the stomach was un- open when removed from the jar; it was placed on a clean plate; Dr. Miles made an in¬ cision and poured out the contents into a beaker glass which I held to receiveit; the plate and beaker glass were perfectly clean; no pos¬ sibility of extraneous substance; the fluid poured into the glass measured within a few drops of four fluid ounces; the stomach was tied at both ends when taken from the jar; I then proceeded to examine that fluid—a turbid brownish fluid;! first examined forthe presence of strychnia and failed to find any traces at all; from what I had learned of the symptoms there was reasonable ground to suspect the presence of strychina; the particular reason for that was the spasmodic symptons as detailed to me by Dr. Williams; to determime the presence of strychpia in organic masses, advantage is taken of certain properties which strychnia possesses; strychnia, or strychnine, are vege * Grisolle says tatar emetic in poisonous doses pro¬ duces vertigo, spasms, convulsions and syncope. 26 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. table alkalies, and will unite to form a defi¬ nite compound, which chemists call salts; I added tartaric acid, using enough to insure a surplus of the acid; the acid I employed would necessarily unite with any strychnia present, and give a compound; knowing that that compound is soluble in alcohol.I added a large quantity of alcohol to this mass I was exam¬ ining. trusting to get a solution of any strych¬ nia compound which might be present; then by filtering, I separated the alcoholic liquid from the insoluble matter, and by evaporating the alcohol ob¬ tained a small quantity of solid matter, which was then treated with water to remove every¬ thing soluble which water would dissolve, and adding to the filtrate a large bulk of sul¬ phuric ether; I then added bi-carbonate of soda to neutralize any free acid, decomposed the strychnia saltz and set free the pure strychnia, if any was present; the object was to get an etherial solution; by the spontaneous evapor¬ ation of that ether there would be left behind in a solid state any strychnia which had been in solution; in my case the evaporation of the ether gave me no crystalline residue; no visi¬ ble residue, except a few points of what np- eared to he fatty matter; as strychnia would ave been necessarily left, I concluded that no strychnia was there; the negative proof was to me conclusive. The Court now adjourned until 10 A. M. Monday, when the examination of Dr. Aikin will be resumed. Information was received to-day of the death of Mr. Ezra Sheckels, the father of one of the jurors, from old age, and also of the death last night of Mrs. Beard, the mother of one of the jurors in this case. SEVENTH DAY. Annapolis. Md„ December 11,1S71. The Ketchnm-Wharton trial is still tedious, and promises to continue at least ten days longer. The interest of the public in the pro¬ ceedings seems but little abated, and rhe court room is crowded daily. A larger num¬ ber of witnesses for the defence were present to-day than upon any previous day. It is supposed that the testimony for the State will be concluded on Wednesday, but, much time will be consumed in argument upon the ques¬ tions of the admissibility of evidence. Mrs Wharton appeared calmer to day, and all the ladies with her, includingherdanghter. seemed iu better spirits than on any previous day of the trial. Soon after the opening of the Court, Dr. Aikin was re-called to the witness stand, and testified: After concluding my examination for strychnine,! next proceeded to examine for the presence of arsenic; the material that I had to work with included everything originally present, and, in addition, those reagents, or some of them, which I had added in the search for strychnine; nothing was removed but what could have been dissolved by ether; the mate¬ rials I used were tartaric acid in the first in¬ stance, and in the second, bicarbonate of soda in the search for stryehinia; they left a residuum of tartrate of soda with an excess of the bicarbonate: these substances I knew could not have contained any arsenic, other¬ wise 1 would never have been sure of iuy re¬ sults ; with that material so made up. I began the search for arsenic; I mixed all the resi¬ due and divided it into two parts; one part I put into an evaporating dish and added strong hydrochloric acid, called also muriatic acid; I digested that, adding occasionally some crys¬ tals of chlorate of potash, the object being to break up and disorganize any organic matter which might be present; when all traces of organic matter had disappeared I had a clear .yellow fluid resulting;! passed that through a -filter, and washed it with distilled water until 1 had about a half pint of liquid filtered from this material; 1 placed it in a glass and passed through it a stream of sulphuretted hydrogen gas; the sulphuretted hydrogen used was washed by passing it previously through water; I used a washing bottle, knowing that the arsenical matter, if present, was not likely to be there in the con¬ dition of white arsenic, hut was most, likely to have been converted into arsenic acid, a dif¬ ferent compound; in order to insure the action of the sulphuretted hydrogen, I applied heat to the vessel containing the material, this suspected matter; while the gas was passing through I had the temperature raised and then let it stand to cool; after standing twenty-four hours at rest I again used sul¬ phuretted hydrogen gas, and again let it, stand some twenty-four hours for the precipi¬ tate to subside; 1 then separated by filter the preciptate which bad collected; it was of a dark coior,brownisli;Ithen examined the precipitate to ascertain wbat it was; if arsenic had been present it would have been a compound of ar-i senic and sulphur; the color was not that I would have suspected in the arsenical com¬ pound; I examined by one simple inquiry, knowing the extreme solubility of the sal-' phide of arsenic iu ammonia; I tried it inspir¬ its of ammonia; its action was so trilling that it dissolved so sparingly I was satisfied it: could not be arsensical; that fiuishedi my inquiry for arsenic; I set the precipitate aside and reverted to the other portion of the original material which; had not been used iu the arsenic process: thel color I had obtained, and its solubi)it 3 T in am-f monia by that process, gave mb good ground^ to believe that a very different substance ex-< isted;they agreed with another known sub-j| stance, leading me to suspect that antimony was present; the action of sulphuretted hydro-1 gen on solutions of metallic compounds is; used to separate metals into groups, and, in, this case, two groups would have been—those! which give dark or black sulphides, on those which give bright sulphides; therefi could .not be present any metal which forms a black sulphide.or my precipi fata, would have been black: the only metal which could give a result anything like what I ob¬ tained was antimony, and for that, reason I was led to search next for antimony: the prosn ence of antimony is established by obtaining! two or three results; these results 1 call char) acteristic—that is, they are not compatible); with the presence of any other metals; the mw THE WHARTON-KETCIIUM TRIAL. 27 oaent I began to search for antimony [ had these resuits in my mind, and my ibject was to ascertain if I could get ;hese results from this material; the results >vould be au orange red sulphide of antimony; ;hat this orange red is soluble in strong boil- ng muriatic acid; that acid solution dropped nto water gives a white precipitate; there are >ther metals which will give a white precipi¬ tate, but the white antimonial precipitate is nade orange red by sulohide of ammonium; if t be anything else giving the same ivhite it would be made dark by the same; my substance which under my examination vould give me the orange precipitate, the olution of that in muriatic acid, the white iroduct on the addition of water and the re¬ appearance of the orange red when sulphide if ammonium was last added, must contain ome antimonial; I don’t know any one thing xcept an antimonial which could give those Jesuits, and as I got all those results in this use from that portion which I examined I ould not entertain a shadow of doubt as to he presence of antimony; I took the ortion of the material not used in the 'irsenical process, added to it an excess of artaric acid, filtered it, and examined the ltrate with sulphurated hydrogen; I got an .bundant brownish red precipitate; red brown nd brownish red wil 1 convey the idea; I used lie sulphurated hydrogen just as I have de- iribed in the other case; there was no necessity >r destroying the organic matter, and I did not se muriatic acid and chlorato of potash; the recipitate I got when separated and dried r as dissolved in muriatic acid; I did not use mriatic acid in preparing the material; the ydrochoric solution dropped into water gave ie a white precipitate; that white pre- ipitate became orange red when treated i’ith sulphide of ammonium; it was ilnblein a solution of tartaric acid; that com- leted, all that was necessary to satisfy me lat I had been dealing with some prepara- on of antimony; I know nothing that could ive produced those results except some prep- ’ation of antimony; as the only corn- mud of antimony used in commerce is rtar emetic, the overwhelming probabili¬ ty were that it was tartar emetic; the only utainty with me was that antimony was feesent; tartar emetic is the only prep- ation of antimony I am acquainted ith as an ordinary article of commerce; the nount of antimony present I could only ap- oximate; my attention was not directed so uch to the amount as to the character of an- nony present; I have never attached any lportauce at all to the question how much is found in the stomach, except in cases in lick things might accidentally get into the imach are present in very minute quantities; e question of quantity is important when cessary to explain the presence of even nute particles of a substance which may ve gotten their accidentally; in my opinion 3 quantity present could not have been less in twenty grains or more,if you call the com- und tartar emetic; the orange red sulphide of tirnony is a definite compound; in a given lght there will be, of necessity, a certain ight of metallic antimony and a certain weight of sulphur; tartar emetic is equally a definite compound; a certain weight of tartar emetic must contain a certain weight of metal¬ lic antimony with the other constituents; then it follows that the metallic antimony present ln a c ® r tain weight of a sulphide of antimony would form a definite weight of tartar emetic, which may be calculated; that calculation gives this result, that ten grains of sulphide of antimony correspond to about twenty grains of tartar emetic; if I decompose exactly twenty grains of tartar emetic by means of sulphurated hydrogen. I would get sulphide of antimony, and the weight of that sulphide of antimony would be about ten grains; not exactly as two to one, but very closely; I would like to have it understood that nobody ever extracted tartar emetic in the form of tartar emetic from the stomach of any dead person; once let it enter into solution, it is beyond the reach of mere mechanical separation; the only evidence of the presence of tartar emetic would be to get revideuce of the presence of some antimonial preparation; this is not peculiar to antimony, but is com¬ mon to all poisons taken into the stomach; I based my estimate of the vreight upon obser¬ vation of the results of another exami¬ nation; in that observation I was anxious to determine the weight which might be pres¬ ent from the observed weight of the sulphide of antimony; it was by comparing in my mind the quantities gotten in each case that I was enabled to make the approximation; in case I got ten grains in the other quantity of sul¬ phide of antimony, and I thought myself safe in assuming that at least twenty grains of tartar emetic were present; the larger quantity of sulphide I obtained from the stomach; a tumbler containing a sediment was given me by Dr. Chew; he called my attention to the taste of th^ article; that was on the 30th of June; I put a particle in my mouth and found an unpleasant, biting, acrid, metallic taste, which I did not think resembled the taste of arsenic; to satisfy my mind I got a fragment of white arsenic and a crystal of tartar emetic and compared the taste of all three, the sediment, the arsenic and the tartar emetic; I found the resemblance was between the sediment and the tartar emetic; that was the only tumbler I ever got from Dr. Chew; I was then satisfied that I ought to look for tartar emetic; the color of the sediment was white, and the color of tartar emetic is white; I had in view, starting with that idea, to search for those characteristics of anti¬ mony, which I have already given, with this addition, that where tartar emetic is suspected to be present, unmixed with or¬ ganic matter, it has a certain property which will aid in identifying it; the property is that when acted on by a drop of hydrochloric acid it gives a white precipitate which is soluble in excess of the acid; that experiment satis¬ fied me that I ought to look for tartar emetic; I then proceeded to verify, as far as I could, my suspicion of the presence of tartar emetic; I used the same means employed before to get the orange red solution; about one-half of the original quantity was treated with sulphuret¬ ted hydrogen, and gave me a precipitate of or¬ ange red sulphide of antimony; it was a direct 28 THE WHABTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. comparison of that and the bulk of the other that authorized me to determine in my mind the approximate quantity present; the orange red preciptate was collected, dried and heated with boiling hydrochloric acid; the solution gave me a weite precipitate, which was solu¬ ble in tartaric acid, and when treated with sul- phideof ammonium became orange red; thence I concluded that an antimonial was necessa¬ rily present; that furnished the chemical test of that material; in regard to the quantity, the only guide I had was acting on a known quantity; I weighed out one grain of the white sediment from the tumbler; the ' antimony obtained was in the shape of sulphide of .antimony, and that dried and weighed was four-tenths of a grain, from which I inferred that the tartar emetic present in that grain of white sediment must have been eight-tenths of a grain; if that was true of one grain, eight-tenths of the sediment must have been tartar emetic; in my judg¬ ment lifteen grains Were, speaking within bounds, present, and the tartar emetic I put at. ten grains, desiring to underestimate rather than overestimate: no one can ever sepa¬ rate in substance tartar emetic after being dissolved; the only evidence of its presence is the presence of an antimonial compound; when taken into the stomach it becomes mixed with the organic matter; the means employed to destroy the organic matter de¬ stroys the tartar emetic, but. does not destroy the antimony which existed as a part of it; it breaks up oue compound and leaves the con- stitueutsof which that compound was formed; I did not use all the processes by which anti¬ monial poisoning may be detected; I used means by which I arrived at what I have a right to consider*a perfect certainty; the means I employed I learned when I was a student.; they were then recognized as reliable; all the authorities, as far as I know, consider all the properties I have described as perfectly conclusive as to the presence of antimony; I have been teaching my classes so many years that these are the reliable methods for detecting antimony that I cannot remember when I began to teach them; I have practiced medicine only eighteen months; but I graduated in medicine. Mr. Revell now proposed to ask the witness if a person might not die from poisoning, and the poison not be detected in the stomach? Mr. Steele objected, as Professor Aikiu was only a chemical expert and not a medical ex¬ pert. Judge Miller said the witness seemed to be only a chemical expert, and that the question should be propounded to a medical expert. Mr. Revell desired to ask the witness if from liis reading and his knowledge of the circu¬ lation of the blood, etc., he could answer the questiou? Judge Miller requested the State’s Attorney to reduce his questiou to writing, which he did, as follows: “Does your knowledge of chemistry and of poisons enable you to de¬ clare your opinion whother or not a person may die of poison, and yet no traces of the poison be found in the stomach after death: and whether it is not within the scope of your profession to know and explain the effect o poison in the human system?” The Chief Judge said the Court did no think the question could be asked, as thi answer of the witness, already given, wa fatal to the question. Mr. Syester said he had supposed tk question involved was one well known h science, and especially to chemical science. The witness continued—All the agents employed were pure—that is, free from any thing “that could interfere with the success o mv experiments. Professor Aikin continued—The title of th ! chair i hold in the University of Maryland i that of Chemistry and Pharmacy; the dutie of my chair involve a knowledge of tliechemi cal properties of medicines: my duty is t. teach everything connected with the cliemica properties of medicines. Mr. Syester aske< the Court if the latter answers of the witnes laid the foundation for the question just rule< out, and the Court decided that they did uol The witness was now turned over to the dt fence, and Mr. Steele proceeded to cross exam ine him : It was my intention to state all th processes I used, but I remember that I use. metallic copper for arsenic, which gave me n resnlt; after all my examinations, have nothing to produce here i Court; the products were not preserver I Mr. Steele—“Do you not know that iu a cas of life and death it is the custom to preserv the results of chemical analysis, and produc l them iii Court?” Prof. Aikin said he knew of one instance but none in the case of antimonial poisoning Continuing—I was born in 1807; I did not in quire what had been administered to Genera Ketchum, and I knew nothing of his treat meut; I had not heard of the yellow jasmin 1 and the chloral; I did not make what ar called laboratory notes, but made memoranda they were thrown aside and I cannot furnis them; they were merely aids to my memory; i made a summary in October to Mr. Knott, d a part, in Baltimore, of the results d my analysis; as soon as I got n suits which only antimony could have fui nished, I considered my duty done; I suppose, evidences which would admit of but oue ri suit would be satisfactory to any reasons!)! . mind; I did not understand them to be cola 1 tests; if I get a yellow precipitate, it not alone, satisfactory; lead will give a re, precipitate sometimes; I rely upon the ra precipitate as far as it goes, but not tin alone; I have seen salts of lead produce acoki which might be mistaken for the autj monial red; the color is importan but not conclusive; I presume i coni have gotten metallic antimony; my of ject was to satisfy my mind of the presence q antimony, and I considered my duty pe I formed; I do not admit of any degrees of ce t.ainty: having been made certain, I could n< ! be made more certain: I evaporated only wb; j passed through the filter; the test I then a plied was directed exclusively to strychin if laudanum had been there I think I wool have obtained some indications of the pre J ence of morphia: I got no trace of the alkalol contained in yellow jasmine; my work wa THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 29 done in the large circular room called the lec¬ ture room; there are three doors to the room; anybody in rny absence can get into that room; when I lock the entrance door and the janitor cannot get in; I consider it necessary only to carry oft the entrance door kcy;Ihave no knowl- jdge of anybody haying a key, but I cannot be positive; all the vessels I used were not aew; I think some of the glass ware was new; [washed all of them myself; I used distilled water and made the ordinary examination by evaporation; incidentally I applied other tests; I distilled the water myself; it was hydrant water; the alcohol and ether I used eft no residue upon evaporation; I examined :he alcohol with sulphuretted hydrogen; ,artaric acid may contain tin, lead, or irsenic; I tested it and knew it con¬ tained none of them; the most likely impurity >f bicarbonate of soda is silica; I examined werything I used; arsenic may be found in mlphuric acid. The witness was now sub- ectert by Mr. Steele to a rigid cross-examina¬ tion as to the tests he used with tbe materials jjie used. Upon comparison a copy of Dr. Aikin’s re¬ tort of this analysis, which Mr. Thomas said le had obtained from Mr. Knott, was found o vary from a paper in the hands of Mr. level!. The State’s Attorney said be would lave Mr. Knott summoned to produce the iriginal report made by Dr. Aikin, that the (missions might be suppied. Professor Aikin continued—I know nothing >f the chemical properties of yellow jasmine; never read an article by Professor Wormley, f Ohio, in the American Journal of Pharmacy , n the subject of yellow jasmine; I am unable o say what would have been the result of ■iy analysis as to colors if General Ketchum ad taken chloral and yellow jasmine; the ests I applied to determine the presence of ntimony were, Iwould say, both good and suffi- ient; as I had used conclusive tests I saw no Season to proceed further. Professor Aikin /as new subjected to a lengthy cross-examina- ion as to his knowledge of the tests known to kemists. At 3 P. M. the Court adjourned until to- lorrow at 10 A. M., when Prof. Aikin will be icalled by the defence. The spectators evi- entl.v tired of the testimony to-day, but the iiemical and medical experts seemed to find pedal entertainment in the examination and ,'oss-examination of Prof. Aikin. All the chemical experts for the defence ave been present since the examination of rof. Aikin commenced, and it has been ob- srvable that they paid the strictest attention i all that fell from the lips of the venerable rofessor. His cross-examination by Mr. teele was very rigid, and will probably be mtmued for several hours to-morrow. EIGHTH DAT. Annapolis, Md., December 12,1871. As far as non-professionals are concerned, e trial of Mrs. Wharton degenerated on usterday into a tedious bore. The medical id chemical experts were, however, deeply terested, and it was evident that for them had reached a pleasant stage. The scien¬ tific war is determined and bitter. The cross- examination of Professor Aikin has been a most rigid one, and the defence have, seem¬ ingly, delighted to propound to him the most searching questions. The experts for the de¬ fence prepared numerous interrogatories, cov¬ ering fifteen pages of foolscap, and Mr. Steele showed that he knew how to handle them. The Court, reporters, and spectators became wrapped, as it were, in “a sulphurous canopy.” and could not determine what it all meant, except that a fierce, scientific assault was being made upon the Chair of Chemistry and Pharmacy. The lawyers on both sides got somewhat “at sea,” and soon found that facts and fictions had become curiously commixed. It is impos¬ sible to say what has been the effect upon the rural jurors, but they looked grave, and one, who had studied under Prof. Aikin, was ob¬ served to take many notes. Mrs. Wharton arrived promptly in Court this morning, accompanied, as usual, by her daughter, Mrs. Nugent, Mrs. Neilson aVid Miss Rosa Neilson. Her manner indicated the com¬ posure which has distinguished her since the commencement of the trial, but Miss Wharton appeared improved in spirits. Soon after the opening of the Court, this morning, Prof. Aikin was recalled to the wit¬ ness stand for continued cross-examination by Mr. Steele. He was first handed his report of his analysis to Mr. Knott, the State’s At¬ torney of Baltimore, and promptly identified it. He was positive, he said, that he had re¬ ported the fluid contents of the stomach to be of a “brownish” color, and not greenish; his handwriting had been mistaken. Continuing: The summary was made on the 14th of Octo¬ ber; the memoranda made of the analysis were very scanty, as I considered the work very simple; when I made the summary I had the memoranda by me, but I do not know that I referred to them; I remember that I destroyed the memoranda, but cannot say at what time; I threw them in the waste basket; I trusted to my memory, and I think I have a good, accurate memory: if my testimony yes¬ terday varied from my memoranda my testi¬ mony is right; I meant my report to convey to Mr. Knott the idea that tartar emetic was there; I have discovered this morning in my report an important error. [Dr- Aikin here took the report, and explained at some length how one white precipitate had become,through a clerical error, confounded with another; he then marked the error in the report.] Con¬ tinuing—It was an error in my writing the report, and not in my judgment. Mr. Steele—Then the test you report in this paper is entirely different from the one you have sworn to here ? Dr. Aikin.—Yes. sir. Continuing—I did not discover the error until this morning; my attention was called to it by a comparison of the two documents; I consider that 1 know now as perfectly what I did in July as I did in October; I can’t remem¬ ber what I said yesterday about the metallic copper test; I have heard so much since yes¬ terday that I can’t remember what I said; I 30 THE WHARTON-KETCHTJM TRIAL. remember, however, what I did in making that test. Mr. Steele.—We are now asking you about what you said yesterday, and not about what you may have done, or ought to have done. Continuing—I was speaking of a proof in another ease; I used it in reference to some remains brought on from Norristown, Penn¬ sylvania; I would have found something if the tests themselves bad not been pure; I used the test in the autimonial test, and not the arseni¬ cal test: intending to give the test to the jury I yet forgot it. Mr. Steele—Do you not remember that the first question I asked you yesterday was if you had told the jury all the tests you had used, and you answered that you had ? The witness said it had been his intention to omit nothing. Continuing—I use no mem¬ oranda except to keep numerical quantities in my mind; I had distinct recollection of what was to follow if antimony was pres¬ ent; the difference between a white chlo¬ ride and a white precipitate is more in the name than anything else; tartar emetic is composed of antimony, potash and a vegetable acid c illed tartaric acid; tartaric acid is composed of oxygen, hydrogen and carbon; I made no examination for tartaric acid in the contents of that stomach; it would have been useless; most cer¬ tainly if tartar emetic was there tartaric acid was there; the idea of looking for tar¬ taric acid never entered my mind; I am un¬ willing to sa v that there are no tests by which tartaric acid can be discovered; I did not look either for the potash; I looked for antimony, but I did not find the metallic antimony; I did not endeavor to obtain the metallic potash; antimony was the only constituent of tartar emetic I discovered. Mr. Steele—“Do yon understand that you are here not to convict the accused but to aid in giving her a fair trial ?” Dr. Aikin—“Yes, sir; I have under¬ stood that from the beginning of my work.” Continuing—The antimony could have been reduced to metallic antimony; Marsh’s test would have brought it, and I had at hand the materials for Marsh’s test; if I had regarded other tests than those I used more certain I would have used them; I have never used the galvanic test for antimony; I know of that test only vaguely; my attention has ne^er been directed to the galvanic test; I learned my tests when I was a student; I do uot mean that I learned them when I was first a student, but I meant to convey the idea that I had known them for a long time; I said yesterday that I did not deem the quan¬ tity in the tumbler necessary to the work be¬ fore me; I had a natural curiosity to find out, however, how much was there; I treated one grain with sulphuretted hydrogen; I weighed it and found it weighed forty hundredths of a grain; I weighed,I mean,the precipitate; all the precipitates from passing through sulphuretted hydrogen are uot always of the same density: if the quantity was a capital point I would not consider sufficient an estimate by the eye; the amount of sulphide I got in oue grain was used to determine the probable amount of tar¬ tar emetic in the t umbler; I did not test all portions of the sediment to see that they were the same; I made no test for the organic mat¬ ter of the sediment in the tumbler; I know ol nothing but antimony which would give all the results I got; if there was anything else which wpuld give all those results'l could not rely upon my tests; the sediment in the tum¬ bler had a biting, acrid, metallic taste; the crystals evaporated by a drop of the solution of the sediment and the crystals evaporated by a drop of tartar emetic had a resemblance, but not identity; I don’t think I did anything until Dr. Williams and Professors Miles and Chew had left; I think if I had been looking for prussic acid it would have been lost; I don't think there was any chance of finding prussic acid by the process I used; I have no product of any part of my analysis to bring into Court; in reference to iny examination ol the reagentsil knew the sulphuric acid was pure, because I had tested it by Marsh’s test; I cannot swear that I had tried it within six months. Prof. Aikin was now allowed to leave flu- stand. Peter Smith was next called, and testified— I am janitor of the University of Maryland, and have been since ’44: I keep the keys and have charge of the building: I always carry in my pocket the key to Dr. Aikin’s room; only Dr. Aikin and I have keys; I remember the time last July when Dr. Aikin was looking for some noison; Drs. Chew, Miles, Williams. Aikin and myself were the only persons who had access to the room; I never disturbed the jar. To Mr. Hagner—I have got the key in my pocket now; if anybody wanted to get in to¬ day they would have to stay out. [Laughter.] The vivacious manner of this witness was a most agreeable relief to the tedious testi¬ mony’ of the preceding one. By T consent, Professor Chew made the follow ing statement: I desire to make a statement or a correction ir my testimony, if such correction be necessary I am represented in one or perhaps more o Ihe public prints, as stating that Professor X R. Smith had written a newspaper article or chloral. In response to a question from tin 1 Attorney General, as to whether Professo Smith had written anything on chloral. J stated that he had written an article on tha subject in a medical journal. I did not rememj ber whether the article appeared in the Rahil more Medical Journal or in the American Journal of Medical Science, or in what particular jour mil. I now know that.it was published in tin Boston Medical Journal. I make the statemenl to remove any false impression from Professo Smith’s mind. Mr Jacob Weaver was next sworn, anc testified—I am an undertaker in Baltimore; I assisted in removing, on the 28th of June, be tweeu 6 aud 7 P. M. the body of Genera Ketchum from Mrs. Wharton’s residence; j took it to my warerooms, aud there put it is ice; I had the entire charge of it, and keptil until Thursday; on Thursday’ it was takes from the ico aud examined by Drs. Chew Miles and Williams; nothing had beeu done tj it except to apply’ ice; after the examination put it back in ice; I delivered the body it Washington, at General Brice’s house. THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 31 The witness was not cross-examined. A. A. Kleinschmidt was next sworn, and ;estified—I reside in Baltimore, and am an ipothecary; I have been an apothecary eight >r nine years; I am junior partner of the firm >f Gosman & Co.; I know Mrs. Wharton; I lave known her over two years; on the 26th if June last, between 7 and half-past, in the norning, Mrs. Wharton came into our store rad asked first for a small vial of tincture of ralerian; I gave her an ounce; she then asked or a small quantity, or some, I forget the ex- ict words she used, of tartar emetic; saying mmediately after that she wanted it for a t plaster; I don’t distinctly remember the (uantity I gave her, but my impression is I jave her 60 grains—one drachm; I charged it ra our book. The book was here shown to the counsel for he defence, and examined by them. Continuing—That is the blotter I have here; n it appears, “Mrs. Wharton, June 26, 1 oz. incture of valerian, 20 cts.; tartar emetic, 10 ts.;” no previous charges appear; that is the irst charge on that day; it is in my hand¬ writing; I sold it to Mrs. Wharton in person; had not been to breakfast at the time I sold S to her; Mr. Hanna was the only other per- on present, but there may have been a eus- omer; I think Mrs. Wharton lived at that ime at 263 North Eutaw street, about square and a-half from my store; I don’t re- lember having sold yellow jasmine on Vednesday, the 28th of June, but it is barged on my book; the prescription is also larked in my handwriting. [The witness ere produced the prescription, and it was ex- mined by the counsel for the defence; it was assed to' Dr. Williams, who identified it as ae he had written.] Continuing—The Nos l the prescription are in my handwriting. The witness then read the prescrip- on, as follows: “For General Ketehum Tincture of Gelseminium, % oz.; SO or i drops every 2 hours. P. C. W.”J Continuing—the whole was one-half an ince; I think I prepared the tincture, but I m’t distinctly remember the time; it is ade by percolating alcohol through four races of the gelseminum root until twelve lid ounces of the tincture have passed rough; some was made a few days since; I ive Dr. Williams an ounce of the same icture he got for General Ketehum— it of the same bottle—on the day is trial commenced; at the time I sold to rs. Wiiarton, Mr. Gosman, Mr. Myer, Mr. Anna, a colored porter and myself were em- oyed in my store; Mr. Myer is slightly deaf. Cross-examined by Mr. Steele—I have been Baltimore since ’66; previously I lived in ■orgetown and Washington; I am a rman by birth; I will be twenty-seven ars old on the 2d of January next; we ve a day book; I have not the ledger here; ! have also a prescription book. Mr. Steele asked to have the day book and a rfect copy of the prescriptions from the 26bh the 29th ef June, inclusive, and the witness >k a note of it. Continuing—Generally the person that sells : ikes the entries in the blotter, but not ! vays; I enter more than any one else; some¬ times I enter sales made by others; Mr. Gos¬ man, Mr. Hanna and Mr. Myer at that time also made sales; if I make the first charge I generally enter the bate; the date is some¬ times marked also at the side; I cannot say the charges are always made at the same moment the medicines are sold, but are made as soon as convenient afterwards; my attention was called to the entry for tartar emetic sometime in July; Marshal Frev first called my attention to it; I referred to my book at that time; my bills are made out from the day-book; Mr. Hanna generally collects the money. Mr. Steele now showed the witness alengthy bill, and the witness said that as far as he knew it was in the handwriting of Mr. Gos¬ man, and receipted by him. Continuing—Sometimes charges are made on the day-book without being first put upon the blotter. Mr. Steele now offered the bill in the hand¬ writing of Mr. Gosman, and receipted by the witness, in evidence. Mr. Revell objected; it was only a copy, and the original was in existence; under no possible circumstances could it be admissible. Mr. Hagner and Mr. Thomas explained that it was offered to test the accuracy of the memory of the witness. After some consultation the Court said the paper offered was not admis¬ sible even to test the memory of the witness. Mr. Steele said a bill was not a copy, but an original paper, and desired to call the atten¬ tion of the Court to the fact that the bill offered was not offered as a copy; the question was one of the general correctness of the entries, and to be judged of by the jury. The Court said the defence would have the fullest opportunity to cross-examine the wit¬ ness after the books were brought into Court. At request of Mr. Revell the witness now explained his way of dating his blotter. Con¬ tinuing—Mr. Myer was not at the store when I sold the medicines to Mrs. Wharton; ho is never there so early; bottles containing medi¬ cines are always labelled, even when sold to persons upon their personal application: that is the custom among the druggists of Balti¬ more. Mr. Henry W. Hanna, was next called, and testified—I live in Baltimore, and have been an apothecary four years; in June last I was with Gosman & Co., and am there still; I have known Mrs. Wharton three or four years; the last time I saw Mrs. Wharton in Baltimore was on the 26th of June last in our store a little after 7 A. M.; I do not know what she had come for; I had just reached the store; I had not taken my breakfast; Mr Kleinschmidt, Mrs. Wharton and myself were the only persons in the store; the store con¬ sists of one large front room and a back room, with a door on either side com¬ municating with the back room; I was going forward to wait upon Mrs. Wharton when 1 saw Mr. Kleinschmidt going and I went back into the back room: I remember distinctly that it was on Monday morning; I remember it from the circumstance of a conversation with Mr. Kleinschmidt; (the witness was here interrupted and not allowed to relate the con¬ versation.) Continuing—I remember to have 32 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. filled on that day a prescription of Dr. Wil I lianas’; it was: “For Gen. Ketchnm, 16 drops ! of creosote 4 oz lime water—a table spoonful every 2 hours, P. C. W.” I filled it about 5 P. M.; Dr. Williams brought it himself. The witness was not cross-examined by the de¬ fence. Mr. N. H. Hutton was next called, and testi fied—I reside in Baltimore, and am a civil en¬ gineer and architect; I know Mrs. Wharton, and have known her several years: I first, saw General Ketchnm on the stairs of Mrs. Whar¬ ton’s residence, on the 24th of last June, be¬ tween 0 and 7 P. M.: I first went to his room on Monday, at the request of Mrs. Wharton; she told me that General K. was sick, and a comparative stranger to most of the persons in the house, and asked me to go and see him, ! and keep him company; she said something about a physician, but I can’t remember 1 whether she said she had sent or was going , to send for a physician; I went up ' and found the General sitting on a lounge; it was about 4 P. M., Monday; I ex¬ plained the object of my visit to him; there was nothing very evident in his condition; he complained of nausea and sick stomach; a few moments after Dr. Williams arrived; shortly after his arrival I got General K. the slop jar which he used; after a time the medicine Dr. Williams had prescribed came and I gave him one or two doses, I don’t remember which; the medicine smelled of creosote; after giving him one or two doses I had to leave him; they had a beneficial effect upon him; I returned to his room between 6 and 7 P. M.; I had \ left the bottle that smelled of creosote on : the mantel; I remained with him until 9 o’clock, reading the newspaper to him and ad- ministeriug his medicine; as I came back to j the bouse, between 6 and 7 P. M., some one asked to go up into his room, and told me that he wanted me; Mrs. Wharton informed me, in | explanation of his call, that his bottle had been broken, and he was anxious for another dose of his medicine; it was to the general ef¬ fect that I must explain to the General, and keep him pacified; she told me she had broken the bottle; I found the General lying on the bed, apparently better than when I had seen him at 4 o’clock; I gave him a dose of medicine from anew bottle which arrived soon after I searched his room; I don’t know who went after that medicine; I remained with him until nearly 9 o’clock and. then left him; my wife came about that- time and called me out; I do not remember any one else call¬ ing me; I next saw General K. about 2 A. M. the next day; Tuesday, the same night on which I left him, I had occasion to use the same bottle of medicine he was using for another person, and I found his door wide open; I went in and saw him sitting up. with his back toward me, on the edge of the bed, and endeavoring to ascertain the time by his watch: he was apparently quite well; I got the medicine and left him; I next saw him du Tuesday night, at Mrs. Wharton’s request; she told me the General was quite sick, and asked me to look at hint and see if I thought he needed a physician; that was, l think, between half-past 7 and half-past 8; I found him lying on the lounge on his back; after looking at him a second or two I left the room and went to Dr. Williams’ office; the General -was sleeping heavily and breathing heavily; I returned to Gen¬ eral K.’s room and looked at him again; he had turned on his side, and was breathing easily; I then left him; no one was with him; the follow¬ ing morning, between half-past 9 and 10, I either met or was called out by Mrs. Whar¬ ton to the front porch; she told me she had something very important and very disagree¬ able to commuuieate: that she had sent for Dr. Williams, and before he came she wished to communicate certain facts to me, in order that I might communicate them to him. and enjoined that I should not say anything to any one else about the matter; she produced from her pocket a vial which she said con¬ tained laudanum, and that it had been found about General Ketchum’s bed by Susan, the colored cook, on the previous day: I think she said in the afternoon; 1 expressed my profound regret that she had not informed me on the previous daj of the finding of the bottle, and she told me she could not make up her mind to mention the matter, as the inferences were disagreea-i ble to her and to General Ketchum’s family; she gave me to understand that General Jv had used the laudanum himself, and was at that time in a very dangerous condition from the effects of it; about that time Dr. Williamt arrived, and I went with him to General K.’f room; we found him lying on the lounge: 1 assisted Dr. Williams in raising him from tin lounge and moving him to the bed; he ap¬ peared to be almost insensible, replying in an articulate manner; his legs wert certainly stiff; while Dr. Williams sup ported iiim under the shoulders, 1 movci his legs, first one and then the other; tb< knees bent very slightly as we moved him after getting him on the bed I took off hi pantaloons; I left the room about 12 o’clock;! re turned again about half-pasti,and found sev i eralpersons werein tin- room; Dr. Williams,Ml Snowden, my wife and a colored man were ii j the room, and General K. was then in a con vulsion; the convulsions he had were ven violent in their character and seemed to affect his back; I saw him frequently raise hi J body from his shoulders to his waist, and a ! the same time he made motious with hi'j [ hands as if he'wished to seize himself; we reti strained him by holding his hands, and in op position to ns he uttered cries; they were iij : articulate cries; towards the latter part of hil ■ attack 1 was left, with the colored man; w continued to hold his hands until he died; hi died in a convulsion; it was near 3 o’clocl when he died; Dr. Williams came back intjj the room. Cross-examined by Mr. Steele—It was aboil 10 o’clock on Wednesday when I went up win! Dr. Williams. At the request of Mr. Steel j the witness drew a sketch of the room in wliicj I General Ketcliuai died, and handed it to tl l counsel for the defence. Continuing—I shonl think the depth of the room was between 17 mi 18 feet: the bed stood with its head to the wa next to the hall: the bed was short; the Gei 1 I era! complained that it was short; the foot (| THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 33 ie bed came near to the mantle piece; there :e four windows: I think the shutters were Km on Wednesday when I was there; I re- illect that Dr. Williams opened the shutters; is quite possible that I may be mistaken j to the hour I met General Ketohum on ie stairway; I did not report to Mrs. Wharton lat General Ketohum needed a physician; I id not tell her I had been for a physician ntil the next day; I saw Dr. Williams give eneral Ketchnm what he told me was a dose : yellow jasmine; that was given in about an our after we arrived. The Court now adjourned until 10 A. M. to lorrow. As new features of the case are eing developed the interest in the trial re¬ ives, and the Court-room was again crowded )-dav. NOTH BA¥. Annapolis, Decemoer 13, 1871. The interest of the public in the great Vharton trial seems unabated, and the court join has been again crowded to-day. The at- mdance of ladies was as large as on any pre- ious day, and they sat patiently during the ntire proceedings. The medical testimony >r the State having been exhausted, except >r rebuttal, the trial reassumed the interest- lg character which most engages the atten- on of the general public. Mrs. Wharton and her daughter were still eavily veiled; Mrs. Neilson and Miss Rosa eilsou still accompany them, and there was othing sensational apart from the testimony ,f the witnesses. Upon the opening of the Court, Mr. A. H. lutton was recalled and testified, under ross-examination by Mr. Steele—I don’t appose I asked Dr.'Williams to come, but ■ft it to him to decide; I told him General etchum was in a bad condition; I described isposition and breathing, and I think I told im that I had not let Mrs. Wharton know lat I was coming; he said he had seen im in the morning, and that he was at then very sick; that he had been eakened by vomiting, and sleeping would ) him no harm; that he did not care ) go unless it was absolutely necessary; that should return to General K., and if I still lought his symptoms unfavorable, I should turn and let him know; I have stated all is reasons he gave me; he did not tell me eneral K. had been rude to him; he said he d not care to go to see General K. unless it as absolutely necessary; Dr. Williams said thing but what I ljave repeated: quite a imber of personswere about Mrs. Wharton’s >use at times during the days I was attend- g upon General Ketchum. Mr. Hutton now ive to Mr. Steele a larger and corrected agrarn of the loom in which Gen. Ketchum ed, saying that the one he had submitted esterday had been drawn, of necessity, in a irry. Mr. Syestfer now asked the witness if he eant to say that a number of persons were Mrs. Wharton’s house or in attendance ith him upon General Ketchnm. The defence objected, but Mr. Steele said he did not object if the witness would name all the persons. A tumbler which had been placed in a nursery refrigerator had been admitted in evidence, and it was right that the jury should know who were in the house. It the inquiry stopped_ there he would not object, but did not desire, of course, to go into the trial of another case. The Court decided that the witness could state who were present in the house at' the times he was there. Mr. Hutton continued—Most of the persons in Mrs. Wharton’s house were in attendance upon some one else; I went there to attend some one else; that person was not a member of Mrs. Wharton’s family. Professor Aikin desired to make an explana¬ tion in respect to his analysis, as reported to Mr. Knott, which was stated privately to the Court, and the Chief Judge decided that the explanation was not material to the case, and declined to allow it to be made. Some desul¬ tory discussion followed between Mr. Syester and Mr. Thomas in reference to the justice of allowing Dr. Aikin to make the desired ex¬ planation, and tho Court still declined to admit it. Mr. A. A. Kleinschmidt was now recalled, and testified that an entry on the blotter, on rhe 26th of June, was in his handwriting; he was then shown the day-book, and testified that the charges were copied on the bill made out in Mr. Gosman’s handwriting. Mr. Hagner said he proposed to show that the entries had not been regularly made, and that essence of peppermint was charged to Mrs. Wharton on the day she was alleged to have bought tartar emetic. In support of the right of the defence to in¬ troduce the evidence, Mr. Hagner quoted from Atwell vs. Millet, 6 Md., and Lewis vs. Kra¬ mer, 3 Md. Mr. Syester said that all that could be shown was that a mistake had been made in making the entry in the books. Mr. Steele said the books had been brought that the memory of the witness might be re¬ freshed, and they showed but one entry had been made of tartar emetic, and that an¬ other article had been charged on the day the witness had testified he had sold tartar emetic to Mrs. Wharton. The Court said the witness could be asked to explain the mistakes that had occurred, but that the bill could not be offered as evi¬ dence. Mr. Syester suggested that the witness had already stated that he did not make off' the bill, and could not explain the mistake. Mr. Kleinschmidt was then allowed to leave the stand. Jacob Frey, Deputy Marshal of Baltimore, was next called, aud testified—I reside at 271 South Sharp street; I am Deputy Marshal of Police at Baltimore; I know Mrs. Wharton; I first saw heron the 7th of July last at her own house in Baltimore; I called on her to make some inquiry iu relation to the death of General Ketchum, which had been reported to the Police Department; I gave her my name, and told her I was there to get some informa¬ tion about the death of General Ketchum; she related to me the fact that Gen. Ketchum had 34 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. arrived at her house on the 34th of June, and further, his sickness, and that Dr. Williams had attended him; the only fact that im¬ pressed my mind— Here the defence objected, and Mr. Steele said it was the duty of the witness to pursue the conversation and not select one single fact from the whole of his conversation. Mr. Syester said he understood the grounds of objection to be that the witness remem¬ bered only one fact- Mr. Steele said a mutilated statement could not be given, and briefly argued the legal right involved. The Court decided that the witness must give the conversation as fully as possible. Marshal Frey continued—Mrs. Wharton told me of Ceneral Iv.’s symptoms: all of the conversation did not impress itself upon my mind, but apart of it did; I asked her if she knew of any tartar emetic having been brought into her house, and she stated that she did; that she had bought some herself; I wish to stat e here that I had four or five conversations with Mrs. Wharton, but I can not draw the dis¬ tinctions as nearly as I would like; I asked her who constituted her household, and she gave me her name, her daughter’s, and the names of the two servants, Susan and Ellen; I asked if her daughter had been at home during the sickness of Geueral Ketchum,and she said her daughter had only arrived home on the day of General Ketchum’s death; this was the first conversation; I told her I wanted to take her servants to my headquarters to interrogate them; she told me I could see them in her house separately and Drivately, but consented that I should take them with me if I preferred: she asked me to let her know howl progressed with the investigation of the ease, and stated that she had intended to leave for Eu¬ rope on Saturday, the following day, and would sail on the next Wednesday; she said she would uot leave us as long as any suspicions rested on her servants, or until the matter was cleared up; I promised to call again and let her know how I was getting along; aftergettiug through with the servants, I called upon her again, that is, on Friday night, about 10 P. M.; I told her I had been un¬ able to come to any conclusion, but was satis¬ fied the servants were perfectly innocent; I had a further conversation with her that night that lasted not more than half an hour, and we weut over the same grouud we had gone over on the afternoon of that day; in that conversation I told her I thought she had better not think of leaving until the matter had been cleared up, telling her I thought it would be most satisfactory to her; I told her I was unable to say how long I would be work¬ ing it up. and that some cases had taken me eighteen mouths; she told me I«had been very kind in calling to see her, and reporting how I had been progressing, and then said she wished to make me a present, and reached out her hand with some money in it; it was rolled up, and I could not see the amount; I told her I could not receive any presents or money; she said she intended to make me a present anyhow, and I told her we would talk that over after the case was cleared up; I called again on Saturday; I cannot be positive as to the time but I think it was about 10 A. M.; her daugb ter came to the door, and told me her motile was not at home, but wished to see me; named the hour in the afternoon at which would meet her, and at that hour met her; ii the conversations I had with Mrs. Whartoi after Friday night I questioned her mor closely than I had done before about the pui chase of tartar emetie, and when sh purchased it; I asked her if it migb not be possible that she had sent one c her servants for the tartar emetic, and tha servant abstracted it; she said no, as she hai bought it herself; I asked her if it might no have been possible that after using it she lia. laid the paper aside and some one in that wa gotten it; she said no, she had kept it in lie pocket; she said she did not remember the da she had bought the tartar emetic, but it wa during the time the sickness was in the house I asked her what time of the day, and she to! me in the evening; she said that on her wa down town, she had stopped aud bough some tartar emetic, had put it in her port monnaie,and kept it thereuntil about retiring when she put it on a plaster and put it on he breast; in one of the conversations, betweej Friday night and Sunday night, she again in sisted upon my taking some money, and tha time she spread the note out, aud it was $2( she told me to take it and buy myself a present I again told her I could not receive it, and wa prohibited by the rules of the Police Depart ment; she told me, that being the case, sir knew the duty of an officer, and that certain! I could not take it; during these conversation the question of her leaving for Europe wa discussed, one being a reiteration of the othei I promised to tell her when I thought th matter was in such condition as would justif her in leaving the city; on Mouda^ morning, between 10 aud 11 o’clock, called upon her, and informed her tha Mr. Pinckney, the Deputy State’s Attorae) of Baltimore, said it would be inadvisable fo her to leave the city while this matter wa pending; she said she was very sorry, and ha expected to leave on that day, at 3 P. M., fo Philadelphia; she asked me if I thought Mi Pinckney would let her go if she saw him; I told her I did not know; she asked me if 1 would be improper for her to call on Mi Pinckney with a legal friend, and I told he certainly not; in the afternoon of that dayl again called upon Mrs. Wharton, and told he circumstances had come to our knowledg which made it necessary for us g place a guard over her house to pre, vent any person connected with her lions leaving it; that arrangement was continue until the following Saturday; during the ir terval I did not see Mrs. Wharton; on Satin day I called with ex-Sherifl Albert and iutre, duced him to her; my connection with th case here ended; I think she said Genert Ketchum had been taken sick on Saturdaj she said he had taken a walk on Sunday, bu said he was too unwell to go to fchureh: sh told me his sickness had cpntinued, but I car not remember the hours and days at whicj she stated he was worse; I don’t remembe the conversation, hut in one she told me Gep TEE WEARTON-KETCEUM TRIAL. 35 K. was a singular man, and that he generally drugged himself, and was opposed to doctors; she told me a hottle of laudanum had fallen from his bed: I don’t remember whether she said she or a servant had found it; she said that being a man who drugged himself, Gen. Ketchnm might have taken the tartar emetic by mistake; I told her that to my mind it was (impossible from the fact that tartar emetic had not only been found in Gen. Ketchuin’s stomach, but also in a tumbler of milk punch, and that that was satisfactory to my mind that the General could not have taken it by mistake and that he had not had access to the place where the second dose of tartar emetic had been found—that is in the tumbler: I don’t remember that she made any reply; what I have stated is all I remember of the conversations I had with Mrs. Wharton. The witness was now turned over to the de¬ fence, and, after a few moments’ consultation with Mrs. Wharton, Mr. Steele proceeded to cross-examine him as follows ; I endeavored to be as kind to Mrs. Wharton as my official duties would allow; she told me that no gentleman was on the premises; I do not remember whether or not she asked me if the servants could be allowed to return that night; I remember that she was solicitous for her servants; we finished with both of the servants that night, but with Susan first; we sent an officer with the servants, that they might not be molested on the way; before arresting her I had never inti¬ mated that she was the suspected party: in the first conversation I did not suspect her at all; I cannot relate the whole of her con¬ versations, but some I remember verbatim; I first saw her on the 7th of July; no one was present at the interviews between Mrs. Wharton and myself; I don’t remember that ipon one occasion, when her daughter was ibout to enter the room, that Mrs. Wharton shut the door; I remember that I desired ny conversations to be with her alone, md that they were: I had at least ive interviews with Mrs. Wharton, and : [ told her at the first that tartar imetic had been found in Gen. K.’s remains: t was after that conversation that she said le might have taken it by mistake; when I out the guard around her house I did not hen tell her that she was suspected, but that 10 one connected with the house would be lermitted to leave; I relate what I told her, >nt that was not what I really meant; the ast conversation I had with Mrs. Wharton vas on Monday, July 10, about half-past 3 i M. James C. Rogers was now called and testi- ied—I have been in the drug business twenty- ive years, and I am uow of the firm of Cole- aan & Rogers; I am the proprietor, Mr. Cole- lan being dead; the witness was now shown he bottle of laudanum found in General K.’s ■ed. Continuing—I smell opium; by ordinary (S6 I shou d suppose it would require six lonths or a year to assume its present look; al ivays label medicines sent out; this is not he style of bottle I use; we use the French quare. and this is known as the flint bottle: b is our rule to stamp “Coleman & Rogers” n the cork; if this vial had been purchased of 3 me on June 24, it would not now have the in¬ crustations I observe unless heat had been ap¬ plied to it. Cross-examined by Mr. Hagner—I know of no case in which the label of lgudanum has been left off in my store; it requires fully six months to make the sediment now in this vial; we do not keep laudanum bottled up, and would fill a bottle brought us by a person who wanted it; we would take one of our own corks and, most probably, stamp it with our firm name; I have never seen Mrs. Wharton in our establishment to know her personally; I did not know her by sight. Mrs. Wharton now raised ner veil, at the request of Mr. Revell, and there was a stir in the court room, many evidently desiring to get a glimpse of her face- Mr. Rogers said he did not recognize her, and she lowered her veil. Colonel H. D. Loney was next called, and testified—I have lived all my life'in Balti¬ more; I am a member of the bar; I know Mrs. Wharton: I never had any conversation with her until the week before General K.’s death; I was sent for to go to her house to see a sick person, and I was informed that General K., too, was sick there, but I did not see him; the only conversation I can recall about General K. was on Tuesday, the day before he died; I was in Mrs. Wharton’s dining room on Tues¬ day, between 5 and 6 P. M.; Mrs. Wharton came in and stated that she was going to Sta- bler’s to get brown stout; I offered to go for her, but she said she wanted the walk; she returned in a few moments with a bottle wrapped up, and said she was going to make a saugaree for General K.; she went to the sideboard and mixed it: 1 did not see how much water she used; I recommended her to put nutmeg in it; she stated it was difficult to get him to take anything when he was sick, and that he was peculiar about taking things, but that she would put the nutmeg in and try it; she took the saugaree up stairs and re¬ turned in a few moments, and said that Gen. Ketchum had taken it; I think that was all that occurred at that time; I don’t remember anything further that she said at that time; subsequently she went out riding with me to Druid Hill Park; Mrs. Wharton said it was difficult to get General K. to take anything when he was sick, and that she did not know that he would take the saugaree without the nutmeg; I cannot state at what time we re turned from our ride; I suppose it was about 8 o’clock. Cross-examined by Mr. Steele—I had diffi¬ culty in fixing in my mind the day upon which this occurred; I thought it was Monday until about three weeks ago; I remember giving you (Mr. Steele) and Mr. Thomas a statement, bnt might have omitted to state all I have stated here. Colonel Loney now explained how his memory had been refreshed in reference to the date, by going to StablePs and finding out from their books the day upon which Mrs. Wharton had purchased the brown stout. Continuing—I was summoned before the Grand Jury, but was not required to testify; I could not say who pulled the cork out of the bottle of brown stout; I don’t remember who 36 THE WHARTON-KETGHUM TRIAL. was in the room; if I had seen Mrs. Wharton polling the cork I think I would have offered to do it for her. To Mr. Syester—Mrs. Wharton gave me no reason for getting the brown stout for Gen. Ketchum. Mrs. Col. Loney was next called, and testi¬ fied—I reside in Baltimore; I have known Mrs. Wharton between four and five years: I re¬ side within three or four squares of her resi¬ dence; I never knew Gen. Ketchum until I met him at Mrs. Wharton’s on Saturday even¬ ing; I saw him when he entered the house, went up stairs, and afterwards when he came into tea; the General was simply introduced to me, and I was not present during the time he was taking tea; I was in the tea room on the next evening (Sunday) when he entered; I did nor take tea with him; I never saw him again until just before he died; I heard him on Tuesday afternoon; I think it was be¬ tween 6 and 7 o’clock; I heard him vomiting; I was on the first floor and he was on the third floor; I have no recollection how long the vomiting continued; I knew he was suflering, and I asked my mother to go to him; that was on the afternoon of the day ray husband took Mrs. Wharton to ride; the vomiting was heard after they had left; 1 do not remember that my husband took Mrs. Wharton riding on an’v other occasion: on Monday morning I was standing on the front steps with Mr. Moale wlien Mrs. Wharton entered the gate; at first I did not recognize her; it was early, she said she had been out to the provision store; I think it was between 7 and 8 o’clock; breakfast had not been served; I don’t recollect any other conversation with Mrs. Wharton: I went to Mrs. Wharton’s on Wednesday a little a f ter 11 A. M., and went ot once to my brother’s room: after remaining there a very few minutes I was called to the door and had a conversation with Mrs. Van Ness; I entered the dining room and found her standing with a wine¬ glass of milk punch, which she had poured from a tumbler, in her hand; as far as I can recollect the tumbler was on the table, giving me an idea that something was wrong with the milk punch, the tumbler having a eculiar looking deposit in the bottom of "it; then asked her to hand me the tumbler, and tasted the sediment; I noticed nothing sweet about it, but it left a grating sensation in my throat such as I have felt after taking magnesia; it left also a very strong metallic taste in my mouth; I took a little of it, and rubbed it on my hand to see if there was any¬ thing sticky about it, but there was not; I asked them to let me have the tumbler, and I put it in my pocket; I returned to mv brother’s room, to avoid any suspicion he might have that anything wrong was going on in the house; I then took the tumbler to my mother’s; I returned to Mrs. Wharton’s with the tumbler, and went into the third story, where my sister, Mrs. Hutton, was; Mrs. Wharton very kindly showed me into a little room, and said I could converse there with my sister. (The witness was not allowed to relate the conversation). Con¬ tinuing—Mrs. Wharton asked me if I was going down town, and asked me also to look at General Ketchum and see if I thought he was as ill as the others thought hi was; she asked me to take a telegran which she had wriiten to Genera Brice; I looked at General K. a moment anr told her he looked to me very much like; dying man; I took the telegram; that wai between 12 and half-past 12 o’clock; 1 went t< my husband’s office, and he told me it wai then twenty minutes of 1; I went in a cai from Eutaw street and Madison avenue t< the corner of Baltimore and Charles streets my husbaDd went with me to the telegrapt office; the despatch was sent at 12:55; when ] went into General Ketebum’s room Mr Snowden was with him; I went from th< telegraph office with my husband ti the office of an analytical cliemisi named Tourney, on Postoflice avenue but he was not at home; we then weni to Andrews & Thompson, on Baltimore street and found only Mr. Thompson there; I put tb< tumbler on the glass case in front of me, atic Mr. Thompson took out a little on his pen¬ knife and put it on a copper cent, consulted i book, and put a drop of some acid upon it; hi made one test, and then took out some mort and made another test: acting upon his advict I put the tumbler in my pocket, got in the car and went to Lanvale street, to Dr. Chew’: house; he was not at home then; after stopping for a moment at my own house, I returned t< Mrs. Wharton; all this time I kept the tumble' in my pocket, pinned iD; I showed Dr. Wil liams the tumbler, and he put a little o the sediment on his tongue, but dii not swallow it; he found his coa was too thin to disguise the shape of the turn bier, and he gave it back to me; I put it in no pocket; k«pt it until the afternoon and liaudei it to Dr. Chew; the tumbler was never out o my sight: Mr. Crawford Neilson took some o the sediment out; my mother took out a little enough to blister her lips; Mr. Neilson said i did not taste peculiar to him: I don’t know a what provision store at which Mrs. Wharto dealt; there is one (Keller’s) near her res dence; I know where Gosman’s drug store i: the shortest way to Gosman’s from Mrl Wharton’s residence is by Keller’s sron i I cannot state the direction from whic' Mrs. Wharton was coming when saw her enter her gate on Monday mornin; I heard General Ketchum coming flown stab on Sunday night. Cross-examined by Mr. Steele—Mrs. Wha: ton said, when she came in, on Monday morr ing, til ax she had been to get something fc breakfast: she did not say what she had go ten; Mr. Moale was the only person presei with me at that time; I started from my horn at 11 A. M. on Wednesday: I had the teiegrai stuck in my glove; I tied my pocket-haudke chief over the tumbler before leaving Mr Wharton’s; I laid the handkerchief over tl top of the tumbler, wrapped it around tl base of the turn bier; it would have been astigl as a preserve jar if I had had a string to ha' tied it: I think all the fluid had been poured o I hardly know whether or uot the sedimei was moist when I first took the tumbler; it. b« came dry as I carried it in my pocket; I pr sunie it was after 6 o’clock before my busbar and Mrs. Wharton started on their ride; Mr THE WHA R TON-EE TO HUM TRIAL. Wharton gave me the telegram after I came out the room up stairs in which I had the con¬ versation with my sister, Mrs. Hutton; I did not see the little nursery refrigerator; it was not Mrs. Wharton’s refrigerator, but had been brought there for the use of any other person who was sick there at the time; I cannot re¬ member whether it was before or after I had had the conversation with Mrs. Hutton that I told Mrs. Wharton I thought Gen. Ketch um looked like a dying man. Mrs. George Warner, Jr., was next called, and testified—I have resided in Baltimore fif¬ teen years; I have known Mrs. Wharton since abouo the beginning of the late war; I saw her on the Monday preceding General Ket- chum’s death; she was on Biddle street, near Madison; I cannot say positively at what time; I left my home, No. 78 Franklin street, at a quarter-past 6 A. M.; I wished to see my sister, Mrs. Chubb, before her departure that morning from Mrs. Wharton’s; I continued up to Eutaw street, and went as far down as Mount Calvary Church, thence to Biddle street; as I turned into Biddle street from Madson I saw Mrs. Wharton approaching me from the direction of her home; when we met I asked her if my sister had left; I think it is about seven squares from my house to the point at which I met Mrs. Wharton. Mr. James McAvov was next called and tes¬ tified—I am an accountant in the banking house of Alexander Brown & Sons, corner Bal¬ timore and Calvert streets; I have known Mrs. Wharton for five years; I was not acquainted with General Ketchum, but was once intro¬ duced to him; I went to Mrs. Wharton’s about 1 P. M. on Sunday, June 24, and went again at 4 P. M.; I was there again as 9 o’clock that night; Mrs. Chubb and General K. were Bitting at the tea table; Mrs. Wharton asked me if I would get her a bottle of brandy from the room of Mr. Van Ness; I got the brandy and handed it to her; she said she wanted to make General K. some punch or toddy, I don’t remember which; after a short interval I looked in the dining room and saw the Gen¬ eral stirring a tumbler; that was about 9 o’clock; I then went into Mr. Van Ness’ room and staid with him until about 12 o’clock; I then went into the dining room and laid down on a lounge; in about ten minutes I heard a step on the stairs, and I heard a fumbling at the lock of the front door; I went forward and saw it was General Ketchum; as soon as I got to the door he evidently knew that I had come to stop the noise, for he said to me at once that he would not go out that door, but would go out the back; he came through the dining room and went through the kitchen, opened the back door and went out into the yard; I laid down again, and in about five minutes I heard another step on the stairs; Mrs. Wharton now came in, and said she was afraid the General was sick and that she was going to give him some brandy and ginger; she unlocked, I think, two cupboards and a sideboard; after she got the bottle of brandy she left the room and went up stairs; I then laid down again on : the lounge and was there probably ten or fif¬ teen minutes when I heard the back door open from the outside; I saw General K. come in; he 37 passed through without stopping or saying anything, and went up stairs; I saw no one else from up stairs during that night; I do not know whether or not Mrs. Wharton got the ginger; the General did not tell me when he went out what was the matter with him;the yard of Mrs. Wharton’s residence has an iron railing in front and a high wooden fence in the rear; I was not asleep in the in terval between General K.’s going out and his return; I think I could have heard a touch upon the gate latch; I never saw General K. again; I left Mrs. Wharton’s between 4 and 5 o’clock the next morning; I did not see Mrs. Wharton again that night; everything was quiet after General Ketchum returned up¬ stairs. Cross-examined by Mr. Steele—I saw Mrs. Chubb and General Ketchum sitting at the tea table, the room is not large; the dining room door and the parlor room door face each other; the brandy was sitting on the table in Mr. Van Ness’ room with the other medicines; as near as I can remember Mrs. Wharton met me at the dining-room door when I handed the brandy to her; it is my impression that when Mrs. Wharton came down during the night she got the same bottle of brandy. The Court now adjourned until to-morrow at 10 A. M. The following additional witnesses for the State have been returned summoned: The Actuary of Girard Life Insurance Company of Philadelphia (to bring documents); adminis¬ trators of J. F. Jones, of Philadelphia, to bring letters of exemplification; Samuel L. Phillips, lawyer, Washington; Dr. Frank Donaldson, Dr. Wm. T. Howard, Jas. Rogers, of the firm of Coleman & Rogers; Mr. Gos- man. druggist; Gen. G. D. Wise and Jas. Mc- Avoy, Henry Johnston and Josiah Lee Johns¬ ton, of Baltimore. 'S'BLVB'Ba »A¥. Annapolis, Md., December 14, 1871. Although the Wharton-Ketehum trial has been unusually protracted, and proved, for a day or more, a decided bore, the interest of the public seems as eager now as when a nar¬ ration of the circumstances surrounding the case was begun. The general desire seems to be to learn every detail, and the testimony of the witnesses is heard with remarkable patience. The ladies who attend seem to at¬ tach more importance to the circumstantial evidence than to any that the doctors have given, and they appear to eagerly anticipate every new development, especially when made by the ladies who are called to the stand. Mrs. Wharton’s manner appears unchanged. She is still accompanied by the ladies who have been with her from the commencement of her trial. Soon after the opening of the court this morning Mr. Thomas held a con¬ sultation with his client, and her manner was earnest, but composed. Whenever these con¬ sultations occur the crowd in attendance evi¬ dences a desire to watch, and the eyes of all are directed at such times towards Mrs. Wharton and the counsel with whom she may be engaged. 38 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. Harry W. Snowden was first called, and testified—I have been a resident of Baltimore for the past three years; I am slightly ac- | quainted with Mrs. Wharton; I first met her last spring; I did not know General K. per- ! sonally; I saw him on Saturday, June 24tli, on the Washington train; I took the train at Laurel Station, and my attention was at¬ tracted to General K. and Mrs. Chubb, who were pleasantly engaged in conversation; we got in the same street car, and they got out at Biddle street; General Ketchnm seemed very well; I next saw them at Mrs. Wharton’s house the following Monday; I next saw General K. on Wednesday, June 28th, at about 12 or a quarter past 12; I was summoned from the room of a sick man in the | house bv Mrs. Wharton to go to General K.’s room; she said he was sick, and it was thought advisable to have a gentleman with him; im¬ mediately upon my being called out Dr. Wil¬ liams came, and i went up with him; I fol¬ lowed Dr. Williams into General K.’s room; I took my seat by his bedside, and did not va¬ cate it, except at one time to aid Dr. Williams in moving him; when I first saw him he struck" me as being a very sick man; he was quite quiet, however, and I only observed some little twitching of his fingers; I remained by his bedside holding his left hand; I cannot say positively that Mrs. Wharton entered the room when I did; shortly after half-past 12 o’clock Mrs. Whar¬ ton stated to Mrs. Hutton that she had pre¬ pared the medicine for General K. as the physician had prescribed for him; I did not see her drop the medicine; I only heard her say to Mrs. Hutton that she had dropped it; I do not remember how long Mrs. Whaiton had been in the room before she made that remark to Mrs. Hutton; during Mrs. Hutton’s absence I observed Mrs. Wbarton at the bureau in a stooping position, and I suppose she was drop* ping the medicine; she had the medicine in a teacup; as well as I remember it was about twenty minutes of 1 o’clock when she pro- f osed to give the medicine or asked the time; remember hearing her say that as he had been eased or relieved by the former dose, 1 that she would like to give the next dose; she inquired the time of Mrs. Hutton, who told her that the time had not arrived, and that 1 o’clock was the hour named by Dr. Williams; in a few moments more she inquired the time, j and I said: “Time appears long when one is anxious;” after Mrs. Wharton had inquired the time again, Mrs. Hutton passed her watch to her; I handed it to her; at about five min¬ utes to 1 Mrs. Wbarton came forward and asked if I would administer the medicine to General Ketchum, and I told her I would; she passed me a tablespoonful, and holding him with my right hand, I gave it to him with my left; I gave the medicine with my left hand as I supported him with my right arm; Mrs. Whartou requested me to keep the spoon in his mouth, and said she would pour in the balance; she then poured in the balance; tlie first quantity given was a full tablespoon¬ ful; I did not see the cup, but I am satisfied that it was quite another tablespoonful; it may have been more or less; I did not see the 40 drops of yellow jasmine dropped here by Dr. Williams; after taking the medicine Gen. Ketchum laid down again and seemed quiet for about ten or fifteen minutes; he then began to show symptoms of uneasi¬ ness; those symptoms gradually became worse, until he was taken with convulsions, and they became more and more severe, and were, ac¬ cording to my judgment, uninterrupted, that is, a continuous convulsion; at times they weTe more violent than at others; I inquired of Mrs. Wharton if General K. had been in ac¬ tive service during the late war, thinking that he might probably have some brain af¬ fection; she at first replied that he had been in active service, and then, upon reflection, cor¬ rected herself and said he had not been; one reason why I made the inquiry was that I saw him place his hands to the back of his neck; that indicated to me that, he might have had some trouble with his brain; shortly after placing his hands to the back of his neck he put his hand inside his shirt and grabbed himself in this way, [here the witness went through the motion]; when I asked Mrs. Wbarton if General K. had been in active service during the late war, she said he had at one time a fall from his horse; I cannot remember when she said the fall oc¬ curred; I examined his breast, and removed his hand after I found he had been clutching himself; he made a slight impression, on his throat, but it was not so marked as it was just under the collar bone; he next put his hands to his stomach; I asked him where his pain was, and after I had repeated the inquiry several times, he replied “in my stomach,Sir;” that was all that he said: when siezed with the convulsions he would make motions as if st.ruok in the back; his counte¬ nance indicated intense pain or agony; his ex¬ clamations indicated, too, that he was in great suffering; the witness was now handed a glass and a vial containing yellow jasmine. Mr. Syester here remarked that they would have to send for spoons, as General Butler was uot present. This remark created some laugh¬ ter. The spoous were sent for, and the wit¬ ness continued: The ouly part I could gather of the conver¬ sation between Mrs. Wharton and Mrs. Hut¬ ton was, that Mrs. Hutton told Mrs. Wharton it was too much, and oflered to drop it again: f don’t know positively what Mrs. Wharton did with the spoon and the cup, but I remem-j ber seeing her sitting afterwards on the sofa, holding them in her hand; I don’t remember seeing them afterwards in the room; Mrs. Wharton left about twenty minutes before! General Ketchum died; I did not see Mrs.! Wharton prepare any drink or mediciue; I re¬ member hearing her say that she was going to give General Ketchum some brown stout: I can’t remember the day: when she stated she was going to give General Ketchum brown stout. Colonel Louey advised her to put nut-; meg in it; she said she scarcely thought he would take it with the nutmeg, but that she would try it; she then left the dining room; she said that Dr. Williams had said that Gen¬ eral Ketchum might have brown stout; shel did not say how Dr. Williams had come tol recommend it; I don’t remember whether or THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 39 not the bottle was wrapped; I don’t remember whether or not the cork was drawn. Dr. Williams was now called, and. at Mr. S.vester’s request, he dropped forty drops of the yellow jasmine prescribed for General Ketchum, and adding two teaspoonfuls of water, put it in a glass and next added two tablespoonfuls of water. Mr. Snowden, continuing—The dose admin¬ istered by Mrs. Wharton to General Ketchum lid not bear the color of this (holding the glass up to the jury); the dose which was handed me in the spoon bore a very different appearance from this. Mr. Snowden now took up a tablespoonful md said it still did not look like what he had xdininistered to General Ketchum. Continuing—I could not see the bottom of he spoon through the dose Mrs. Wharton landed to me, but in this I can seo t distinctly; the dose Mrs. Wharton ;ave me appeared of a grayish or leaden •olor; it looked turbid; I could see it lerfectly well; I did not see any of the niedi- ;ine except in the spoon; I saw, however, a Irop of it on a towel put under General K’s ihin; it looked of a leaden color; the witness iow nut on his handkerchief a drop of the nixture he had shown the jury,and said it did tot look like that he had observed oil the owel under General K’s chin; ho next dropped orty drops of yellow jasmine in the mixture md said he did not observe the same cloudy ppearance which he had seen iu the dose ad- oinistered to General K. Continuing—I was tot present when General K. died; I was pres- nt when the chloralaud chloroform were ad¬ ministered; Ins convulsions at that time were ery violent and his face showed that he /as suffering great agony; when a poon handle was put in his mouth to enable )r. Williams to look at his tongue he bit upon t so violently that one of his front teeth tarted to bleed, and the Doctor removed it; I aw Mrs. Wharton quite often while at her ouse; I was in attendance upon a gentleman rho was lying sick in her parlor. Cross-examined by Mr. Steele—I was asked } go to General K.’s room, as he had tried to et up and Mrs. Hutton was alone with him; I eld his left hand nearly the whole time I was ■ith him; he kept raising up the hand Mrs. (utton held, and said “keep me in motion;” as ■ell as I remember, the windows were open; le house stands between two larger houses, nd the sun may have been excluded by them; re light was not at all disagreeable, but the )om was quite light; I cannot say positively, ut my impression is very strong that it was a rp in which Mrs. Wharton had the dose for eneral Ketchum; I do not remember that a 'ass was on the mantle; I did not see the first Dse administered by Dr. Williams; General K. jened his mouth at Mrs. Hutton’s request; he id little or no difficulty in swallowing; Mrs. i ; r harton approached me over my left shoulder, file witness here showed how he held Gen- al K. and administered the rnedicinetohim.J did not see the cup as it stood upon the table; have put tartar emetic in the same quantity : yellow jasmine and water I have shown the ry, and it did not produce the color of the ise given General K.; I did not state that to the jury, because I did not recall it at the time; the first motion I observed General K. make was the putting of his hands to the back of his neck; the next to put his right hand to his collar bone; then both hands to his throat, and next to his stomach; as well as I remember, Mrs. Wharton, asked me the time, and I told her my watch was too unreliable; , that was before giving the dose; I am certain that Mrs. Hutton was in General Ketchum’s room when Dr. Williams arrived, but I cannot speak posi¬ tively as to Mrs. Wharton’s having been there at that time; I think Mrs. Wharton retired about a,-quarter past 1 o’clock; a colored man was also in the room, but sat most of the time at one of the windows: the colored man was not there when I went in; I left him there when I retired, at about a-quarter past 2 o’clock; as well as I can remember, Mrs. Hutton sat on the edge of the General’s bed, and opposite to me; the General lay near the edge of the bed next to me; it may have been ten or fifteen minutes after Dr. Williams’arrival before chloroform was given him; it was given in a towel; I don’t remember that an addi¬ tional supply of the chloroform was put to the towel; the adminstration of chloroform was, as well as I remember, given from time to time until the chloral was given; the chloral was given before I left the room, and as nearly as I can fix the time I left, it was half-past 12 o’clock; the towel was re¬ moved from his neck simultaneously with the removal of the spoon; I had no particular rea¬ son to look at the towel; I am only prepared to say that the drop on the towel was of a gray or leaden color; I do not remember that it was before or after she gave the dose to Gen. K. that she said he had been in active service; she at once corrected herself and said he had not been iu active service; if General K. had been a friend of mine I confess I don’t think I could have remained and witnessed his suf¬ ferings; Mrs. Wharton may have told me that General K. had been engaged in one of the Departments in Washington, but I cau’t re¬ member now; Mrs. Eugene Van Ness is the sister of my wife. To Mr. Syester—The experiment I made with the tartar emetic, which I have spoken of, did not originate in my mind entirely; laudanum was also added; it occurred in the office of Dr. Williams, on a Monday, early in July; that mixture produced a brownish color, with a cloud, which, in some lights, might give it a gray or leaden color. Mr. Eugene Van Ness was next called, and testified—I reside in Baltimore, and have lived there about 'eighteen years; I have known Mrs. Wharton about nine years; I was at, Mrs. Wharton’s house on the 21th of June last; I was there while General Ketchum was in the house. Mr. Syester—“Don’t answer the question I am now about to ask you until we hear from the Court. I wish you to relate to the jury how you came to be at Mrs. Wharton’s on that day, if you were well or sick, and de¬ scribe your fellings and symptoms fully, and how you happened to be taken sick there ?” Mr. Steele—“Of course we object.” Mr. Syester—“Well, we will argue it before 40 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. the Court.” To the Court—“We offer to show by Mr. Van Ness that he lay sick in Mrs. Wharton’s house on the Saturday, Sunday, Monday and Tuesday preceding General K.’s death, and on the day he died; that his symp¬ toms were the same with those of General K., ; and that tartar emetic was found in the ves¬ sels in use at Mr. Van Ness’ sickness; and that Mrs. Wharton knew of the deadly character of the medicine: all this took place in the same house and at the same time at which it has been shown General K. lay sick and died.” Mr. Hagner said the question was not one of relevancy, but of admissibility. The rule would be clearly on the rules of common justice, to exclude such evidence: if one evil act could be brought in, fifty could be brought j in. The Constitution of the United States and of Maryland guaranteed that a person | should not be tried twice for the same of¬ fence, but it would be trying a person twice with a vengeance to bring in such testi¬ mony as was now offered. Mr. Hagner proceeded to annie the question involved, and quoted from Rex vs. Oddy, 1 Hills Reports, 316; 15 N. H.,State vs. Kennard; 18 Ohio. 222, old series; 8 Cox.Queen vs Wins¬ low; 27 Law Journal, p.214: 4 Foster and Final- son, Queen vs. Garner. 346; 1st Lee, 574; 2d Cushing, p. 590:5 Grattan, Wharton, 635, 824 and 640; 3 Greeuleaf, sec. 19; 20 Alabama, and other appropriate authorities. Mr. Thomas followed, arguing that the evi¬ dence was inadmissible on general principles. The alleged crimes were not so connected as to admit of the introduction into the trial for the poisoning of General Ketehuni of the evi¬ dence in the case of Mr. Van Ness. If both had partaken of the same food, and had been made sick, that fact would be most pertinent to the issue: but the State had admitted that Mr. Van Ness lay sick in Mrs. Wharton’s house before General Ketchum arrived. A com¬ mon motive had not been alleged, and it was not even offered to prove anv motive for the alleged poisoning of Mr. Van Ness. The defence was not resisting the evidence from fear of the effect on the trial of the Van Ness case, but because it could only! prejudice the minds of the jury now trying the graver charge, that of the murder of Gen¬ eral Ketchum. What propriety could there be in this jury trying the question of the poi¬ soning of Mr. Van Nessf It makes no differ¬ ence that Mr. Van Ness’ case is now pending in this Court. Mr. Thomas quoted in his argument, from Wharton's Criminal Law, sections 635 and 640, note, end: Rex vs. Thomas Smith, 2d Car¬ rington and Paine, p. 295, and other author¬ ities, and said, in conclusion, that in his opin¬ ion the evidence was clearly inadmissible even upon general principles of the law. Mr. Revell said the circumstantial evidence was, after all, but presumptive evidence, and it was competent to make out, link by link, a perfect connection of circumstances. It had been shown that tartar emetic had been found in Mrs. Wharton’s possession, and Mar¬ shal Frey had shown, by her admissions to him, that she had tartar emetic in her pos¬ session three times on Monday, Juue 25. Lord Ellenborough says: “It crimes do so in¬ termix, the Court must go through the details.” Mr. Revell read from Wills on Cir¬ cumstantial Evidence, page 63, premeditated crime must be preceded not only by impelling motives but by the possession of the means. Wilson, Circumstantial Evidence, page 179. It is clearly established that it is not necessary to prove the corpus delecti bvdirect evidence: 1st Greenleaf, sec. 108; Roscoe on Criminal Evidence, 5th American edition, page 87; Wharton on Crime, sec. 649. When the acts form one transaction the evidence is admissible; 5th Carrington & Paine, 155, Rex vs. Salisbury—this seems to over¬ rule Rex vs. Smith, in 2d C. & P.; 1st Archibald’s Criminal Practice and Pleadings, page 120; 1st Lee Reports, page 576; 8th Cox. nage 455; 4th Foster and Finlason, Regina vs. Garner, and Regina vs. Harris; 27 Law Jour¬ nal, Rex vs. Garey, and 2d Cox, Queen vs. Bayley, page 311. In conclusion, Mr. Revell said: “The testimony of Mr. Van Ness is import¬ ant and admissible, and it should go to the jury to unfold and reveal to them all the cir¬ cumstances connected with this terribly dark transaction.” Attorney General Syester followed for the State, and said that, if it was competent to prove that in Mrs. Wharton’s house the deadly means of crime had been found, it was com¬ petent to prove it by Mr. Van Ness, who was there languishing. He did not understand that the evidence was objected to because it was relevant to another case. It was. how¬ ever, contended that the mere fact of tilt pendency of another indictment cut the-State out from the evidence relevant to both, Mr Syester then quoted at some length from 1st Lee, State vs. Walker: 5th Carrington A Paine, claiming that the case quoted fron 2d Carrington & Paine had been met anc overruled; Lewwyn’s Crown cases, p. 103. Jas. Kirwood’s case, decided in 1830; note 3 and sec tiou 322,Taylor’s Law of Evidence, Lord Den man’s decisions referred to there; Wharton oi Homicide, p. 324, and numerous other au thorities. Mr. Syester spoke with his usual earnest' ness and ability, and was listened to by tin Court and audience with profound attention Upon the conclusion of his argument tin Chief Judge asked Mr. Steele if his healtli would permit him to further argue the ques tion to-day, so that the Court might renderitt decision to-morrow morning upon reasseni bling. Mr. Steele said his health was too fee: ble to proceed further to-day, and that in con: sequence of his ill-health he had to go to bee in the afternoons. The Chief Judge then adjourned the Conr until to-morrow at 10 A. M„ when Mr. Steel will close for the defence. It is anticipated that the effort of Mr. Steele to-morrow, will be a most able one, and ij every way worthy of his high reputation. I The Chief Judge again ordered the Sheri to-day not to take the jury out of the Conr room uutil the audience had departed, and i seemed the anxious desire of the Court t keep the jury from even theslightest imprope influence. Geo. M. Gill, Esq., of Baltimore, havinj THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 41 been summoned by the State, appeared in Court to-day, and occupied aseat immediately to the left of Miss. Wharton. E. O. McNear, a banker of Washington, has also been sum¬ moned by the State. ELEfEMTSI 1>1¥, Annapolis, December 15,1871. In many respects the great Wharton- Ketchum trial has become decidedly monot¬ onous, and apart from the discussions of coun¬ sel, and the testimony of witnesses, there is but little to attract special attraction. The interest ot the spectators has evidently been considerably subdued by the tedium of a great part of the proceedings, and the eagerness to see the prisoner and catch the slightest ex¬ pression of counsel or witnesses, which was so marked during the first week, is no longer observable. The court room is, however, still crowded each day, and the public seem de¬ termined to learn all that is to be said on either side. The patience of the ladies is re¬ markable, and by the constant attendance they manifest the most earnest interest. Mrs. Wharton’s carriage arrives each morn¬ ing in front of the Court House a few minutes before 10 o’clock, and-Sheriff Chairs or Deputy Sheriff Basil, alighting, assists the prisoner, her daughter and Mrs. Nugent from the vehicle. Mr. and Mrs. J. Crawford Neilson and Miss Rosa Neilson then join them, and the party eDt.er the court-room without attracting much attention, and quietly occupy the seats imme¬ diately in rear of Mrs Wharton’s counsel. Mrs. Wharton, Miss Wharton and Mrs. Nugent appear in black, and are deeply veiled, and the prisoner and her daughter remain veiled until their return to the carriage. Mrs. Nugeut usually removes her veil after arriving in the court-room, and reveals a remarkably pleas¬ ant, though a rather sad, expression of countenance and a face that was doubtless beautiful in happier years. Her manners are very quiet, but she seems to keenly appreciate the sorrow which now surrounds her Mrs. Wharton’s manner is still very composed, and except when consulting with her counsel, or exchanging a few words with her daughter or Mrs. Neilson, she remains perfectly quiet. Her countenance cannot be seen throu'gh her heavy veil, and no changes of expression can, of course, be observed. Miss Wharton ap pears in much better spirits than during the first week of tho trial, and frequently con¬ verses pleasantly with Miss Neilson, who sits near her, and her cousin, Mr. H. Moon Whar¬ ton, of Philadelphia, who sits to her left. Upon the opeuing of the Court this morn¬ ing, the Chief Judge said the question argued on yesterday had before been considered by the Court, and the Court did not think that further argument would change its opinion, as it had already considered the question fullv. The general rule of evidence was that the tes¬ timony must be confined to the issue. The important rule is also laid down that the prosecution cannot go into the question of the prisoner’s character, unless the way is opened to them by the defence. These are two well defined rules. When the law allows the facts of another offence to he given in evidence, the pendency of another indictment makes no dif¬ ference. The Chief Judge then read from Roscoe, on Crimiual Evidence, touching this point. It is not necessary to prove guilty knowledge in this case by "the fact that tartar emetic is well known to be a deadly poison when given in overdoses. The Chief Judge then read from Archbald’s Criminal Practice, touching the question of what constituted a whole trans¬ action, and said the offence of attempting to poison Mr. Van Ness was a separate and dis¬ tinct offence, and the testimony in his case was not admissible in the case at the.bar. During the delivery of the opinion of the Court the most respectful silence was ob¬ served, and both sides seemed to appreciate fully the importance of the decision. After considerable consultation between the respective counsel, Mr. Syester submitted the following to the Court without reacting it and without argument: “The State now offers to introduce evidence to show that whilst the deceased lay languishing in the prisoner’s house certain articles of food and drink, to wit, milk and beef tea, were taken to the house; that when taken there these articles were free from all noxious or poisonous quali¬ ties; that after they had been a short time in the house, and in places where the prisoner had knowledge of them, these same articles were found to be impregnated w r ith poison as far as that fact can be shown by the taste of the poison and the symptoms of those affected by it; and further, that the symptons of those who had occasion to make use of the milk and beef tea indicated the presence of tartar emetic.” The Chief Judge said that the Court would admit part of the offer. It was competent to show that tartar emetic had been found in Mrs. Wharton’s house, and it could be proved by persons who tasted it, but not by the symp¬ toms of those affected by it. If any person could say that he tasted poison in Mrs. Whar¬ ton’s house, the testimony of such a person would be admissible to prove its existence there. Charles L. Ketchum (a son of the late Gen, Ketchum) was now called, and testified—I re¬ side in Georgetown, D. C., and I am a son of the late General Ketchum; I have known Mrs. Wharton over 20 years; I remember the day my father left Washington; his health was perfectly good; I had occupied the same room with him from the 5th of last April up to the day he left for Baltimore; I never heard him complain except of a slight sore throat; I next saw him on Friday, June the 30tlr; he was dead then, and had been brought to the house of my uncle, Gen. Brice; I saw Mrs. Wharton in Washington on the 3d of July; my brother and I called at Mrs. Chubb’s to see Mrs. Wharton; she had telegraphed ua to meet her; she commenced to sympathize with us at the death of our father and said she too had lost a true friend; while talking with us and expressing her sympathy, her eyes were filled with tears; she said she re¬ gretted very much to be compelled to talk about business so soon after my father’s death, 42 THE WHA R TO N- KETCH TIM TRIAL. but that necessity compelled her to flo so; she then told me she had called upon me for $4,000 in Government bonds which she had given my father, aud that wish¬ ing to make up a letter of credit before leaving for 'Europe she had called to secure the bonds; she said she would leave New York the following Wednesday: I asked her at what time she had given the bonds to my father, and she replied, “About eighteen months ago;” she told me they were four one thousand five-twenty bonds, bearing sis per cent, interest, and were to be sold by him. and invested in ten-forty coupon five per cent, bonds; I asked if my father had given her any receipt for them, and she said he had not; she also said when I asked her that she had no witnesses to the transaction; I told her I could not do anything then for her as no adminis¬ trator had been appointed, and that no ap¬ pointment could be made until the following Saturday, when the Orphans’ Court convened; I told her that none of ns could touch a cent of my father’s money until that time; she re¬ plied that that would not do, and that she would leave Baltimore on the following Satur¬ day, and must have the bonds to make her letter of credit good before leaving; I told her that if she would go with me to Gen. Brice’s office he might know of some means by which she could procure them of which I was not aware; she conseuted to go with me without hesitation; I then asked her if she would be offended at me for talking business matters to her, and she said she would not; I told her then that my father’s books and papers showed that she was in his debt to the amount of $2,600: she replied that she had paid that upon two installments; on July 1.1870.$1,300, and $130 interest: on Janu¬ ary 17, 1871, $1,300 aud $65 interest on that amount for six mouths; that my father had noted these payments on the back of the note, that he had entered on the back of the note $130, as having been received for the last interest, instead of $65; she said General,that is not right: it should be $65 instead of $130; he acknowledged the mistake, crossed out tie $130 and put down $65; he then handed her the note aud said, “Ellen, now that the transaction has ended you had better destroy the note, as it may give you trouble in the future;” she said she destroyed the note in his presence: I do not remember that she said how she had destroyed it; I asked her if there were any witnesses to the transaction,and she said there were not; she said also that sbe had no receipts to show for the principal or interest; we then proceeded to Gen. Brice’s office, and I attracted his attention as he was busy at the time, and I introduced her to General Brice and requested her to make known the object ! of her visit to him; she then told him that she called to secure the $4,000 in Government bonds which she had loaned my father; that she was about to leave for Europe, and could not possibly go without getting those bonds, as she had to use them to make good a letter of credit; General Brice expressed his aston¬ ishment at her demand, and told my father’s books and papers showed that she was in his debt to the amount of $2,600. and there was no evidence of his owing her $4,000; he asked when she had given the bonds to my father, and she replied, “About eighteen months ago;” he asked what description of bonds they were, and she replied tliatthey were four 5-20 United States coupon bonds, and that she had given them to him to convert into the bonds I have mentioned; the General then spoke to her about the note for $2,600; she told him what she had previously told me in reference to the note; the General asked her in what manner she had paii. the money to my father, and she replied. “In greenbacks;” he asked her if she was not afraid to carry so large an amount of money about her, and she said she was not; she told him she had no receipts to show, and told him there were no witnesses to the transaction; he then asked her if Mrs. Chubb was not aware that she had so large an amount about her; she replied that Mrs. Chubb did not know, and that no one knew of it; General Brice toldjher there was no possible means of her getting the money at that time, as the matter was in the hands of the Courts, and that if her trip to Europe de¬ pended upon her getting those bonds, that she had better give up all hopes of going; she took that announcement without showing any apparent emotion, and got up to leave the office, saying that she was sorry she had not time to call on Mrs. Brice, but thought that it was best as it was that she should not, as 1 her presence misfit awaken afresh her! grief; Gen. Brice’s wife is a sister of my father’s; she sent her love to Mrs. Brice by the Geveral, and left the office; I accompanied her to the sidewalk and told her I would come the next day to Baltimore for my father’s valise and effects:she gave me her address and we then de- | parted; she said shehad paid the interestou the ' 17th of jnue.1871, at the house of Mrs. Chubb; I went to Baltimore on the 4th of July, arriving at Mrs. Wharton’s about 10 o’clock; Mrs. Whar¬ ton came in the parlor and took her seat' near the front window; I took from my pocket 1 a small pocket diary belonging to my father, ‘ and handed it to her to examine and read for ' herself. [The witness here took the diaryfrom i his pocket and it was passed to the counsel | for the defence]. Continuing—She declined to • take it, saying she could not see to read it; it i was then a few minutes after 1 P. M., and it was a clear day; I asked her if she had her i glasses) with her, and she said they would I make no difference, and that she could not I read it; I told her that if she would move to I the opposite window I would read the con-1 tents of the book to her; the blinds of the op -1 osite window were open; I then turned torlie y-leaf of the book, holding it so that she could look on at the same time; I commenced at the fly-leaf aud read the contents of each ! page to her. The defence here objected to the offer of the I book as evidence. The Court decided that so much as Mrs.' Wharton assented to was evidence. The witness continued—Arriving at one I page I read the following: “Interest on E. G. W.’s note, 17 January, 1870, $130;” “Interest! ditto, 17 July. 1870, $180;” arriving at anothef page, I read “January 25, 1871, interest from I E. G. W„ $130;” while I was reading this book ! to her she interrupted me aud said she had ! TEE WEARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 43 >aid that money, and asked me how she could ;et her bonds; I told her that if she would vait until I got through reading the book to ler I would talk to her about the $4,000; she •emarked about the payment of $130 on the 5th of January, 1871, that it should be $65; ihe said that she had paid the last installment in the 17th of January; I asked her if she had laid it by a check on her banking house, and he said no; she said she had paid the note on the 7th of January. 1871; she said she had paid it iut of money from rents and other sources; ' asked her if she could give me from her looks the dates of the payments of interest md principal, and she replied that she did not :eep any books, but had at one time, and ound them too much trouble; I asked her to end me a memorandum of the dates upon rhich she had paid the installments of in- erest and principal, and also the date when he gave my father the bonds: she said she rould send them the next day, but would not ike to be compelled to swear to the exact ; ates, as she kept no books; I told her I would ake General Eaton with mo to the Safe leposit Company in Washington, and allow im to examine the bonds to see if hey indicated on the face or back that i hey belonged to her; she consented to it; I do not remember what she said; she said she ould not understand why my father claimed rat she was in his debt, as she had paid the ote in January, or why lie should say that he r as going to Baltimore to have a settlement ith her; that was said in reply to my read- ig her the amounts from the book. [The de- tnce here offered objection, and the Conrt de- ided that the witness could relate all the mversatiou that took place between the risoner and himself.] Continuing—She said ie did not understand why my father had lid he was going to Baltimore to have a set- ement with her before she left for Europe, i she had paid him all she owed im, unless it was that he had reference i a conversation she had had with him; ie then told me that my father had told her le had been looking at a house somewhat ;ove his figure, and that if he made up his ind to buy it, he would have to ask her to turn the compliment of his loan to her; and lat he would give her a mortgage on the iuse; she told him that she did not know at she could spare the money, but that if e could possibly let him have any of the ,000 she would do so; and that as he had cepted her note, she would certainly accept s without taking a mortgage; she said at she was sorry to be compelled to say so, it tlmt she had noticed that my father’s ind was blurred at times and that in one or - o recent conversations with him she had ticed that he had lost the thread of his con- “rsation; I told her I had never noticed it r heard any one else mention it; I don’t re- llect her reply to that; she offered the re¬ irk about my father’s memory as an ex- mation of the mystery: I believe that was that transpired in the parlor between us; file in Mrs. Chubb’s house in Washington; I id her that on the 23d of June my father had d me, in answer to my inquiry if she d paid him the money on the pre¬ vious Wednesday, that she had not paid him; because she had made a statement to him that, owing to some misunderstanding with her banker in Baltimore, he had neglected to for¬ ward the money to her; I also told her that my father had told me she had on that occa¬ sion extended an invitation to Mrs. Chubb, him and myself to spend the following Satur¬ day and Sunday with her in Baltimore; I also told her that he had told me that she had promised to pay him the money she owed him; he did not state the amount; he said he had no objection to her having the money as long as she remained in this country, as she paid him good interest for it, but that he knew she was in delicate health and that he might never see her again, and he thought it was best for him to make the de¬ mand mpon her' before she left, as he needed the money to help to pay for his house and furnish it; he said that he was afraid that his having made this demand upon her had de¬ layed her departure for a month; she said she had not been delayed on that account, as she had paid the money in January, and -had in¬ tended leaving for Europe about the 1st of July. Mr. Steele said he did not desire to be per¬ tinacious, but he thought that some explana¬ tion should be made to the jury that these statements were not evidence as coming directly from General Ketchum, and the Court briefly explained to the jury the value of the evidence. The witness continued—Mrs. Wharton told me she had received interest on the bonds in gold, greenbacks and coupons at different times; she attempted to describe the coupons but I do not remember her words; she said she had received the interest from my father; I went with General Eaton on the 5th of July to the Safe Deposit Company in Wash¬ ington, and we found no indications that the bonds belonged to Mrs. Wharton; I looked also for the note and evidences of the alleged payments, but I could not find it; I informed Mrs. Wharton by letter on the Wednesday following of the result of my search; I found that all my father’s bonds were 10-40 bonds, amounting in the aggregate to $59,700; my father bought a house in Washington on the 13th of June, giving for it $11,900, and paid the full amount on the 24th of June, 1871; I have the receipt'for the whole amount. [A can¬ celled check for $11,900 was now shown,and the defence objected to its introduction; the coun¬ sel for the State said they would follow it up by the testimony of Mr. Carusi, a lawyer, of Washington.] The witness continued—When I went to Mrs. Wharton’s residence, she took me up to the room in which my father died; she showed me where his valise, hat, linen duster, and umbrella were; she then left me and went down stairs; when she returned she brought me the key of the valise, my father’s watch, fob, pocket-book, pocket-knife, and a small pocket match safe; I opened the valise in her presence, and taking out the different articles of clothing I found there, put my hand in every pocket to see what it contained; I was looking for the note and found nothing; there was a vest also containing three 44 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. pockets; two outside, and one inside; my father always had an inside pocket made in his vests in which to carry money or valuable papers: he instructed my brother and myself to do the same; he was not in the habit of car¬ rying valuable papers in his pocket-book; he generally pinned up his inside vest pocket if the papers would admit of it; my father uever used any drugs, lotions or quack medicines, but was opposed to them; he was not in thehabit of taking laudanum; the only medicine I remem¬ ber him to have ever carried was prescribed by Dr. Morris, of Washington; his lieaith was uniformly good; one of the ingredients of the prescription by Dr. Norris was sarsapa¬ rilla; my father was six feet in his stocking feet; he would have been 58 years of age on the 7th of July last; my father used to put the vial containing Dr. Norris’ prescription to his mouth and in that way take it; I have no knowledge of his carrying any other medi¬ cine about him except some liuament for sprains; I never observed any failure of my father’s memory. Mr. Rwell said the State now proposed to offerin evidence the books kept by General Ketcliuni to show an indebtedness of the pris¬ oner to him during his lifetime. Mr. Steele asked that the jury be retaired during the argument on the admissibility of the evidence.'aud the counsel for the State consenting the select twelve were marched from out of the court room. Mrs. Wharton and her party followed soon after, and the argument of the question then commenced. Mr. Hagner opened for the defense, and sub¬ mitted the following authorities, etc. Such entries inadmissible on general prin¬ ciples. 1 Taylor’s Evidence, § 510, 543:1 Green- leaf’s Evidence, § 134, 99,102, 38; 2 B. and A. 185; Rex vs. Debenham. Are they admissible as declarations against interest. 1 Taylor’s Evidence, § 602 and seq; Best on Evidence, § 500; 30 Md., 326. Such entries must be against the pecuniary or proprietary interest of the party making it, to he admissible, not merely in absence of in¬ terest. 1 Taylor’s Evidence, § 604, 605, 7; 11 Clarke and Fin, 108 et seq; Madeline Smith’s case. Jurist vol. 3, part 2, p. 333 et seq. Are they admissible as having heeu madehy General Ketchum in the course of his official business or employment. 1 Taylor, § 680, 632 1 Greenleaf, Evidence, $ 116, note. It must appear not only to he the practice, hut the duty of the party to make the entry. 1 Taylor, $ 633, 2 Queen’s Bench, Rep. 326, Smith vs. Blakely. H.2 official character must he shown. 1 Taylor, § 635.1 Car aud Kee; 276, Davis vs. Lloyd. Entry must he contemporaneous. 30 Md., 330, 2 C. and K., 718, 1 Taylor, § 636, 640. Law as to entries in shop books not applica¬ ble in Maryland. 5 G. and 1,134, 6 Md., 16, 30 Md., 333. There is no pretence that General Ketchum was performing any official act in making these entries. Upon the conclusion of Mr. Hagner’s argu¬ ment the Court adjourned until 10 A. M. to¬ morrow. TWELFTH DAY. Annapolis, December 16,1871. It seems now that the testimony for th State, in the great trial at present engagin. the attention of the Circuit Court of Ann Arundel county, will not he concluded uuti next Tuesday or Wednesday. Nearly ; dozen witnesses remain to be examined, an the question of the admissibility of a goo< part of their testimony will give rise to mucl argument. The testimony for the defenci will then occupy the Court at least a-week unless afternoon sessions be held, and it ma, be reasonably concluded that the argument o the case will not he commenced until th second or third day of Christmas. As th issue is the gravest known to the law, it i not probable that the Court will limit the ai guments before the jury, and at least two day will be occupied in the closing efforts of couh sel. The State’s testimony on yesterday part’ ally developed a new phase of the case, an much interest is felt in the testimony bearin upon the alleged indebtedness of Mrs. Whai ton to General Ketchum. The decision of th Court to-day was anxiously anticipated b both sides, and the arguments were earnes and able. Mrs. Wharton remains very calm, but lit daughter does not seem to-day in the goo spirits which she showed several day's sinc> Doubtless the anxiety she feels bear heavil upon her, and gives her but little thougt save of the fearful issue which her mother h; been called to meet. Paymaster General Brice and the two sor of the late General Ketchum have been in a' tendance since the commencement of thetria General J. H. Eaton is also present to-day Upon the opening of the Court to-day th argument of the question of the admissibilit of the books of the late General Ketchum, t show an indebtedness of Mrs. Wharton 1 him, was resumed, Mr. Thomas following M Ilagner for the defence. In support of h view of the question, Mr. Thomas earnest! argued against the admissibility of the ev deuce sought to be introduced, and made tl following points: That the entries offered iti evidence are nj admissible in this case, unless they would 1 in a civil suit by the executors of Gener Ketchum against Mrs. Wharton. That entries of a deceased person are n admissible against a third party in either civil suit or a criminal prosecution, unlei they were made in the discharge of an ollicifi duty, or of a duty of an agent to his priucip; or unless it be made clearly to appear th! they were against the interest of the persi making them at the time they were made. The Western Maryland Railroad Compai vs. Morse, 32 and 280; State vs. Woodward, Iowa, 542. The entry of a payment is not admissible against the interest of the party making unless there be other evidence of the de than that in the book containing the euti Higham vs. Ridgway, 10 East., 109; Gallon i Bowles, 1 Moody aud Rob, 261; 2 Smitlj Leading Cases, 336,337 and 338, marginalpag< THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 45 rhe entries offered in evidence were not made n the discharge of an official duty, or of a luty of an agent to his principal; they were lot against the interest of the person who made hem; but on the contrary were all of them mtries in his own favor. The State’s Attor- ley, James Revell, Esq., replied as follows : As our brothers on the other side have rep¬ resented that they are not aware for what pur¬ pose we otter the testimony proposed, I will low state that it is for the purpose of show- ng motive for the perpetration of the crime, hereby strengthening the chain of presump¬ tive evidence before the jury and connecting he prisoner with it. I understand the decision of the Court ex¬ cluding the declarations made by General ietchum to Mrs. Chubb touching the object md purposes of his visit to Mrs. Wharton did lot reach the question at bar, and that the luestion of the admissibility of this docu- nentary evidence is now an open question. In cases of death from a deadly weapon, ac- ;ompanied by facts showing wiifulness and leliberation, there would be no necessity to how motive; but in a case of poison, where learly in every instance the State must make rat its case by circumstances, there motive, hough not actually essential, is pertient and broper. General K. had no object to make a false en¬ try. This entry was made 25th January, 1871, md is ottered for a two-fold purpose: 1st, to how an indebtedness at this time, and 2d, to sontradict Mrs. Wharton’s statement that she lad paid the entire debt on the 17th January, .871. We further offer a schedule, which we can how by circumstances must have been made letween 12th June and the 21th June, 1871, in vhich this indebtedness of Mrs. Wharton for 52,600 was stillexisting. Further argued at length, thus the entries ye re again intact and properly receivable and sited aud commented on. Webster vs. Webster, 1 Foster and Fulason, ). 401. Percival vs. Hanson, Exchequer Reports, p.l. Davies vs Humphreys, 6 M. and W., p. 153, md other authorities. That entries made by these parties were reated as original evidence: Doe vs. Fenford, 3 B. and A., 890. Champreys vs. Peck, 1 Starkee, 404. Roscoe, pages 26 aud 27. Bank of A. S. vs. Davis, 4 Cr. C. C., 533. 1 Greenleaf, sections 115 to 120. And, again, if the particular circumstances if the case afford a presumption that the evi- lence is true, then the otter is admissible. Quoted Roscoe and other authority in support. Offer is in sound discretion of Court, &c. 1 Greenleaf, section 108. Attorney General Syester further argued he admissibility of the books of General fetchum as evidence. Mr. Syester contended 'is follows: ' The evidence is properly divisable into two listinct heads. 1st. As to the entry made the 5th of January, 1871, by which General K. ntered the payment to him of $130; that entry 3 against the interest of the party making it. t is the character of the entry as to inter¬ est at the time it was made Jihat deter¬ mines its quality, and this is admissible, even though such entry attords the only evi¬ dence of the claim which it purports to liqui¬ date. See Rex vs. Lewer Hyford, cited at 2d Smith L. Co., 283; Rex vs. Hendon, 9 C. & P., 255; 1st Taylor on Evidence, secs. 610, 611 and 612. and Highman vs. Ridgeway, 10th East. 2d. The memoranda are admissible, be¬ cause they are in the course of business and in reference to an important item of business, and every entry on the last memorandum will be shown to be verified, corroborated and fully sustained in the single entry of the debt of $2,600, due by Mrs. Wharton. It is mainly a proposition of probabilities, the other entries being verified and corroborated by subsequent inquiries and facts. It is because of these probabilities that such evidence is admissible. See Pattenshall vs. Furford, 3 Barn., 890, 3S8, 3d Euglish Common Law Reports. At the conclusion of Mr. SyesteFs argument Mr. Steele saici he had never before, in a cap¬ ital case, known of so many offers of inad¬ missible evidence as had been here made in the one at the bar. The offer made was a novelty, and, in his opinion, the evidence was clearly inadmissible. It had been published in the newspapers that General K. had entered in his hooks that interest was due him by Mrs. Wharton on the 17th of July last; but the papers here ottered did not show it. Two statements of General K. are offered, and they bear no date, and it cannot be told which of these statements was made out first. If the evidence was admissible in law it would yet not be admissible on account of its intrinsic defects. The defence had had no opportunity to examine the papers until brought into court, and who knew but that there were other papers throwing light upon those offered? Mr. Ketchum might have omitted them, and done so honestly in his view of the case. Mr. Steele here referred to 4 Gill, page 97, Jones vs. Jones—memoranda in pencil were of too loose a character to be admitted even in a civil suit. The Court of Appeals have decided in 32 Md. that the declarations of a party could only be given in evidence when against his interest, or in the course of business. Mr. Steele referred now to 3d Greenleaf, sec. 115; 1st Smith’s leading case, page 504; 2d Queen’s Bench; Smith vs. Blakeley, page 331—the en¬ tries were not made in the prosecution of busi¬ ness for a third party. The entries in General Ketchum’s books did not even show whether the interest set down was one to or from Mrs. Wharton. In conclusion, Mr. Steele said that in no point of view was the evidence admis¬ sible. The argument was concluded at twenty minntes of 2 o’clock, and the Court at once commenced an earnest consultation. After some time had been spent in delibera¬ tion the Chief Judge said it was of course the duty of the Court to decide the question as Judges, and simply as one of law aud without making comments, except so far as necessary to explain. It was a case between the State of Maryland and the prisoner at the bar, and the entries of a third party were offered to prove an indebtedness. It was clearly laid down by the authorities that such entries were not 46 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. admissible.unless against the interest of the party making them, or in the discharge of official duty, or as agent, and all the entries were coupled with the note of $2,600. The Court, therefore, decided that the proffered testimony was not admissible. Eugene Carusi was now called, and testified —I reside in Washington and have been a member of the bar since 1856: I knew General K. upwardsof two years; in June last he pur¬ chased property which I sold as trustee; it was situated on Iv street, between Thirteenth and Fourteenth streets; he paid for it $11,900 on the 24th of June; I drew the money from the First National Bank. Cross-examined by Mr. Hagner—My office is at 490 Louisiana avenue; it is upwardsof two miles from my ofiice to Gen. Ketchum’s house in Georgetown; it was a warm day; he called at my office between 12 and half past 12 o’clock; we went to Latimer & Cleary’s office five or six squares; when we got there he opened his vest and showed that his linen was saturated by perspiration and somewhat discolored; General Ketchum was a robust man; I parted with him at the corner of F and Fifteenth streets about 2 P. M ; I don’t know that he was distressed by the w r eather; I can only say what effect it had upon me. Mr. Syester—“We can very well imagine what effect the warm weather had upon you.” This was said in Mr. Syester’s viva¬ cious manner and caused alaugh.in which the robust witness joined. Mr. Carusi continued—The General and I walked; he preferred to walk; I heard no com¬ plaint from the General; I had suggested lem¬ onade and he declined that; he did not drink any water either that I remember. Dr. Basil Morris was now called and testi¬ fied—I have resided in Washington siuce February, 1863; I am a surgeon in the army, and have been since 1852; I am also a physician: I knew General Ketchum from about the time I went to Washington in 1863; I was called to see him in 1866, and afterwards, probably two or three times, as I met him on the street I would prescribe for him; his general health was good; I recall from my Dooks that I made a prescription for him last ou the 5th of last May for slight sore throat;” half drachm chlorate of potassia, one ounce of bitter wine of iron, half ounce pulverized sugar and three ounces water; when I made that prescription I explained to him the ingredients and told him it was harm¬ less: on the 14th of last February he com¬ plained of pain in his right wrist; I treated it as a rheumatic affection, and prescribed the iodide of potassium and the syrup of sarsa¬ parilla, one tea spoonful three times a day; that was to promote the absorbants and secre¬ tions; the General did not call upon me until the 3d of March, but had the prescription re¬ newed on the 24th of February; he desired to know if the medicine could have made him sick, and after some conversation with him I ordered the iodide of potassium to be re¬ duced one half; he had that second pre¬ scription renewed on the 14th and 23d of March, and the 4th and 29th of April; I can say that General Ketchum had not the habit of tam¬ pering with drugs; I had no knowledge of his experimenting on himself with drugs; 1 was very well acquainted with him; I nevei heard him express an opinion on the subject of the use of drugs. Cross-examined by Mr. Steele—I also pre¬ scribed for General Ketchum on the 3d of last March; that was the. prescription I ordered t( be changed; he had been sick in Baltimore when he came and asked to have the prescrip¬ tion changed; he was not, however, sick wlier he came to me; I have no knowledge of Gen¬ eral Ketchum having been thrown from hie horse while in the West, or that he had yellow fever or cholera at Fort Laramie; I first met him in ’66, and he was suffering from carbuncle, Mrs. Eliza W. Chubb was now re-called, as had been agreed on her first examination. She testified—Mrs. Wharton was in Washing¬ ton on the 6th of July last; I saw her from : half-past 2 o’clock until she left in the 5:4t P. M. train; she came to my office iu the Treas- ' ury Department; the office of Mr. Charles L. Ketchum is opposite my office. Mr. Syester now explained briefly that he wished, as did the witness, to have explained a portion of her testimony given when she w r as first called. Mr. Steele objected, and considered that the nature of the testimony should be expiained to the Court. Mr. Syester said it was simply to make an explanation in regard to the drug clerk from whom she bought the medicines. Mrs. Chubb was the first witness called in the case, and her embarrassmeut and omission was natural Mr. Steele said it was a dangerous prece- 1 dent, and he would snggest that the utmosf caution should be exercised iu giving the right to the prosecution. Mr. Revell briefly explained that Mrs. Chubt desired to explain as a matter of justice tc herself. Mrs. Chubb, in answer to the inquiry of the Court-, said that it was her desire to explain a portion of the testimony she had given when, previously on the stand. Mrs. Chubb then testified—I was asked if Mrs. Wharton had made an statement or in¬ quiry of me, and I forgot and did uot state all' ou the Thursday after Mrs. Wharton’s arrest] received a telegram from her requesting ind to come to Baltimore; I went and she said ifl was important to her that I could have rad mind clear as to the person from whonj I had bought the tartar emetic, and i! I could identify the person; I told hei I could, and that it was a deaf man she replied, “That was not the man, but t-hd man from whom I had bought was the oiut ■who said he had sold it to her, and that I must testify to that one; I said that if hewasthd man i could identify him, and if not, of coursd I could not testify that he was; she then sail that Mr. Steele wished to see me, and had made an arrangementto meet me at 9 o'clock that evening at her house;I told her that I war obliged to return that evening to Washington I asked if I could go to Mr. Steele’s house in-i stead, and was told that I could; Mr. Neilson went with me. Mr. Steele.—Her conversation with me it not evidence; Miss Nellie Wharton telegraphed for her; I did not. THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 47 After some desultory conversation between dr. Syester and Mr. Steele, Mrs. Chubb was dlowed to continue, and said: Mr. Steele said ledidnot want to see me; Mrs. Wharton’s nanner wg,s very neryous when she told me ,o go to Mr. Steele. To Mr. Steele.—The telegram was signed ‘N. C. W.;” I was informed that the deaf man lad said he was not in town on the day I nade the purchases. The Court now adjourned until Monday at .0 A. M. It is remarkable that though an unusually arge number of witnesses have'been sum- noned in this case, that as yet none have )een attached. Deputy Sheriff Grafiin, of Baltimore, has been in constant attendance, md has discharged his labors with satisfac- don to the Court and respective counsel. THIRTEENTH DAT. Annapolis. December 18,1871. The great Wharton trial still engages pub¬ ic attention here, but the near approach if the close of the State’s case occasions a general feeling of relief. The proceedings have ieen so unusually tiresome and protracted hat even the lovers of the sensational have ound them wearisome,and desire now to hear that is to be offered by the defence. It is mown, however, that the testimony for the efence will be in great part medical and hemical, and the general public have already een surfeited with scientific facts and fictions, t is not expected, therefore, that the learned xperts will have large audiences. The ladies re still eager and assiduous in their attend¬ ees. Soon after the opening of the Court this lorning James D. Ketchum was called, and sstified—I reside at present in Troy, N. Y.; I oi a son of the late General Ketchum; on londay, July 3d, my brother received a tele¬ ram from Mrs. Wharton desiring to see him b Mrs. Chubb’s house; at 12 o’clock my brother ad I went to Mrs. Chubb’s and met Mrs. Iharton; she commenced by condoling with ; 3 upon the loss of our father, and said she, >o, had lost a very dear friend; she stated lat she had administered to his wants during is last sickness, and remained with m to within a few minutes of his ■lath, when seeing him in such pain and , iasms, she could not stand it any longer, id left his room; she excused herself for itering upon business matters at such a time, id said she had come to see my brother lout four $1,000 Government bonds, which e had given my father about eighteen onths before to be converted from 10-40 mis into 5-20 bonds; she said that after their nversion my father had kept them his safe for safe keeping, and would nd her the interest from time to ne; she said further that she was dng to Europe, and would leave Baltimore . the following Friday or Saturday, and iuld require the $4,000 bonds to make good r letter of credit; she wished to know if ere was any way by which she could obtain them; my brother said he could not do any¬ thing for her, as no administrator had been appointed, and would not be appointed until the following Saturday; she said that would be too late, as she would leave Baltimore on that day; my brother then told htr that if she would leave her banker’s address, and the bonds were found, he would have them placed to her credit; she said that would not do; my brother then told her that if she would go with him to General Brice’s office, he might know of some way by which she could get the bonds; she consented to go; ray brother then asked her if she would be offended if he talked business to her, and she said she would not; he then told her that my father’s books showed that she owed him a note of $2,600; she said it had been paid, as follows: On 17th July, 1870, $1,300 of the principal and $130 interest, and on 17t,h January, 1871, the remaining $1,300 of the principal aud $65 in¬ terest; that my father had endorsed the pay¬ ments on the back of the note, and in record¬ ing the last payment had written $130, when she corrected him, and told him it should be only $65; she said my father had advised her then to destroy the note, as it might cause her trouble in the future; my brother related to her then a conversation he had had with my father before he left for Baltimore; he had told him, in answer to his inquiry, that Mrs. Wharton had not paid him the money; she owed him; he also told my brother that she had said she had been obliged to delay the payment on account of a misunderstanding with her banker; that she had invited Mrs. Chubb, my father and brother to spend the next Saturday and Sunday with her in Balti¬ more; and said she would pay him at that time; my father said he had no objection to her having the money, as she paid him goods interest; but as she was going to Europe and was in bad health,.he did not know that he would ever see ’ her again; he said he was afraid he had delayed her departure fully a month by demanding the money; Mrs. Wharton said she did not know what he had reference to when he said she had promised to pay him on that occasion, as she had settled with him, unless it was in reference to his buying a house which he had told her was a little above his figure; he had asked her to return the compliment of his loan, lend him the $4,000, and take a mortgage on the property; she had told him she did not know that she could spare the money, as she wished to make up her letter of credit, but possibly she might let him have half of it, and that if she found that she did not need any of it he might have the whole of it; she said she told him that as he had taken her personal note she thought it would be proper for her to ouly take his personal note; my brother and Mrs. Wharton then left for Gen¬ eral Brice’s office, and that was all that was said in my presence; I never saw her again until I saw her here; I am twenty years old; I roomed with my father for two years: I then went to college; I was with him from August 1866 to September 1868; I was with him during my Christmas and summer vacations, and during those periods I roomed with him; he always had an aversion to quack 48 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. medicines, and I never saw him take any; his general health was very good, and his habits were very regular; he was an officer of the old army, and was first attached to the old Sixth Infantry; he was a member of the Epis¬ copal Church, and was very regular in his at¬ tendance; he had been a member of that Church, for about two years before his death; he was always very cheerful whenever I saw him; he was very attentive to his business ana was hardly ever absent except when off on leave; I never noiiced that his mind wandered, but he was always clear in his remarks to me; he had a very good memory. Cross-examined by Mr. Hagner—I was in Troy at the time of my father’s death: I had not seen him since September, 1870; my brother was engaged in the Paymaster General’s Office in Washington, but had gone to New York on leave; he went to Washington in April, 1871; my father was living on Georgetown Heights: my brother is married, but his family was not iu Washington when my father died. Mr. Hagner now asked the witness if he did not know of an estrangement between his father aud his brother. Mr. Revell objected, and Mr. Hagner said he desired to rebut the idea of such intimacy between them as had been testified to. Mr. Revell said if an estrangement existed it should be proved by facts and not by un¬ earthing family differences. Some desultory discussion took place between the counsel, Mr. Syester contending that it was only com¬ petent for Mr. Charles L. Ketchum to testify on that point. The Chief Judge said the defence had better postpone the examination of the witness on that point until Mr. Charles L. Ketchum had been further examined. * Mr. Ketchum continued—Mrs. Wharton 6tated that the bonds belonged to her, but did not, as far as I can remember, say that there was anything on them to indicate that they belonged to her; my brother did not tell her in my presence that he would go and look for them among my father’s papers. Mrs. Helen Van Ness was next called,and testi¬ fied—I am the wife of Mr. Eugene Van Ness; I reside at 91 W. Monument street, in Baltimore; I was at Mrs. Wharton’s house from the 24th to the 29th of June last; my husband was ill there at the time: I left there on Friday, June 29th; I was there night and day from June 24th to June 29th; I saw Mrs. Wharton go out of her house several times; she was not a great deal with me, but was in and out of the room in which my husband lay ill; I saw her on the night of Sunday, June 25th; she came into the room I was occupying; I cannot say what time it was; I had been asleep; I was in the second room, front story; I was awakened by a noise, aud I saw her at the washstand opening the door; I asked if I could do any thing for her, and she said General Ketchum was very sick and she was going to give him some paregoric and mint; she started to leave the room, and I asked her if she had found the paregoric, and she said “No, I think Susan must have it, she'is very fond of taking medicines, aud I will go and see;” she came back in a few moments, said Susan did not have it, and that she had remembered that Nellie had taken it to the country with her; she went to th washstand and looked again, .and then lei the room; some time after that I saw Genera K. coming down the steps: he went on dow stairs; I did not speak to him; I do. not knm how long he remained down stairs, but it dt not seem more than ten or fifteen minute: before General K. came down I saw Mr: Wharton coming from the third-story: sh went on down stairs and I did not see ‘eithe of them again that night: the room I occupie was immediately under General K.’s room; had not heard him sick; I never saw Gener? K. after that night; I made the milk punc spoken of here; the doctor ordered a milk punc for my husband; Mrs. Wharton, Mrs. Hnttoij Mrs. Van Ness and myself were present whe it was ordered; a wineglass was ordered ti be given him, and some one suggested tha we should make a double quantity: Mril Wharton made the suggestion; Mrs. Hutto] took a tumbler from the sideboard and put j lump of sugar in it; I thought there was tej much sugar, and broke a piece off; I pourej the milk in first and then the whiskey; ha of that punch I poured into a wineglass, an put the balance remaining in the tumbler i j the nursery refrigerator m the dining roonJ I pnt nothing in except sugar, milk an] whiskey; some time after I went back and toe j the punch from the refrigerator, stirred with a spoon, and poured it in a wineglas I noticed a sediment in the tumbler, an thought the whiskey had turned the mii sour; I put in my little finger and tasted it; j did not taste peculiar, but by the time I he: reached the door of my husband’s room i tasted so bad that I then tasted it again, ar it was again so bad that I called the attentio of my sister, Mrs. Loney, to it; she then toq the tumbler; I then made a fresh punch, ar took it to my husband; at the time that first tasted the sediment it tasted as if I h; put a brass piu in my mouth: Mrs. Wharf told me (upon what day I cann now remember) that she had i, vited General Ketchum, Mrs. Chubb an Mr. Charles Ketchum to stay with her froi Saturday until Monday; I was not all the tiq in my husband’s room, as I had one of rr little children in the second story; I drank] tumbler of the milk from which the piim was made, and experienced no ill effects; £ drank it after the punch was made; it was jq after we gave my husband the second punq the milk was, I think, from a refrigerator I Mrs. Wharton’s cellar; the punch was inaj the day General Ketchum died. Cross-examined by Mr. Thomas—The roonfl was occupying was Mrs. Wharton’s own rooj* I do not know that the washstand was ktm locked; I never went to it, and only saw tjl open it. Mr. Eugene Van Ness was next recalled, al Mr. Revell asked him if Mrs. Wharton hll been in his room on Tuesday and Wednesdtt nights of the last week iu June last? N| Thomas objected, and the Court decided tt» the witness couid state what he knew of M. Wharton’s whereabouts during those nigql Mr. Van Ness then testified—I don’t remejr her seeing Mrs. Wharton in my room an night I was in her house; I saw her seveli THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 49 ;imes during the different days I was there, >ut I cannot say how often or upon what lays. Mr. Revell said this was all the State pro- )osed to ask Mr. Van Ness at this stage of the ;ase, but would recall him at another stage. General Benjamin W. Brice was next called, md testified—I reside in Washington, and am Paymaster General of the Armies of the United States; I have been holding that posi- ;ion nearly eight years; I was very well ac- luainted with General K., and had known lim thirty odd years; I married his sister; I jnew him well from his early cadetship at West Point; he was of a strictly moral char- icter, as much so as any man of my acquaint- mce; he was a member of the Episcopal Jhurch by reputation, but not of my know- edge; his general health was remarkably ;ood all his life; he was a strong, robust man, md of such remarkably careful and regular labits that I do not think his health was ever naterially impaired; he was a very conscien- iouslv close business man; closely atten¬ tive to all his duties, public and private; he vas not addicted to the use of drugs or quack medicines; I have heard him express his aver- ion to all medications for a sound person mly slightly indisposed; his habits were re¬ markably systematic; he was a total absti- lence man during the whole of my acquaint¬ ance with him, that is, I speak with reference o intoxicating drinks; I never noticed any hange in the vigor and power of his mind; us disposition was not at all morose; ne was , grave man, except among his intimates, but laturally cheerful and exceedingly fond of onng company, children in preference to dults; I had a conversation with Mrs. Vharton on the 3d of July last at my ffice in Washington city; she came to ay office, accompanied by Charles Ketchum; iter the usual greetings, Charles Ketchum aid, “Mrs. Wharton desires to have a con- ersation with you, and will explain her bject;” I seated Mrs. Wharton close by my ide, and she proceeded to state to me that tie was going to Europe on one day of that reek, and that she was unable to make her loney arrangements, to get up a sufficient mount to procure the necessary letter of redit for her uses while abroad, and was, ierefore, compelled to call upon us for $4,000 f her money, which were among the fleets of General Ketchum, and which le bad left in his possession; I in- uired how that was; she replied that a year md a-half previous she had handed to Gen- ral Ketchum four $1,000 5-20 coupon bonds of eEs to be converted into 10-40 bonds; I in- uired if General K. had made conversion of er bonds; she said she had, but had still re¬ fined them, and that they were in his posses- on when he died; I inquired if she had Gen- ral K.’s receipt for the bonds, and she replied ;ao;” I asked if General K. had given her no >rt of memorandum for her protection, and i le said “no;” I asked then if she had herself i'ept no memorandum with a description of le bonds, and she said she had not; I asked if aybody besides herself and General K. had a oowledge of the transaction, and she an- vered “no;” I said, then, “Mrs. Wharton, this claim of yours takes us entirely by sur¬ prise; we have just had a thorough examina¬ tion of all of General K.’s books and papers, etc., and they and other circumstances impel us to believe that instead of General K.’s being in your debt, you owe him borrowed money in the sum of $3,600, executed two or three years previous, at ten per cent, interest;” she admitted that such a note bad existed, but said that on the previous January she had paid the note and all accrued interest; I asked if she had preserved the note, and she said she had not; and in substance, that at the sug¬ gestion of Gen. K. at the time she paid him she had destroyed it; I asked her where that oc¬ curred, and she said at Mrs. Chubb’s house in Washington; I asked if Mrs. Chubb or any other person was present, and she replied in the negative; I then inquired how she paid the note, by check, certificate of deposit, or how? she replied that she had paid it in money; I ifiquired if she had brought that large sum of money with her from Baltimore, and she said she had; I asked then if Mrs Chubb know that she had such a large sum of money about her person, and she said she had not commu¬ nicated it to her; she repeated to me again that the $4,000 was indispensably necessary to ht^r European trip; I told her that General K.’s effects could not be disturbed until the Court had appointed an administra¬ tor; she asked me then,“can’t I give you any se¬ curity so as to get that $4,000?” I told her that was impossible, and that the assets of the de¬ ceased General were then in the hands of the law, and must be disposed of by a proper per¬ son to be designated by the law; I then re¬ marked to her that the whole proceeding, as related by her, was the most extraordinary I had yet encountered; knowing General Ketchum’s abhorence of debt, and knowing that he never permitted himself to be in debt a moment longer than it was possible to liquidate it, and that dur¬ ing all my long acquaintance with him I had never known him to be in a position in which he could not meet any debt he had con tracted; I had previously inquired why she had left the bonds in his possession after their conversion, and she said, “For safe-keeping;” I asked her why safer there than in any of the public institutions where such deposits could be made; she said she had perferred, from her long acquaintance, personal friendliness and entire confidence, to leave them with him; then reverting to General K.’s dislike of debt I said that it was very strange that he fwould consent to be the custodian of her bonds and be responsible for them, but that if he could make up his mind to take a responsibility of that kind, his scru¬ pulous and conscientious exactness in the per¬ formance of all business obligations would, I knew, have impelled him to require her to take a receipt or other voucher to protect her against just such a casualty as his death had brought; I said, too, “more surprising than all, Mrs. Wharton, is that one of your business experience and reputation for business shrewdness could consent to make a de¬ posit of your money with any individual or institution without some evidence that it wmild be protection against loss;” that was 50 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. the import of my language; I tolcl her I had already explained that she could not get any¬ thing until the administrator had been ap¬ pointed, and that it was proper for me to add that unless she produced authentic evidence of her claim other than her verbal statement she never could get it; she said she thought that General K. might have placed some marks upon her bonds by which they could be distinguished from his own: I told her that Charles Ketchum and General Eaton, who I had designated as a witness to accompany him in his examination into his father’s effects, should make a re-ex¬ amination, and if any of the bonds belonged to her the administrator would be authorized to return them to her; I expressed my disbe¬ lief that any m.arks could be found, as they would have been found on the first examina¬ tion; I told her General Eaton should go with Charles Ketchum, and the examination should be thorough and accurate; I suggested to her that it was strange that as she had received interest on her 10-40 bonds that she should pay ten per cent, interest, while her bonds in her creditor’s possession were drawing only five per cent, in gold: I said, finally, to Mrs. Wharton, “If, as you inform me, that $4,000 is indispensable to your Eupo- pean trip, then vou may as well abandon it;” when our conversation terminated, she rose to leave, inquired how Mrs. Brice was, told me to remember her to Mrs. Brice, regretted that she could not call upon her, and then re¬ marked that it was perhaps best as it was, as the sight of her might be the cause of fresh grief; this was on the third day after General K.’s funeral; her manuer was cool and self- possessed when I told her she had as well abandon the idea of going to Europe if her trip depended upon her getting the $4,000 from General K.’s estate; she did not show any dis¬ appointment or express regret. Cross-examined by Mr. llagner.—1 do not think the interview continued longer than fifteen minutes; no one but Mr. Charles Ketchum was present that I remember; Gen¬ eral Ketchum nd Mrs. Wharton’s husband had been together in the old army; General Ketchum had been married twice, and mar¬ ried sisters; he had been retired in January last, as Colonel; he rarely spoke to me of bis business: he was retired for thirty years faith¬ ful service, and had not reached the age of sixty-two; I was never stationed with him ex¬ cept' in Washington; I have only heard that he had had a fall from his horse; it was during the fitting out of the ex¬ pedition against Utah; I do not know anything about his having had cholera or yellow fever at Fort Laramie: in some respects "General K. was eccentric; his estate proved greater than I expected, hut I kuew he had something handsome saved during a frugal and careful life. Mr. Hagner now asked the witness if he had not expressed the opinion that General K.’s son Charles probably knew least of any per¬ son about his money affairs. Mr. Revell objected, and the Court said that the sou of General K. was present, and he could be interrogated; General Brice said he may have made such a statement. General Brice continued—He was not in tin habit of conversing about his business affairs and I never knew him to have a business con¬ fidante; in nothing, except that wonderful reticence and remarkable exactness, giving s blind negro a cent and entering it in his book was he eccentric; I saw General K. frequently while he resided in Georgetown, but not daily Mrs. Harry W. Snowden next testified—1 reside in Baltimore, and have lived ther< nearly all my life; I saw General K. on tin 34th of June last on the cars coming fron Washington: I was coming from Laurel Sta tion with my husband: I was attracted by hh merriment; Mrs. Chubb was with him; I nevei saw him again except in the street car aftei reaching Baltimore; he aud Mrs. Chubb go' out at Biddle street; I have known Mrs Wharton perhaps 18 months; on the evening o Friday, June 30th, I saw Mrs. Wharton at he: own house at the request of Mr. Van Ness; In told me to tell her he hoped she would go t< Philadelphia as she had intended, as he wa: so much better; she said that as she wa: obliged to go to Washington on Saturday, sh* would prefer to go to Philadelphia on Mon day, not caring to travel on Sunday; she thei remarked, “you know General Ketchum tool laudanum;” I said, “so I have heard;” I hat heard it from some one else; she then said b was in the habit of taking medicine careless!’ from a bottle, without measuring it; I don’ remember that she said anything more abou General K., but she talked principally of Mr Van Ness and his sickness; Sir. Van Ness lia< been removed that afternoon from her house Mrs. Snowden was not cross-examined. Chas. L. Ketchum was now recalled, ant testified—I administered on my father’s es fate; no account has been presented by Mrs Wharton since I received letters of adminis tration; Mrs. Wharton told my brother ant myself that she had taken good care of ou father during his sickness, and had remained with him to within ten or fifteen minutes o his death; I made with General Eaton a sec ond examination of my father’s papers, and i found nothing to indicate that my father ha owed Mrs. Wharton. Cross-examined by Mr. Steele—I took m letters of administration the second Saturda after my father’s death; I know that Mr.- Wharton has been in prison since; I had beej living in Washington from the 5th of las April; I had been previously living in Ne< York since the summer of ’65, and had mad frequent visits to my father; I had occupiet the same bed with him in Georgetown, bci had moved to another boarding house thrg'l weeks before he came to Baltimore; in father’s vest was made of nun’s cloth an was of a light gray color; the whole sui was of the same material; I have no talked often of the conversations I ha with Mrs. Wharton; I recollect m conversations with her sufficiently to n member the words she used; I do not remen her having had a long conversation with an one else about six mouths ago; I do not ri member the ifs aud ands, hut I recollect tl words Mrs. Wharton uttered to me; I was e: amiued before the Grand Jury; I did not mas the same full statement I have made here be. THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 51 cause I was not questioned so fully; I think I stated to the Grand Jury that she had told me she had paid the note in two installments; Mrs. Wharton did not tell me that she had paid the note iu $1,000 notes and the balance in notes; 1 asked Mrs. Wharton if she knew my father had made a will, and she said he had; I never found the will; I did not tell her that 1 thought that if he had made a will he prob¬ ably had uot left me anything; I have no knowledge of my father having been thrown from a horse while in the West: he was on 'General Halleck’s staff during the war; I lived in Harrisburg from September, ’62 to June, ’(55; I had been living, previously, iu St. Louis; I went there in Jauuary, ’62, and lived there with my father. Major Thus. H. Bradley was next called, and testified—I reside in Washington; I have re¬ sided there over eight years; I was associated with General K. officially and socially over sight years; for over seven years we occupied, ilmosf daily, desks at the War Department; I was his principal assistant, and necessarily had his confidence to a certain extent: be was on duty ns counsellor to Secretary Stanton; his peculiar duties were exami¬ nations of miscellaneous war claims; he was assigned to that duty in November. 1862; 1 first met him in December, 1801, in St. Louis; he was then on General Halleck’s Staff and was Lieutenant Colonel of Infantry; le was afterwards made Brigadier General of volunteers; he was ordered to Washington iu .62; on the 23d of August, ’63, I reported to him '.or temporary duty, and from that time to his retirement, r n the 15th of December, ’70.1 saw lim almost dai'y; we were in the same room. My. Syester new asked the witness if he had luring all his long acquaintance observed in leneral K. any ‘suicidal tendency.” Mr. Steele objected, and the Court said the vitness could state what were his habits and disposition. The witness continued—During the whole ime I had liis acquintance his morals con¬ firmed to law or order in every respect, in my udgment; systems of morality aud principle leemed to mark all his actions in public and irivate; he despised and seemed to spit upon j.nything that would seem to reflect upon his baracter. ■ Mr. Steele hero interrupted, the witness, and aid the testimony as to General K.’s character was going too far. After some explanation and desultory dis¬ cussion, the witness continued—He was not a melancholy sort of a man, but was of rather heerful disposition; I never noticed in him nytbing more than the ordinary absent- aindedness about trivial affairs; prior to’67 J.e seemed to avoid society, but subsequently je seemed to seek for cheerful society; I never oticed him in a melancholy oi depressed state f mind, except when he lost his wife in ’66; | e was rather cautious about the use ot drugs, ud I never knew him to take medicine unless y medical direction, except upon one occa- ion; he then took chlorate of potash as a wash; bout a week before his death lie called at ay office; he was then well and cheerful; he 4 was a man of robust health: strong and mus¬ cular, and of rather an elastic step. Cross-examined by Mr. Haguer—General K. frequently called at my house and spent even¬ ings there. The Court now adjourned until 10 A. M. to¬ morrow. FOSJRTEEiSTSI BAT. Annapolis, December 19,1871. The great Wharton trial is still attractive to the public of Annapolis. Notwithstanding the heavy snow storm of to-day, the ladies were present in goodly numbers, the inclemency of The weather uot seeming to abate their interest in the proceedings. Mrs. Wharton appeared to-day in much better spririts, and, as far as could he ob¬ served through her heavy veil, her expression was less anxious. She was still accompanied by Miss Wharton, Mrs. Nugent, Mrs. Neilson, Miss Eosa Neilson and Mr. Moon Wharton. Colonel Brantz Mayer was again with her to-day, and Hermann Stump, Esq., of Harford, was present with her counsel. Judge Henry Sherman was first called to¬ day, aud testified—I reside iu Washington; I went there after the lirst battle of Bull Euu; I knew General Kefclmtn very well; I had known him from 1865; he was very intimate in my family; he was a man of a very social, cheerful nature, not fond of gay, fashionable life, but of cheerful company; he came regu¬ lar to my house twice during the week and on every Sunday evening; he was very fond of music, and particularly of sacred music; he was a man of uncommon purity of character; I saw him on the morning of the day he left for Baltimore ; he came into my office about 7 o’clock in the morning and had some papers and a bunch of flowers in his hand; ho left the flowers for one of my daughters ; he took papers from his inside vest pocket and made some memorandum and put the papers back again; he was very exact in li;s habits, and was always very punctual in keeping his ap¬ pointments; he was in perfect health when I last saw him and in very fine spirits; he was at my house iu 1 he country on the pre¬ vious Thursday and was then very well aud cheerful; he was opposed to all drugs at (l was very abstemious in his habits!; I could never get him to take even a glass of wine in my house; I never noticed any failure iu his mind, and would have done so, because I saw him so often; when he left Washington for Baltimore he was as fine a specimen of a man, mentally and physically, as I ever saw; he was frequently taken for me, as we are about the same size. General Win. Myers was next called,and tes¬ tified—I am an officer of the army, and at present stationed at Washington; I first knew General K. at Fort Dalis, Oregon, in 1859, and served on his staff; I was there nearly a year with him; I served afterwards with him in St. Louis and Washington; during all my long ac¬ quaintance with him I never knew him to take much medicine,but he was very averse to taking medicines; he was remarkably robust 52 THE WHARTON-KETGHUM TRIAL. and healtliy: I never knew him to undertake to treat himself with drugs, and I knew that he had a great repugnance to taking medicines of any sort; lie was a very cheerful man and very fond of visiting his intimate friends: I never saw him morose or melan¬ choly; lie was exceedingly temperate, and I never knew him to drink any intoxicating drinks: he was a great walker, and always took a great deal of exercise; I saw him almost daily from the 1st of last June until he left for Baltimore; he was in his usual good health and spirits when I saw him a few hours before he left for Baltimore; I never noticed any thing in him to indicate a failure of his mind; my office is upwards of a mile from General K ’s house in Georgetown, and he came to my office about 9 o’clock; my office is between Nineteenth and G streets: .Judge Sherman lives on I street, between Fifteenth and Six¬ teenth streets. General George D. Wise was next called, and testified—I reside in Baltimore county; I have known Mrs. Wharton six or seven years, probably more: I saw her in Baltimore after the 4th of last. July, and had a conversation with her. Attorney General Syester here passed the following statement, in writing to the counsel for the defence. “The object of the evidence to be offered by the State is to show that at this time Mrs. Wharton was extremely anxious to effect the loan of a large sum of money in order to ena¬ ble her to leave the country for Europe; that she was prepared to make unusual sacritices for that purpose, aud manifested the greatest anxiety on the subject.” Mr. Hagner, after it had been read by the counsel for the defence, passed it to the Court, remarking that it appeared so clearly inad¬ missible that the counsellor the defence did not propose to argue it. Altera brief consultation, the Chief Judge said the Court was of the opinion that the question was entirely admissible. General Wise now resumed—I met Mrs. Wharton at Mr. Kirk’s jewelry store in Balti¬ more, on the 7th of July last, and she said she had been in search of me; she said she had been disappointed in funds in making her arrange¬ ments to go to Europe, aud that she had reason to know tnatMessrs. Johntson& Bro.wouldfur- nish her the funds if I would endorse her note: she stated that her passage and her daughter’s to Europe had been paid, and that she had purposed leaving on the next day for Phila¬ delphia, on her way to New York, whence she would leave in a steamship: I inquired bow much money she required; she said $11,000: I asked her how she intended to make good the note when it became, due; she said from funds derived from her income, which was $11,000 a year; I asked her what security she had to give for tins loan. Mr. Hagner here interrupted, and said this was an attempt to show misconduct, and the Court had decided that the character of the prisoner could not be assailed. The Chief Judge explained the view of t.lie Court. Marshal Frey had testified that Mis. Wharton had told him she would stay until j an investigation was had, aud the defence | were now proving that she was at that time making efforts to raise money to leave for Europe. Mr. Hagner again nrot.ested against the in¬ troduction of the testimony; be did not see where this sort of testimony would lead to and the authorities spoke of it in no am¬ biguous terms. Mr. Syester replied that the State proposed to show the extreme anxiety of Mrs. Wharton to leave for Europe. Mr. Steele begged leave to correct the false impression; Marshal Frey had first seen Mrs Wharton at 5 P. M. on the 7th of July, and General Wise had met her about 12 M. on that day; the matter was collateral, and it wasnot right that it should he brought into the case. Mr. Re veil stated that the State would fol¬ low up with testimony to show that the fact of the finding of the poison in General K.Tt stomach was communicated to Mrs. Wharton on the 4t,h of July. The Chief Judge said the Court thought the evidence admissible, but they would decide at a future time whether or not to allow the State to contradict the statements now being given in evidence. Gen. Wise, resumed—I asked her what secur¬ ity she would be able to give: she said she had Western bonds (I think St. Louis), and prop¬ erty in Baltimore and Philadelphia, but that she had given her word to a relative in Phila¬ delphia, who she had reason to know had made his will in her favor to the amount of $600,000 or $700,000,that she would Dot hypothe.- cate any of her estate, as he had little confi-i deuce in the business capacity of ladies.and bv so doing she would break lier word; I told her I would he glad to assist her, hut under no circumstances could I accede to her! request to sign my name as acceptance to her note; I suggested that she should go some broker or banker of respectability wool might arrange to obtain for her the funds she! required; I also inquired if she had any banker, or business agent who was in the habit of at¬ tending to her affairs; she said Mr. Van Ness) was her business agent and kept her funds and accounts with Alex. Brown & Son, corned Calvert and Baltimore streets; she said Mr.' Van Ness was sick and that she ban been M the office of Alex. Brown &. Son, and that Mr.l Browu had not yet come ffi from his country residence; I then offered tq accompany her to the office of Mr. Geo. Guest: a property broker, and told her I could recent) mend him as a gentleman to he relied upon to assist her to make a money negotiation: Mrs Wharton intimated tome (I don’t reme.mj her the. precise terms she used) that she would be willing to pay a considerable-sum to effect i this negotiation, but she did not name the sun at that time: she accepted my offer, and w< went to Mr. Guest’s office; I introduced her ft him, and I mentioned to him iu a few words the object of her visit: ho informed her thai ho could procure funds for her at a reasotiahkl rate of interest if she could hypothecate bonds or give the security of real estate) she repeated to him innoh of the same slnl had spoken to me; I think she stated t<* him the same reason why she could not liyl pothecate her estate; Mr. Guest inquired iutcl THE WHAETON-KETCTUJM TRIAL. 53 ier circumstances as I bad done, and con- :1 tided by telling her that without the prop- Tty security she could not obtain the money: he told him that she could not even have ier accruing income so fixed as to pay oli the inte, as it was already in the hands of Mr. /an Ness and Mr. Brown, on account of her etters of credit; she told him she had no se- urities she could make use of for such a pur- iose; I am certain she told him the same he had told me about her uncle n Philadelphia; her first request of ilr. Guest was for $11,000; she did not state he exact time for which she wanted the noney, but the inference was, that it was to >o paid as her income became due; her con¬ versation to Mr. Guest was partly addressed o me; Mrs. Wharton then asked Mr. Guest for .3,000 or $5,000 on the security of her furni- ure, which was worth $5 000; Mr. Guest in- ormed her that property of that kind would ot be taken as security for the proposed loan, ,ud declined to attempt negotiation on such ;erms; that was all the conversation, except hat Mrs. Wharton said, in a general hay, both to Mr. Guest and myself, that he would pay almost anything to get he money, giving as a reason the great isappointment she would feel if obliged to si-ego her trip to Europe; she mentioned 1,000, but I cannot say whether it was in eference to the loan of $11,000 or $5,000; Mrs. Wharton’s manner was very incoherent and bid, and somewhat contradictory, although le proposed to Mr. Guest, to litigate the debt urn income; her attention was called to the bet that she was prevented by the fact of her remise to her uncle in Philadelphia, and also 3at her income had to be paid to Messrs, lex. Brown & Son on her letter of .•edit; she said then that I knew the L)an would be paid; I suggested that ie might be shipwrecked and lose her fe, and she said that in case of any accident i her her daughter, Miss Nellie, would pay all morable debts of her mother; both Mr. Guest id I again informed her that such was uot, icurity in a business point of view; 1 gathered om her conversation that Miss Nellie was >iDg to Europe with her; I can’t say that ally¬ ing was said to her about the probability of j-iss Nellie’s being also lost by shipwreck; rs. Wharton said she had been to Messrs, dmst.on & Bros., and they had promised to rnish her the money if she could get a relia- e gentleman to endorse for her, and that r. Johnston had suggested my name, king her if she knew me; Mrs. Wharton If t Mr. Guest’s office with me; I parted .th her on Baltimore street, about ] ,lf past 2 P. M.; tier manner during all this ! ne was very excited, and she appeared to be boring under strong excitement, so much so at I did uot think her entirely in her right nd; she said she had given her promise to r uncle in Philadelphia and would break r word if she hypothecated any of lier es- ie; she did not say that her income would pledged, but gave nie to understand that it mid be applied to the payment of the loan, dross-examined by Mr. Steele—She did not ite when she had paid her passage and her ughter’s, and how long they had contem¬ plated their trip to Europe; the conversation at Mr. Kirk’s took place about noon on the 7th of July last; she said the money was for the expenses of her European tour. To Mr. Hagner—I told her I did not doubt the honesty of her purpose to pay back the money; and I then spoke of the impossibility of her paying it from her income, a3 she had stated it was in the hands of Messrs. Alex. Brown & Son. Prof. Eiyiuk Donaldson was next called, and testified—I reside in Baltimore, and am a physician: I have been in active practice twenty years; I have had experience with gelsemiuim, or yellow jasmine, and have pre¬ scribed it very frequently within the last few years; I have generally prescribed it for facial neuralgia, and with good effects: I have gen¬ erally given it in dose of thirty or forty drops, repeated every two hours; its effects have been principally to lull pain by its action on the sensory nerves; I have never given it to the extent of producing any de¬ cided impression upon the motory nerves, lmt the authorities state that it has a decided effect upon these nerves distributed to the upper eyelid and the lower jaw; I can’t say that. I have seen that condition brought about; cases have been reported of its beneficial effects upon the nerves of the sympathetic system distributed to the minute arteries; the nerves of the sympathetic system affected by it are called vasor mortor nerves; in many parts of the body the quantity of the blood is variable, and yellow jasmine lessens the increased How ot the blood to certain parts of the body; I have noticed a temporary dizziness; I have used it almost exclusively in cases of facial neu¬ ralgia; in my judgment, thirty or forty drops every two hours is not an improper dose; I have never seen any bad effects from that quantity, except the little dizziness I have spoken of; I have frequently not. returned to my patients for twelve hours after giving it, so safe do I consider it; I did not hear Dr. Williams’ testimony. Mr. Syester here stated that he proposed to ask the witness a hypothetical question. He then passed to the defence a lengthy written statement of General K.’s symptoms, the re¬ sult of the post mortem, the fact of the dis covery of antimony, etc., and asking if, in his opinion, death was from natural can es. After reading it Mr. Steele said to the coun¬ sel. for the State, “Of course you put in your view of the case; we do not admit it, by any means ” Mr. Syester then read the question above given to the witness, and Dr. Donaldson re¬ plied: Of course it would be impossible to form a correct opinion without carefully com¬ paring the symptoms during life with the post mortem lesions; doing that I acknowledge I would be very much puzzled to make a clear diagnosis, for, from the description given, I cannot say that I recognize any disease with which lam familiar, either from myowu ■ ob¬ servation or from my reading: there are points of resemblance to several well known diseases, but at the same time there is the ab¬ sence in each one of those cases of prominent symptoms which we usually find in those morbid conditions. The initiation ef the dis- 54 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. ease has the appearance of what is commonly recognized as cholera morbus, from intestinal irritation caused by undigested or indigestible articles of food: the effect of that irritation is to produce profuse vomiting and intestinal discharges to an extent of exhausting in a great measure the blood of its watery elements; I have never seen a fatal case of cholera morbus, and I question if they often occur, and I think when met with they result from some poisonous substance eaten, for iustauce, decayed tish, vegetable matter or fruits; atfter the initiation of the disease, the individual seems to have entirely recovered from the effects; ordinarily after an attack of cholera morbus we expect the patient to be weak, but after rest to be able to digest ordinarily digestible food; in this case, if I understand the record, the patient had a return of the symptoms twice, and died in a seini-comatose state with convulsions; I have never seen a fatal case of cholera morbus, but I suppose the death would be similar to the death from Asiatic cholera, fatal cases of which 1 have frequently seen both in this country and in Europe; in those cases the consciousness is clear, skin clammy and bathed in perspiration ; tongue cold; in¬ telligence generally clear and the patient dy¬ ing evidently from exhanstiou; there is also the peculiar organic poison of Asiatic cholera; 'I would expect in the autopsy of a person who had died from cholera morbus the same condition of the heart and lungs as is found in Asiatic cholera; the venous blood collects in the right side of the heart, supposed to be the case in consequence of the small circulation in the minute capil¬ laries of the body; the blood, to properly cir¬ culate. must have its proper quantity of water: I would expect to find the right side of the heart very much distended by this venous blood. Such being the case I could not state that the individual died of cholera morbus. There is some resemblance to the patient dying of what wecalluraenicp >ison, where.owiugto the deficient action of the kidneys from dis¬ ease, there is retained in the blood an extra quantity of the effete substance, known as urea, resulting from the disintegration of the body: it accumulates in the blood, interferes with the capillary circulation, and produces a form of dropsy, anil various other effects upon the organism, and frequently ends in con¬ vulsions; this disease is generally a gradually progressing one, and one of its most prominent symptoms is the presence of albumen in the urine, and under the miscro- scope of what are known as casts of the kid¬ neys. When a person dies from this poison we find evidences of disease of kidneys, of which there arc two or three varieties; in this case no albumen was found in the urine, and no disease in the kidneys; I am, therefore, obliged to exclude the idea of nraenic poison; I would suspect some serious disease of the brain, and what is popularly known as apo¬ plexy: true apoplexy is ordinarily a sudden disease, preceded generally bv threatening such as numbness, owing to impaired sensi¬ bility or temporary lessening of the power of motion: ordinarily when the attack comes on it is sudden, the patient falls, has loss of con¬ sciousness, and frequently paralysis in differ eut parts of his body: technically, we cal those cases apoplexy in which there is cere bral hemorrhage—rupture of the minute ves¬ sels; the term is often applied popularly when there is no hemorrhage, but only momentary loss of consciousness; there is another font spoken of by the old writers, where there i: no clot, but an effusion into the ventricle o: the brain; more modefu authoritiei do not bear that out: the symptoms of appoplexy vary according to the place when the clot is effused; if it is in or near where il presses upon what is known as corpus striatun and the opticthalmus, we will have paralysis in other portions of the brain we would liavi restricted paralysis, not general paralysis; it cases of death from apoplexy we wool i expeel to had relaxation of the limbs, complete coma slow, measured respiration, and correspond¬ ing slow pulse; if I understand the record those symptoms were not present in this case in a post mortem of a case of apoplexy w( would expect to find a clot of blood: the. ac¬ count, as read to me, does not state that sncL a clot was found, and I am, therefore obliged to exclude the disease known as apoplexy. There is another disease to which tlu symptoms bear some resemblance, knowr as congestion of the brain; there are twc forms, one known as arterial congestion, the other as venous or passive congestion; befon the circulation of the brain was as well de monstrated as it now is, it was supposed tha- congestion of the brain, as a primary cause was a frequent disease, but modern investiga tion has shown that nature has protected tin circulation of the braiu with more safeguard, than any other portion of the “body! it is shut up in an air-tight box where no atmospheric pressure can bear upon it directly; so true is that that for years i: was questioned if there could be at differen times any variable quantity of blood in th< : braiu, the texture of the brain being of sucl a delicate nature that any pressure upon i would interfere not only with the function of the braiu proper, but of all the function! and organs of the body, because the nervou system, of which the braiu is the centre- presides over all the organic function! of the body, so that if there was I congestion and over-distention of th-li blood vessels, it. would produce seriouii results; it was found that nature had provide! another fluid to pass in aud out of the brain according to whether the brain was active ol quiet; it is called cephalo-zacbidien fluid, il circulates from the spinal cord to the brain. s| as to keep an equal pressure upon the braiii in addition, there is a peculiar construction oj the large veins, which are adherent to tk covering of the brain, by means of which the, are kept open: this assists in the removal o the venous blood from the brain, by which i is known as the force of inspiration; my objec in stating this is to show the obstacles t< congestion of the brain; in addition there is a provision by which th larger vessels do not pass into the substance o the brain; there is also the presence of a doubl valve to prevent the venous blood frod THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 55 regurgitating back into the head, at the point ■where the internal jugular vein empties into the unominata; from these physi- ological facts modern authors state that venous congestions, so as to produce death, very rarely occur except as the result of some preceding'disease; when a patient dies and venous congestion is supposed to he the cause we would expect to find all the veins of the brain surcharged with blood; arterial con¬ gestion of the brain is not ordinarily an acute disease; when it does occur the inactivity of the circulation, not the quantity of the blood, is the cause of death; when persons are in convulsions there is al¬ most always more blood found in the veins of the brain than when they die from ordinary diseases; this is in consequence of the fact that during a convulsion there is an interruption to the regular number of inspirations which are. important to draw the venous blood down to the heart; I therefore can give the opinion that the individual named did not die of con¬ gestion of the brain of either form. There is still another disease of the brain to which there is some resemblance in. the symptoms given, because, when consciousness is in¬ terfered with, we naturally suspect it results from some brain disorder: that is acute in¬ flammation of the structure of the brain itself; it was formerly supposed to be met with as a disease independent of traumatic cause, injuries, forinstance; but since the application of minute dissection and the microscope this lis now known to be an exceedingly rare dis¬ ease; when it does occur it is generally of what is now called from degeneration of the arteries, ending iu red softening, a chronic disease; we can have inflammation of the i membranes surrounding the brain, but it is very rare except as one of the forms if the development of tuhucle, which oc¬ curs mostly in children; in inflammation of the structure of the brain we would oxpect to find punctiform ext.ravisa- ;ion ; from the Rymptoms here related 1 ex dude inflammation of the structure of the brain or inflammation of the covering of the or: in ; there are two other diseases of the main in which there are one or two points of . resemblance to the case here stated—one is :rnown as cerebro spinal minigitis, that is where there is inflam [nation ot the upper part of the spinal cord as it enters the skull; the only symptom of the disease here related is b'here the head is thrown back m i Convulsions ; the preceding history of the case and the absence of the characteristic post mortem lesions preclude the idea of death from cerebro spinal minigitis. The te¬ tanic spasms spoken of would, sug¬ gest the possibilitv of its being a oase of tetanus, which generally results from an injury; it very larely occurs as a primary disease; if it had been tetanus I hould have expected it to have had the pecu¬ liar tetanic spasms throughout the disease; this results from the spasmodic contraction of the muscles of the body, and is not connected 'with the brain it.self;tbose are all of the natural causes to which I could impute the death in this case; I therefore feel justified in saying That to the best of my knowledge and belief IK 1 - I he did not die of natural causes. There is one symptom which would make me strongly suspect opium, and that is the semi-comatose condition. I have seen persons die from opium, several suicides and deaths from the accidental administration of it, aud in every one of those cases coma was profound; it was impossible to rouse them, ami in this case we are told he spoke intelligibly; as far as mjr memory serves me in each of those cases of poisoning the pupil was excessively contracted, the breathing slow and measured, and the pulse generally correspondingly slow; in the cases I have seen,death was caused by a condi¬ tion which we recognize as asphyxia, which is from deficient aeration of the blood; this is in consequence of the impairment of the mus¬ cles of respiration; from the salts of morphia, and the other alkaloids of opium; opium being the most powerful sedative of the ma¬ teria medica; when the individual is suffi¬ ciently under its influence to die from it,there is a paralysis of the centres of sensation and the nerves of motion; the deficiency of air causes the venous blood to flow where the arterial blood flows; this, of itself, would cloud the intellect; I cannot see that the individual died from opium; the semi- comatose state would indicate that a mode¬ rate dose had been given, hut not enough to overpower his system and cause death; my experience corresponds with my reading on the subject of opium poisoning; some of the authorities speak of the pupils becoming relaxed at the last moments of life from the general relaxation; I have, however, never observed that feature; it is estimated that one-sixth of the whole mass of blood goes to the brain; the time at which death would follow from opium would depend upon the condition of the patient’s stomach and the susceptibility of his system to its effects. To the Court—If the dose of opium had been administered on Tuesday afternoon, I suppose be would have died before Wednesday at 3 P. M.; the longest case I ever knew of was twenty-four hours, and the patient was then in a profound coma. To Mr. Revell—If the individual bad died two hours after a final dose had been given him, and twenty grains of tartar emetic was found in his stomach, I would naturally sup¬ pose that a much larger quantity had been ab¬ sorbed; tartar emetic is one of those metallic salts which does not coagulate albumen, and when taken into the stomach freely diluted, passes with rapidity into the vessels known as absorbents, and into the minute veins; it circu¬ lates freely, and is readily eliminated, that.is, it. passes in and out of the organism with great rapidity; it is estimated that the circu¬ lation of the blood in an adult is accomplished in thirty seconds, and a metallic salt in the blood passes through the organs into the kid¬ neys, from which it is eliminated; during the two hours, in the case given me, the absorbents and veins would be active in taking up what ever was there, arid moreover, the mechanical action of the stomach would force the fluid into the upper part of the small intestines, where the absorption is still more active than in the stomach: in regard to the symptoms from tartar emetic, I have never seen a case of acute 5G THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. poisoning from tartar emetic; I therefore cannot state what are the symptoms except from my readings; in this case the symptoms closely correspond to what the authors state _the frequent respirat ion, clammy skin, great prostration, and finally the convulsions, to¬ gether with rigidity of the muscles of the ex¬ tremity of the jaws; the authors speak of the patients dying in an insensible condition, but I don’t remember ever in a stupid condition; they speak of great pain and a burning sensa¬ tion in the stomach, violent vomiting, purg¬ ing and disturbance of the cerebral functions: we aro all in the habit of administering chloroform to control convulsions, no matter from what cause they come; chloral is given also frequently' to keep up the effects of the chloroform; I should say that in this case chloroform was a very proper ad¬ ministration; upon the theory that gelsem- inum acts in controlling venous congestion, I should say it was a judicious prescription in this case; the observations made of gelsem- inum render that theory plausible; opium ad¬ ministered with tartar emetic would modify the effects of the emetic; it lessens the vomiting, and produces tolerance^ The Court now adjourned until to-morrow at 10 A. M., when the examination cf Prof. Donaldson will be resumed. FIFTEENTH DAI. Axnapolis, December 20,1871. The Wharton-Ketchum trial bids fair to prove as notable for the length of time it will occupy as in the circumstances andiucidents which have attracted to it so large a share of public attention. The State’s officers have evidently been active in preparing the case, and the testimony already offered is more voluminous than was at first supposed to be in their possession. Prof. Donaldson was recalled upon the open¬ ing of the Court to-day, and turned over to the defence for cross-examination. In answer to Mr. Steele’s interrogatories, he testified as follows: 1 am a Professor in the University of Maryland, and am associated with Pro¬ fessors Chew, Miles and Aik.u; I had the pa¬ per read here yesterday read to me by Dr. Williams two days before; I had conversed with him before about the case; some per¬ sons are more susceptible to particular medi¬ cines than to others: it would depend very much upon the condition of the patient’s health; we understand by 7 the vital powers only those peculiar properties by which they appropriate nourishment; gelseminum would not be described as a sedative in the same sense as opium; it is somewhat of an anesthetic; there are three main forces governing the sys¬ temic circulation of the blood—that of the left ventricle of the heart, the elasticity and the muscular contractility of the arteries; gelsemi-, num is not supposed to act on the centre, | the heart, but upon the minute arteries; it does not affect the flow from the heart, but merely the arteries where they empty in the capillaries; I have heard of deaths re¬ sulting from chloroform, but they are except¬ ional; chloroform is pre-eminently an anes¬ thetic, and in overdoses it acts powerfully upon the heart; chlorolorm deadens the acute¬ ness of the sensory nerves; I suppose there is such a thing as an overdose of gelseni- iuum; I know of two cases of death from gelseminum, but, the doses were over¬ large; one was reported by Professor Wormly, of Ohio, and the other by Dr. Davis, of West Virginia; there have been deaths from even table salt, and an overdose of almost anything will cause death; chloroform is the most pow¬ erful agent to control convulsions, and I think Dr. Williams was right to give it to General Ketchum when he did; 1 have never seen any sedative effect upon the heart by gelseminum; I have never prescribed it for congestion of the brain; I have never seen a post mortem of a person who had died from gelseminum: I remember, however, that Professer Wormly states in a case he reports that there were no decided lesions; I am certain that no convulsions were reported: I know of a case of death from chloral, 400 grains having been taken, and again in a casetM attempted suicide 600 grains were taken, aud after eighteen hours sleep the effects passed off; as a remedy chloral is in universal use; in my opinion the use of chloral is safe; the action of chloral is similar to the action of chloroform; it is decomposed in the blood and is considered a much safer remedy than chloroform; it is of course a daugerous remedy when the blood is surcharged with it; my opinion that General K.’s death was from un¬ natural causes was founded on the symptoms ] and the post mortem examination; I should have been puzzled to account for the cause of | death from the symptoms alone, and I would l not have given an opinion only on the symp¬ toms; I should have also declined to have given an opinion from the post mortem ob¬ servations alone; it is from the symptoms and! the post mortem observations that I am en¬ abled to arrive at an opinion; there are dis¬ eases in which there are no perceptible post mortem lesions; for example, persons some-; times die from a simple nervous shock: I have] never seen a post mortem of a person who had : died from cholera morbus; at the commence-] I ment there is a decided similarity between; the symptoms of cholera morbus aud irritauq poisoning. Mr. Steele here read from Taylor on Poison¬ ings, page 124. Dr. Donaldson continued—I stated yesterday that the initiation of the case indicated) cholera morbus, but the subsidence of the symptoms in the progress of the case changed my lirst impression; the deaths recorded from tartar emetic aro generally caused by thq tetanic convulsions. Mr. Steelo here read from 2d vol. Beck’s Medical Jurisprudence., page 647, as to tkd effect of tartar emetic iu distending the heart as in cholera morbus. Dr. Donaldson distinguished the twej cases in this instance from the symptoms: the condition of the heart was only one cle¬ ment; there may be a variance in the symp¬ toms of cholera morbus or tetanic poisoning] but we would have to collect the various THE WLIARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 57 features, and have some of the more promi¬ nent to enable us to recognize; there may be i deficiency in some of the prominent features iwing to the intensity of the attack and the constitution of the patient; in the case here •elated, taking it altogether—symptoms and lost mortem—the pathological lesions corres¬ ponded to those reported in cases of poisoning :rom tartar emetic; the symptoms of poison- ng from arsenic, as reported by the authori- ries, are somewhat different from those re¬ ported in this case; if arsenic had been ounu in Genera Ketclmm’s stomach I would have looked for different symptoms: mpposmg that arsenic had been found instead if tartar emetic I could not have formed the ipinion. that death had resulted from arsenical joisoning unless I had found the symptoms of inch poisoning; if laudanum had been found [ would not have concluded, in the absence of tne symptoms of opium poisoning, that death bad resulted from an overdose of laudanum; [stated yesterday that the hooks did not re¬ port a semi-eomat rse state from tartar emetic; there are cases reported of convulsions in cases of opium poisoning; cases have been re¬ corded where there was no vomiting or purg¬ ing from tartar emetic poisoning; the general symptoms are burning, cramps md convulsions, vomiting and purging; hn authorities state that very frequently ifter eases of tartar emetic poisoning there ire points of congestion in the stomach and iinall intestines: the authorities state also "hat the lesions are very variable; I don’t re netnber that the best authorities state that :lie lung's would be affected: if there was a 'refuse intestinal discharge I would suppose here would bo an unusual quantity of venous blood in the lungs; gelseminum has been recommended to relieve both passive and ac¬ tive congestion, hut 1 think it is principally :or passive congestion; tartar emetic depresses she heart; it weakens its force and increases ■ts frequency; as far as my experience goes relseminum has no direct effect upon he heart, but upon the arteries, i. long distance from the heart: t would do this without disturbing the action >f the heart; tartar emetic is readiiv absorbed, and readily eliminated, and after an interval >f twenty-four hours its effects might pass off'; f a man had been lying semi-comatose from he evening of one day to 2 P. M. the next lay, the circulation of the blood would go on, md I should say absorption would certainly coon; it might, be somewhat lessened; I should Pink absorption would be less influenced by i semi-comatose state than the other active unctions of the body, such as digestion; opium las the reputation of modifying the effects of i artar emetic, and I suppose laudanum would iso; I cannot say that laudanum would les- en the absorption of tartar emetic; when we described tartar emetic for pneumonia we vould g ve live drops of laudanum to each our Mi of a grain of tartar emetic; I think that ras the proportion, if I remember correctly; hat would be 600 drops of laudanum to 20 Tains of tartar emetic; if 400 drops of lauda- ititn had been taken it would have killed the iatient, unless lie had been an opium eater; if our large doses of tartar emetic had been given on four successive days, I could not say that the post mortem would show lesions de¬ cided enough for the formation of an opinion; senii-coroatose condition is not mentioned, as far as my knowl¬ edge goes, as one of the symptoms of tartar emetic poisoning; insensibility, but not coma, is mentioned; if tartar emetic and laudanum has been administered two hours before death I cannot say how soon convulsions would fol¬ low, hut, as I said yesterday, the absorption of tartar emetic is very rapid; I do not remem¬ ber having read of a case of opium poisoning in which thepnpil was not contracted; ordi¬ narily the effect of opium upon the third pair of nerves is such as to produce contrac¬ tion. Mr. Steele here read again from Beck’s Medical Jurisprudence, as to the contraction of one eye and the dilation of the other. The witness continued—I have sometimes ob¬ served a temporary dizziness, and a little drooping of the eyelid in cases of the admin¬ istration of gelseminum. To Mr. Hagner—Some of the facts I men¬ tioned yesterday, as to the circulation of the blood in the brain, have been known to the medical profession for a long time; Harvey knew of the presence of the valves, but he knew Dotliing of the capillary eiiculatiou; I hope medicine is a wonderfully progressive science. To Mr. Revell—A fatal dose of arsenic is va¬ riable: sometimes one grain is fatal. Dr. J. Harry Thompson was next called.and testified—I have resided in Washington nine years, and am Professor of Physiology in Georgetown College and Surgeon in Chief of the Woman’s Plospital, Washington, D. C.; I have been practicing 20 or 27 years; I have seen a case of poisoniug from tartar emetic; one fatal case I saw at St. Bartholomew’s Hospital, London, in 1847; the patient, a woman, had taken, as far as we could ascer¬ tain, 10 grains of tartar emetic: it was followed by vomiting, purging and a complaint of a burning sensation in the stomach, giddiness and excessive prostration; she recovered from that dose, and in a few hours appeared to be well enough to go home; she took another dose the same evening; there was but little vomiting or purging following the second dose; her pulse became rapid and feeble, skin cold and clammy, face of a dusky hue, and she died in violent tetanic spasms; no post mortem was made; Mr. Wakley was Coroner at the time, and a post mortem was deemed unnecessary; I can give no other case in which it was clear that a poisonous dose of tartar emetic had been taken; we feared that other poisons bad also been taken, and that the symptoms were masked; I cannot therefore give that case as one of tartar emetic poisoning; persons who brought tlie woman stated that she had taken it about half hour before; she was brought in a quarter past 6 P. M., and died quarter past 10 A. M- the next day; we knew of her taking in the two doses twenty grains; we learned that from the druggist; the time in which the alarming symptoms would appear would de¬ pend upon the size of the dose and the condi¬ tion of the patient; the symptoms would bo very much modified by the quantity given 58 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. and the way in which it was given; a very large dose, say twenty or thirty \ grains, administered at one time, would produce very different symptoms, and post mortem lesions from the same quantity given in several small doses; I have knowledge of the use of yellow jasmine; it is not an article of the materia medica I would select, but I would select it to give a soothing effect without any positive narcotic or seda- , tive effect; I think chloral one of the most valuable of recent discoveries; I use it fre¬ quently and fearlessly 7 , both in my public and private practice, not having regard to the quantity, but giving it until the desired effect is produced; I think that in cases of convul¬ sions it would be of all remedies the best that could be selected. Mr. Syester now read to the witness the same lengthy hypothetical statement, he had read on yesterday to Prof. Donaldson, and propounded to him the same interrogatory as to his opinion of the cause of death. The witness continued—A hypothetical case is always a difficult one upon which to give an opinion, but from the train of symptoms and post mortem examination given to me here, my decided opinion is that he did not die from natural causes; being ac¬ quainted with the lesions which attend most fatal diseases, and the, symptoms which accom¬ pany those diseases, I lind an entire absence of any data which would correspond to any di¬ sease with which I am acquainted; in my opinion the administration on Monday of the creosote and lime water was one which entire¬ ly met the indications of cholera morbus; I think it, was eminently proper to have admin¬ istered yellow jasmine, because it exercises a soothing influence more particularly upon the sympathetic or the ganglionic nervous sys tear which controls the capillary system- it would assist in restoring the capillary cir¬ culation to a normal condition; I apprehend that no educated medical man who has any acquaintance with his profession, and the use of chloroform, could possibly take aoy excep¬ tion to the administrations in this case; I have already given the symptoms of a patient suf¬ fering from an overdose of tartar emetic, and the jury can very well draw the proper infer¬ ences between the cases; the symptoms here related correspond very closely with those I would expect to follow repeated doses of tartar emetic; the effects of a dose of tartar emetic uncombined with any¬ thing else would naturally produce vomit¬ ing and purging, nature thereby elimi¬ nating it; I should think the administration of opium either before or after tlio adminis¬ tration of tartar emetic would have the effect of reducing the symptoms, so far as vomiting and purging are concerned, preventing its elimination from the blood, and hence produ¬ cing a more lasting and profound impression upon the nervous system; Ihe time of the absorption of the tartar emetic would depend upon the condition of the patient; I should expect it earlier in an empty stomach than in a full one; the effects of laudanum upon the system arc so well known, that I pre¬ sumo there is no difference of opinion; the time in which its effects would pass off would depend upon the condition of the patient, usually iu nine or ten hours; it is. however, sometimes retained for some time in the stomach: taking the whole case, symptoms and all, I should say decidedly that no symp¬ toms of laudanum poisoning are found; I should say that not more than twenty-four hours would elapse before death from ail over¬ dose of laudanum, but that would depend upon the condition of the patient; iu this case I should expect laudanum to he absorbed rapidly, and also produce its constitutional effects rapidly: I should expect the decided effect of this drug to be manifested in 1 his case in two hours; if a fatal dose of laudanum had beeu administered on Monday afternoon, it is not likely that the patient would be well enough to be sitting up on Tuesday morning. To*Mr. Hagner—lam forty-nine yeaisof age: iu 1847 I was 25; the case I spoke of was not reported: those cases are. so common that they are not reported; in oue case I ha ve seen arsenic was supposed to have masked the effects of the autimonial poison; I base my opinions expressed here upon the hypotheti¬ cal statement presented, taking the case ex¬ actly as it is presented to me; some of the symptoms would correspond with a number of diseases, hut, the post mortem lesions do not carry them out: every physician baa cer¬ tain drugs which he more generally uses in h s practice; death following a poisonous dose of opium would depend, as to time, upon the vital powers of the patient: I have seen cases of death in eight hours, and again a patient breathing at the expiration of twenrv-four hours: in one case which I saw in 1S52 the symptoms of tartar emetic had been masked by one ounce of laudanum; as far as we could gi t at the quantity of tartar emetic, it was ten grains; the ease was that, of a female; I think in that ease the opium got the better of rhe tartar emetir;‘llasori is still considered an au¬ thority by some ignorant, members of the pro¬ fession: Parcira is a high authority; I do not think that lemonade would have neutralized the effects of tartar emetic. To Mr. Steele—Medical science is progres¬ sive; we have no security that ail the theories now iu vogue will not be upset, in thirty vears. I Dr. P. C. Williams was now recalled, aud testified—I have exhumed the body of General Ketchnm since I last testified; on last Satnr-I day, at 8 P.M.. I received a letter from thej State’s officers, requesting Drs. Miles and Chew and myself to go to Washington, ex¬ hume the body of General Ketchnm, and bring hack such portions as we thought proper; I reached Washington at about half¬ past 10 P. M. Saturday and I then proceeded to the office of General Brice, and then to his house, as he was not at. his office; I failed t< obtain an entrauce, and the next morning, at lialf-past (5 o’clock. I met. Professors Miles andi Chew at the depot; we then dove to the resi-l denceof Gen. Brice, and obtained from him per¬ mission to exhume the body, and bring away such portions as we thought proper; iu onlei to save time we left Dr. Che" to look for arj analytical chemist, in whose hands we could place the portions of the remains: Profess,n Miles and myself drove to the cemetery, had THE WEARTOE-KETCHUM TRIAL. 59 the gra ve opened, and obtained the liver, one kidney and the spleen or pancreas, and about six inches of the upper end of the intestine; we put the kidney in one glass jar and the other portions in another; I washed the jar myself; I put the liver in the largerjar and the kidney and the other portions in the smaller ■jar; we then secured them, returned to Wash¬ ington. and retained them in our possession; I identified General Ketchum’s remains as fully as I could any individual, by his uniform and the incisions we had made in previous exami¬ nations; we met Dr. Chew at General Brice’s office, and ascertained, for reasons of public consideration, that we could not obtain the services of the chemist to whom we had ap¬ plied; we were then recommended t-o Mr. Tonry, of Baltimore; we returned to Balti¬ more, and alter considerable difficulty, suc¬ ceeded in finding Mr. Tonry; we communi¬ cated to him the material we had brought from General Ketelium’s grave, &c., and re¬ quested him to take charge of this material, to subject it to a careful analysis, and report the result to the State’s officers; I had a con¬ versation with Mrs. Wharton on the night, of the 4th of July in reference to tartar emetic ■having been found in General Jvelchurn’s re¬ mains. Mr. Steele hero objected to the conversation being given, and Mr. Revel] proceeded to state to the Court that the testimony of Dr. Wil¬ liams was now in connection with Gen. Wise’s testimony. When the, witness was previously on the stand the inquiries had been omitted inadvertently. Mr. Stedle said he did not understand that it had been omitted inadvertently. The witness continued—In order to explain fully that conversation it is proper to revert to the circumstances; I had been in cotnmuni- 3ation with Prof. Aikin, and when I had been informed that he had obtained definite results [ wrote a note to Mrs. Wharton, asking her to (call at my house at 9 o’clock that night, telling her I would give her my reason; I also requested Dr. Richard MeSberry to meet her; sire and Dr. VlcSiierry came promptly at 9 o’clock; I in¬ formed Mrs. Wharton that I had ascertained hat day that poison had been found in General L’s remains, in the milk punch, and that Mr. i7an Ness had been poisoned also; I did not lesignate the particular poison; I then told her my defy to communicate this fact toiler at.the earliest possible moment, that she and ler daughter might protect themselves igainst a similar accident, for, to he rank, I suspect one of your servants ,ohave administered the poison: Sirs. Whar- ,on then said that I must be mistaken as to he fact of having discovered poison, for it, vas impossible that he could have died from loison; I can’t give, however, her exact lan- ;uage; I replied that there could be no doubt bout the fact, as I had had the contents of [General K.’s stomach analysed and also the innch,ami the same poison was found in botb;I kepeatod that there could be no doubt as to the lOisou having been found, and that the only uestion in doubt was who administered it; hat, I said, will be the subject of future in¬ vestigation, hut in the meantime I desire both ou aud your daughter to be ou your guard; Mrs. Wharton then replied that she was satis¬ fied that her servants had had nothing to do with it; that, Susan, had lived with her five or six years, and she had the most implicit confi¬ dence in her, and added, "I know she could not have done it;” I replied that I would be ex¬ ceedingly glad that she could show that not only Susan had not done it, but that no one else in her house had done it, for it was perfectly clear that some one in that house had admin istered it; after some further conversation of no importace Mrs. Wharton and Dr. McSherry rose to leave;I passed around my library table iu order to be near the door to open it for her, and she said she had only one thing to say in reference to the subject, and that was that if anything was found in General Ketchum’s stomach it was the result of his own hand; that remark was repeated three times in very close succession; after thanking me for my great kindness to her and my very assiduous attention to General Ketchum, she left my house; I never at, any period of General Ketch¬ um’s sickness prescribed brown stront for him. Cross-examined by Mr. Steele—When I had the conversation with Mrs. Wharton the analysis had reached a stage at which it was certain that some kind of poison had been f uind; that was the first, time I ever told Mrs. Wharton that General Ketchum had died of poison; I did not mention this conversation when previously ou the stand, because I did not think it was my business to give in evi¬ dence what I was not a.sked about; I had men¬ tioned it to the. counsel for both the State and the defence; the body of General Ketchum was in very good state of preservation; the grave was dug open in my presence; the coffin was wooden, covered with black cloth; we found The liver where we had left it: one jar was fastened with a cork and the other with a piece of very thick brown paper tied over the top of it: I had no conversation with Mr. Knott before I received the letter from him requesting me to go to Washington: I I know, however, that some gentlemen had seen him on the subject: I asked Mr. Tonry particularly to look for tartar emetic; I washed the jars at the gra.ve; one had had perfumery in it, and the other, I think, had contained preserves; the larger one was furnished by the guardian of the cemetery, and the smaller one we took with us from Baltimore: we ex¬ humed the body on last Sunday morning and carried the jars to Mr. Tonry Sunday after¬ noon; we did not examine the larger intestines or the blood on either occasion; nothing had been done to preserve the body: we made no additional examination of the spinal cord. Win. P. Tonry was now called, and testified —I reside at No. 20 Mulberry street, and have been practically engaged as an analytical chemist since 1868 in the laboratory of the Surgeon General’s office in Washington; last Sunday evening, about 6 o'clock, I was called to my door, and was told that the gentlemen were Drs. Williams and Chew; they told me that the two jars contained the liver and kid¬ neys of General K.; I received a package done up iu brown paper, and was told the larger jar contained the liver, and the smaller the kidneys; 1 was told to examine only for antimony; also that it would be 60 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. necessary for rue to come to Annapolis Mon¬ day evening; I undertook tlie analysis; locked up what was given me in a trunk, the key of which I kept.; I took the package from the trunk on Monday, and carried it to my office in Maryland Institute, and by a string, and the use of sealing wax, secured it while I had to go out; I asked mv friend. Dr. Forster, to be present with me; 1 cut the string, went in; found two jars; the larger one had no cork, but was covered with brown paper, and was wrapped in cotton; the smaller one was corked, and wrapped also in cotton: I took out the contents of the larger jar; four pieces and a very small quantity of dirty fluid; what they were I don’t pretend to say: the small jar I found to con¬ tain, I think, four pieces; while opening that Dr. Chew came in; I put the contents of the smaller jar back again, put the cork in and put it aside; I also put the contents of the larger jar back again, except, what adhered to the plates; I then commenced preparations for the analysis; I tested some new sul¬ phuric acid which I had bought, some dis¬ tilled water and, I think, some other things; meantime.before commencing. Drs. Chew and Forster left the laboratory; I then took the contents of the larger jar on the late on which they had first been; then cut about half of each piece, cutting it as nearly as I could in the centre; I put half of each piece back again in the jar; cut then each piece remain¬ ing on the plate tolerably fine with a new shoemaker’s knife which I had bought lor the purpose; I then put them in a porcelain evapor ating dish which holds (here he referred to his pocket memoranda) about sixteen fluid ounces: the dish was new, and had been washed once, with hydrant, water and strong concentrated muriatic acid, and then with distilled water: I then dried it: I mixed about one fluid ounce of muriatic acid with four fluid ounces of distilled water: of that I poured two, perhaps three fluid ounces over’ the cut tip mass which was now in the evaporating dish; I then put the dish over a water bath, and ns soon as it com¬ menced to heat, added powdered chlorate of potash, and continued to add small quantities of the powdered chlorate of potash, and con tinned stirring for sometime: I think it con¬ tinued digesting about, two hours; it may have been more; I don’t think it was less; 1 then took a glass tunnel and put a piece*of filter paper and a piece of muslin inside; I then poured out into the filter all or very nearly all the liquid which was in the evaporating dish; I then took the solid part, tranferred the solid part to a Wedgewood ware mortar: this I mashed tip with the pestle.and then put it back in the evaporating dish, which I replaced on the water bath; added the balance of the five ounces of muriatic solution which I had made; I poured that over the stuff’, adding again small quantities of powdered chlorate of potash, and stirred as before; this digested about an hour, at least; I then found by a glass rod that all the tissue was thoroughly broken up; I then poured it, into the same filter which I bad used for the first part, and as soon as the liquid had drained through 1 washed the mass which hail remained in the filter in dis¬ tilled water; I washed it, of course, in the filter: we will noty take the solution; I took a glass evaporating dish and a porce¬ lain evaporating dish, and put both on the same water hath, each containing some of the solution, the object being to evaporate the so¬ lution to a convenient point and concentrate any metals present; I continued adding quan¬ tities from the filtrate to these dishes; then, while the filtrate was evaporating in the two dishes,I took the residuum from thocloth filter, collecting the four upper corners, and squeez¬ ing the, liquid from that into what, I had al¬ ready obtained; I then put the cloth, after squeezing, on a plate, spread it out,and spread the mass over the cloth, so that it would dry, my object beingto keep it; I put itasideto dry. Mr. Syester here stated that the analysis hud not been completed, and it was necessary that time should be allowed the witness to com¬ plete the analysis, some portions being un¬ completed; it was not proposed to stop the cross-examination, as a part of the analysis was complete enough now. The Chief Judge said the Court would see about, the recall of the witness when the time came. The Court here adjourned until 10 A. M. to-morrow. Professor Aikiu, ex-Mayor George William Brown, Win. Sheppard Bryan, Esq., and^Iaj. R. A. Venable were present to-day. On yes¬ terday Hon. Win. Pinkney Whyte, Governor elect of Maryland, was present for a short lime: also. WilliamF.McKewen, Esq .Clerk of the Criminal Court of Baltimore, and Jno. M. Travers, Esq., delegate elect from Baltimore city. Mrs. Wharton .appears more anxious and sits almost motionless. Her daughter appears, also to he careworn, and has been an eager listener to-day. SIXTIEEXTSI !>A¥. Annapolis, December 21,1871. | The introduction by the State of testimony in reference to the recent, exhumation of tliej body of the late General Ketchum, and the sub¬ sequent analysis of portions of his remains by Prof. Tonry, has given increased interest to Mrs. Wharton’s trial. It. is now anticipated rhm the trial will not eud for at least two weeks. Prof. Tonry was recalled upon the opening of the Court to-day, and testified —Leaving theresidunm to dry, we take now the solution which was a good quantify; the solution was placed in evaporating dishes and evaporated to about, three fluid ounces: it, was then filtered into a clean glass, and the filtering paper through which it had been filtered was thcr washed with distilled water, and the wosli ings collected till the whole amount, readier four fluid ounces; now this solution con tained nearly all the extracted matter I go from the sample taken; it did not contain all because during the filtration 1 took tw« small quantities out; the first I took out to pasi sulphuretted hydrogen through it. m.v ohjeol being to see what precipitate, if any, I would THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 61 xet with sulphuretted hydrogen; that would be a guide as to the quantity of the solution it would be necessary for me to take after¬ wards; the second quantity of solution 1 took me at the instance of Dr. Chew, who called m Tuesday afternoon; lie wished me to try a quantity of the solution with hydrogen to see if any dark spot could he ob¬ tained on porcelain—that is autimouiated hydrogen; I was told to examine only for mtiinony, consequently that was the only thiDg I intended to look for; I would have gotteu a combination of hydrogen and anti¬ mony, if any had been present, which would dve a spot on porcelain; I made some objection to taking away any part of the solution until I had completed the filtration, and 1 told him it could be done only very imper¬ fectly at that stage, yet as he desired it I took r small quantity out; this test, which was not ntended as aregulartest, but merely to satisfy Dr. Chew, I did not make with perfect care; oart of the small quantity which I had taken ;roin the filtered solution had to be thrown away; on trying the result ou porcelain the ipot, or apparent spot, seemed to be so insig- aiticant that I told him it was not worth while alaciug auy reliance on a test made in that way, and that the analysis would have to rake its regular course: having that filtered solution which was clear, but not colorless, ;ho solution which had passed through four liters (the witness here referred to his mem- [ iranda), I now took one-fourth of a fluid nince of it, the whole solution being four luid ounces; that was about oue-six- ieenth of the whole solution; I wanted to try that by one test; it s a fact that where arsenic or antimony are iresent their presence can bo detected by the ormatiou of a spot from arseniuretted or anti- noniated hydrogen; the test was made as fol¬ lows: into anew flask, which had been washed mt and perfectly clean, 1 put pure zinc with ome distilled water over it; I then put in ulphunc acid, which would evolve hydrogen roin tnis mixture; this flask was so arranged hat all the hydrogen which would be evolved could pass over into another flask and through listiiled water contained in it; that is called ‘washing;” this second flask I so fixed that all he hydrogen that would pass from it could pass through a tube containing klori.de of calcium, broken up in fine lumps, he object being to dry the hydrogen; after assing through this chloride of calcium tube lie hydrogen passesthrough a small tube which t drawn to a fine point about the size of a small in’s head, and which is open; the apparatus eiug put together and the sulphuric acid, inc and water being put in, hydrogen is enerated; the hydrogen, which is generated, assed into the second flask, through the hloride of calcium tube, and out through the mall tube; after it has continued mg enough to fill the apparatus and get rid f the common air, so thatnothing but liydro- en would pass from the delivery tube, the ' ydrogen passiugfrom the last tube is lighted; i is necessary to let all the air pass away to | prevent an explosion; so the test that nothing i ut hydrogen is passiug over is that there is 3 explosion; all the apparatus I used was new, except tl*% piece of rubber joining the two vessels and the chloride of calcium tube;’ all were first washed with strong muriatic acid, and then with distilled water, so that no impurity could have been left; fixing the apparatus as I have described, I let it work for about fifteen minutes, taking in the meantime the cover of a porcelain cru¬ cible, washed that also with strong chemi¬ cally pure muriatic acid and water, and after about fifteen minutes that the flask had been working, I lit the gas at the end of it; it gave a small flame, and after it had burned for some time I put the lid of the porcelain cruci¬ ble in the flame and let it strike on the lid; I did this five or six times, and got no spot; that proved that the zinc, water and acid I had used contained no arsenic or antimony; I then took about one-sixteenth oftheoriginalsolution and poured thatinto the first flask, while the hydrogen gas was being evolved; after trying tho porcelain lid, I moistened it and rubbed it with a cloth and saw that no trace of a spot was left; putting this same cover in the hydrogen flame after adding the solution, in a very short time I got a decided stain, and 1 put it several times in the flame, collecting the stain each time on different parts of the cover: there are only two bodies or substances that are known which will give a spot under similar circumstances: I use the word spot or stain as j equivalent; the two bodies which gives this spot are arsenic and antimony, consequently one or the other was present in the solution which I had added; these spots I did not touch, hut left them on the cover as received; I then took a small paper box, put in the bottom a piece of filtering paper,put the porcelain lid on with the spots downward, put on the top of the box and sealed it with my private seal; that took me until last Tuesday; beyond this point I am not willing to go until I have completed the analysis; science can de¬ termine whether the spots are antimonial or arsenical, but I prefer to determine more from the solution itself; the solution, from which 1 took one-sixteenth, contained what¬ ever was extracted from the contents of the larger jar, to which I added muriatic acid, water and chlorate of potash; none of these bodies or their constituents would have given these spots; when I say that, I don’t mean to say that I have tried myself everything in the known world to prove it: but it is the usually received fact,and I do not think anybody will controvert it; when I first tried the apparatus adding this suspected solution, and received no spot, then I added the solution and re¬ ceived the spot; Mr. Davidson, one of the pu¬ pils of the Maryland Institute school, was present at that time; I much preferred to have it done in the presence of some one. Prof. Toury here exhibited the porcelain lid, and said: “Here, gentlemen, are the spots; tho lid has not been taken from the sealed box I have here since it was closed in the presence of Mr. Davidson.” Tho Professor : then showed the lid and the spots to I the respective counsel, the Court, the I chemical experts for thedefenee, and tliejnry, by whom they were carefully examined. The porcelain lid was about two inches in diam- 62 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. eter.and the snots were thirteen in number and about the size of a pin’s head. While the lid was beiug shown, the most marked silence reigned throughout the Court room. Mrs. Wharton appeared calm, but those around her looked anxious All the, chemical aud medical experts for the defence 1 were present, aud have been very attentive since the introduction of the testimony of Dr. Williams and Professor Tonry. His Excel -1 leucy, Governor Bowie aud Hon. R. C. Holly- day, Secretary of State, were present during the examination of Professor Tonry. After exhibiting the lid. Professor Tonry carefully replaced it in the small round paper box from which he had taken it. Prof. Tonry then continued—There are J tests known to science by which the presence ' of arsenic or autimony in these spots can be determined, but from experiments I made while engaged as chemist at the Baltimore ; Copper Company’s works I prefer other tests; this box has been almost constantly in my possession, and whenever I had to leave my room 1 sealed the door by means of wax and a string; there is another door to the room, which is bolted ou the inside; I have formed no idea of the quantity present, but I believe I could have gotten a dozen more spots; the test 1 used is generally considered a delicate test. Mr. Steele—You mean to detect a very small quantity ? Prof. Tonry—Yes, sir. To the Court—1 believe the test is called Marsh’s; I know it is so called when applied for arsenic, aud I presume the same for anti¬ mony. To Mr. Syester—The contents of the second j jar I have not touched, and I will require two days more, at least, to finish my yet in¬ complete analysis of the first portion. To the Court—If I get a precipitate with sulphuretted hydrogen from an acidsolutiou of the suspected matter, and that precipitate is soluble in strong muriatic acid, and from that solution of m riatic acid a white pre¬ cipitate is thrown down by water, aud that precipitate produced by tbe water is colored orange by sulphide of ammonium, I would cousider that unmistakable proof of the presence of antimony without the formation of the metal; if the quantity will allow me, I will try those tests, and try to get the an¬ timony also, hut it will depend upon the quantity I obtain. Mr. Syester here stated that this was as far as the State could go at present, with this witness, and that he would ask that the. St te be allowed to recall him, if his analysis was completed in a reasonable time. Mr Steele said it was an “unpreceden" d application,” and he. knew of no parallel o such an offer. It, was avowed that the anal - sis was incomplete, and no one ever heard f such a proposition in a court of justice as w is here made. The indictment was found five months ago. and three weeks had been occu¬ pied in tbe trial, and it was now claimed by the State, ofiicers that they should bo allowed more time in which to collect additional evi¬ dence. Mr Revel 1 said the counsel for the defence were hero to secure even-handed justice be¬ tween the State of Maryland and the pris¬ oner at the bar. After seeing the array of medical aud chemical witnesses for the de¬ fence, the State’s officers had determined to give the fullest examination into the case and to make a further analysis of the remains of General Ketchnm. The State’s officers had felt hound to do what they had done, and he knew of nopreetdent for stopping the inves¬ tigation at this stage.' The State conld not say what would be the result of the analysis to be completed, and all that the State’s offi¬ cers asked, in the name of justice to the State of Maryland, and to the prisoner, was that the fullest investigation l>e had. Mr. Syester said the defence had arrayed three eminent experts, whose business it had been to sit and take notes for the avowed pur¬ pose of overthrowing the State’s testimony, by giving their opinions and not by making experiments. He could not see that public justice, or the accused, would suffer by a com¬ plete analysis. He did not understand this to be. a trial of wits, and it was of interest to all the people of Maryland to know how lives may be taken in secret. The analysis might result favorably to ber wbo sat now with the paleness of death upon her face and the anguish of death at her heart, and if so, he would join heartily with his brothers in giv- her its full benefit. Mr. Steele said the offer was unprece¬ dented, and that the prosecutors, in their zeal, had tone too far. He thought the zeal of the Attorney General had led him further than his own better judgment would approve. The prosecution had no right to know what the defence proposed to show by exDerts, or that they would be called at all. As lie understood the principles of law even in civil suits, no man could he hemfitei by his own wrong. Would the learner prosecution for a moment consent that the de fence should delay the Court aud send foi witnesses? He was cjrtain they would not The Courts lay it down that the State nuts exhaust their testimony, and could be allowei only to rebut. Tbe object was to give tin witness time to refer to books aud make ex perimeut.s, and come back here to give testi mouy after tbe defence bad closed their case It was his right and duty to speak plainly auc to repel the remark of the prosecution tha they felt sympathy for his client. The quest ioi was one of great importance, and it could no be told when or where such examination! would end; if such a rule was adopted it woun be to change an English common law coutj into one of the inquisitorial courts of Cout: nental Europe. . . The Court was occupied some time in da liberating with deep earnestness, and th i Chief Judge announced the opinion and dec J siou of the Court substantially as follows: A the Court understands the case, the wi ness has been examined up to a to 1 tain point, and he is now making an analys | of portions of General K.’s remains, which li I can complete in two days. The question bj fore the Court is whether or not the scientin I investigation shall go ou. The case is al j extraordinary one. a jd the indictment chargq I a most heinous crime. A chemist who hr THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 63 analysed a portion of the body of Gen¬ eral K. had been examined, and an¬ other analysis has been diligently pur¬ sued since the second exhumation of General K.’s body. The witness had sworn that he has discovered the presence of poison, and that a delay of a day or two will enable him to determine fully whether it is anti¬ mony or arsenic. The Court considers it to be its duty to allow that time. The State may go on, and, if necessary, the Court will take an adjournment to let the witness come back and testd'y to what he discovers. If a similar case was presented by the defence the Court would allow them time to make experi¬ ments. If, in a civil suit, it was necessary for a witness to send for a paper to establish his title to property, the Court thinks it, would ■ be monstrous not to allow him reasonable time j in which to obtain it. The Court then gave j the State’s officers notice that if they did not recall the witness for further examination they must have him in Court for cross- examination by the defence. Mr. Syester said he would be present. Dr. Benjamin F.Craig now testified—I reside j in Washington, and am an analytical chemist by occupation; I have been fifteen years so engaged;previonsly I was a practitioner of med icine for live years, and was also a professor of chemistry for three years; I have resided nearly twenty years in Washington, and 1 am now in charge of the labora¬ tory of the Surgeon General’s office, I and employed to make investigations and to attend to other duties of a scientific character. The witness was here shown the report of Professor Aikin to Mr. Knott, and was occupied some time in carefully perusing t. He theu continued—The tests used by Pro jt’essor Aikiu were the usual tests to discover ;lie presence of antimony, and were in my . ipiuion sufficient; the obtaining of the red j color with sulphuretted hydrogen, under the iircuinstances, and the obtaining of a white i rrecipitate by the action of water on the acid iolutiou of that red precipitate, are sufficient | ,o make, the presence of antimony certai n; all ether substances known to science, except au- imony, would have given a different color; .here is no substance known to science which vould, under the tests here described, have ;iven the result here described. Mr. Steele said the defence had no questions o ask the witness, and he was accordingly at his point allowed to leave the stand. ' Mr. Reyell stated to the Court now that the l Itate had three more witnesses to examine, [ ml he was informed That they would reach mnapolis by the half-past 1 o’clock train, and i e would, therefore, ask the Court to wait for hem. The Chief Judge said that as it was already fter 1 o’clock the Court would grant the jequest. After a delay of twenty or thirty liuutes Professor Richard McSherry came ato court, and, being sworn, testified s follows: I reside in Baltimore, and ave practiced medicine there about twenty ears: I never prescribed tartar emetic for lrs. Wharton; I was for six or seven years er family physician; I was present with Mrs. Wharton at Dr. Williams’ office on the 4th of last July; Dr. Williams was under the impres¬ sion that, some domestic of Mrs- Wharton had been using poison in her house: his idea was, I think, to try to inform Mrs Wharton that there was clanger in her house, and that one of her domestics was using poison; he wished Mrs. Wharton to beware of the supposed facts, alleging that parties in her house had been given poison: be sug¬ gested one of her servants, and Mrs. Wharton said she had perfect confidence in that ser rant and no apprehension in that quarter; I don’t remember anything else material that occurred except that Dr. Williams designed to put her on her guard; I don’t remember that it was stated how the poison had been found; I don’t remember that any explanation was offered as to the finding of the poison; I have a vague recollection of Mrs. Wharton’s saying that the probability was that General K. had taken himself some injurious agent; there was notking definite or conclusive in that conversation which I can now remember; I remember as one of the incidents of the in¬ terview that an empty vial wms produced by Dr. Williams, and some suggestion made as to the probability of General K.’s having taking opium or laudanum; I can’t remember who made the suggestion, but I remember that tlMre was some conversation about it; I re¬ member hearing Mrs. Wharton say that Gen¬ eral K. was in the habit, of drugging himself, but as I bad various interviews with her, I am not prepared To say she said soon that night. To Mr. Steele—I wasnot in Baltimore at, the time of General K.’s sickness at Mrs. Whar¬ ton’s residence. Mr. Revell now stated that Dr William T. Howard. George M. Gill. Henry E. Johnson and Professor P. B. Wilson were the remain¬ ing witnesses, except Prof. Tonry, on the part of the State, but none of them were now pres ent. The Court theu adjourned until 10 A. M. to¬ morrow. SEVENTEENTH DAT. Annapolis, December 22,1S71. The seventeenth day of the great Wharton- Ketchum trial opened gloomily, a heavy snow storm prevailing at the hour the Court was called to 1 order, and the surroundings of the Court House were in keeping with tfie dreari¬ ness within. But few spectators were present and most of them gathered near a stove in a corner of the room. The jury was marched in at the usual hour, and looked weatherbeaten, restless and dis¬ satisfied. Mrs. Wharton’s carriage was promptly in front of'the Court, House, and she was accompanied to-day, upon her ar¬ rival, only by her daughter. She entered the court-room leaning on the arm of Sheriff Chairs, her arrival attracting but little atten¬ tion, as she is constantly veiled, and the at¬ tendants upon the trial have become accus¬ tomed to her presence. In a few minutes Mrs. Wharton and her daughter were joined by Mrs. Nugent, Mrs. 64 THE WHARTON-KETCHUH TRIAL. Neilson, Mi88 Rosa Neilson, Mr. H. Moon Wharton, of Philadelphia, and Hermann Stump, Esq , of Harford county. Mrs. Wharton for the first time since the commence¬ ment of her trial betrayed to-day considerable agitation. Her manner is not now so calm as was strikingly observable for the first two weeks following her arraignment, and she converses more frequently with her counsel and the friends around her. The heavy veil which drapes her countenance effectually pre¬ vents a close observation of her expression [ even by those who sit near her, and her seat j is at such a distance from the jury that they cannot more than distinguish the outlim- of her most prominent, features. Her faithful daughter is ever at her side, and seems to ap¬ preciate fully the position her mother occu¬ pies, and the troubles which surround her. The feelings of this entire community towards Miss Wharton are those of earnest sympathy with her in the afflictions and the present great sorrow which have clouded so sadly the morning of her life. No accusing word can be whis¬ pered agaiDsf her. and whatever disposition there may bo with some to prejudge her mother, finds a proper rebuke in the love and devotion of an only child. Her con¬ duct from the hour she heard the first word of accusation against her mother has been such as to challenge the admiration of the most fault-finding, and to commend her to the heartiest sympaths. Those who Ijnewqier in happier days remark the change which has passed so swiftly over her, and look in vain now for the charming vivacity of manner and conversation which made her a universal favorite. Her features show that the past six months have been to her full of anxiety and care, and though she bears herself with remarkable fortitude, yet , it is evidently a hard aDd breaking struggle. Upon the opening of the Court to-day Mr. | Revell stated that, contrary to his expecta- j tions, no witnesses for the State were present. He had learned by telegraph from Deputy Sheriff Grafflin, of Baltimore, that Dr. How¬ ard was still too sick to attend, aud that Mr. E Livezy, of Baltimore, was absent from that city. , , . The Deputy Sheriff had informed him also that he had used every exertion to secure the attendance ot the remaiuig witnesses for the. State, and had in his zeal roused Prof. Wilson from his bed at 1 o’clock this morn¬ ing, and that Professor Wilson, Henry John¬ ston, Esq., and Geo. M. Gill. Esq., would leave Baltin ora with him at 10 o’clock. Mr. Revell t urtler sr.ated that he could not now ask the Court io delav more than a reasonable time for the arrival of the State’s witnesses. The Chief Judge inquired if the State’s offi¬ cers proposed to close tlieir case at this point, with the exception of the privilege granted on yesterday of recalling Prof. Tonry. Sir. K veil said the State’s officers could not, under t he circumstances, ask a further delay, but t hat lie felt certain that the witnesses spoken of would arrive by the next train. In answer to the inquiry of the Chief Judge,Mr. Steele stated that the defence would not go on with the examination of their wit¬ nesses until the examination of Prof. Tonry was concluded. Mr. Steele then said that he would propose to the State’s officers to call the two servants of Mrs. Wharton, Susan Jacobs and Ellen Ded- driek. who had been summoned by them and had been present from tlie beginning of the trial. He did not ask that they be accredited as State’s witnesses, but he, thought it was only just that the State should call them and not compel the defence to call them. Mr. Revell said he was unwilling to call them, nut be was willing that they should testify it accredited to neither side. The Attorney General said he would con¬ sent that, the witnesses spoken of should lie called by the Court, but the State did not think proper to accredit them to the jury as its witnesses. The Attorney General then added: “At the sa,. e rime the State will, in this case, consent that if the defence see proper to call the two witnesses named, it may not be so far bound by their answers as to lie concluded. We do this because they are, in some respects, wit¬ nesses to the transaction, and there is, in cases like this, some propriety in calling all witnesses to the transaction. It is, however, for the defence to assume the responsibility of the position in which it will place the wit¬ nesses themselves, they being, under such cir¬ cumstances, wholly without protection.” The Court then stated that it would not wait further upou the State, itnd ordered the State’s officers to close their case, with the ex¬ ception of the examination of Prof. Tonry. Some desultory discussion next ensued be¬ tween counsel in reference to the calling of the two negro witnesses who have sat patiently in a corner of the Court room since the first day of the trial, and the subject was finally dismissed before the Court, with the understanding that, an arrangement of the matter would be made by counsel before the conclusion of Professor Tonry’s examination. The - Chief judge then ordered that the Court, stand adjourned until half-past 1 o’clock on Tuesday next. At this announce¬ ment the jury seemed much disconcerted, and, one of them was overheard by the correspnn-l dent of the Gazette to express his decided disn approbation in language more energetic than elegant. It is evident that the jury are very restive aud have become greatly dissatisfied since finding themselves hound to the State) for a much louger time than any of them, anticipated. Some of them took their seats with evident) satisfaction, doubtless anticipating a trial on not more than three weeks, with much oil dramatic interest. In both they have been, thus far, much disappointed, anti the tedinuir of the trial has, doubtless, proven as tiresome) to them an to the prisoner. They are keptl under the strictest, guard, atm, apart frtuji comfortable quarters and good fare, at, the City Hotel, there is nothing to make t-hoii situation pleasant. They are not allowed te read the papers, or to receive any communica¬ tions, even from their families. The Sheriff and his deputies are alone allowed to address them a. word, and they are forbid¬ den also Christmas luxuries,from their homes] THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 65 [n a case of so much importance, it is of course only proper tbattliejury should he kept iibove suspicion. Dr. Davidson and Mr. Seilman seem to take their con¬ finement and restraint with commendable resignation and generally appear in good spirits andlready to make a joking remark to their discontented companions. The Chief Judge each day charges the Sheriff nor, to take the jury from the court room until the audi¬ ence has retired, and to-day earnestly re¬ peated the order, adding the injunction’that the jury was to be cared for properly during the approaching holiday, hut that they were not to be allowed to make themselves sick. Soon after the adjournment of the court Mrs. Wharton and her daughter returned ander the escort of Sheriff Chairs to their prison homo. Mrs. Neilson, Mrs. Nugent and Miss Rosa Neilson will remain with them luring the adjournment, ana Mrs. Wharton’s :'riends in Annapolis will doubtless remember 'ho loneliness and unhappiness of her cheer¬ less quarters. Professor Wilson and Messrs. Johnston, Gill i.nd Livezy arrived by the half-past 1 o’clock r,rain, but found that the order of the Court lad rendered their attendance unnecessary. It is understood that their testimony wouhl lave proved of no material importance. Dr. P. C. Williams was the only medical gentleman present in the court room to-day, ill the medical and cliemical witnesses for the Hate and defence, with the exception of Prof. JcCullough, having left Annapolis for their lomes. The experts confess that they have grown vearied with the trial, hut they will no doubt >e present at the proper time. On Tuesday the State will recall Professor kmry, and the defence will doubtless subject im to a rigid cross-examination. EKSK'S'EEUWM 0A¥. Anxapolis, December 3d, 1871. The attendance to-day upon the great Yharton-Ketchuin trial was as large as on le opening day, many doubtless availing lemselves of the leisure of a Christmas olid ay. i The Court was called to order promptly at Jjalf-past 1 o’clock to-day, pursuant to ad- nirnment, a full bench being’present. Prof. Wm. P. Tonry, at the request of the fate’s Attorney, resumed the witness stand, hd testified as follows—Taking the dark lots on porcelain, my object was to determine liether they were arsenic or antimony; I have Terence now to the lid I exhibited; king one of the larger spots, and perhaps vo of them, I tried their solubility in sul- nde of ammonium, and the greater part of tie spots dissolved readily; the ready solnbil- Jy of the larger portion wouhl denote, so far, itimouy, hut the more difficult solubility of e remaining speck or part of the st>ot would .mote arsenic; applying a very slight heat the lution was evaporated !o dryness, giving on e outer edge of the evaporated spot the unistakable color of antimony; the centre of the spot was of alight yellow color, part of it inclining to white; this would indicate sulphur, which was very probably evaporated dry from the sulphide' of ammonium or arsenic, one or both: adding now to this spot a drop or two of strong muriatic acid, and then perhaps a drop or two of distilled water, I took an apparatus evolving sulphuretted hydrogen, and squeezed the delivery tube so as to let the stream of sulphuretted hydrogen impinge on the spot or the solution of the spot; doing this till the solution of the snot was dry,the centre and greater part of the then resulting solid, gave the antimony color; now viewing the spot with the microscope, I found around the edges of the spot the canary yel¬ low color of arsenic in exceedingly small quantities, too small to he readily detected by the naked eye; thus the spot is composed prin¬ cipally of antimony, with a very probable trace of arsenic; some of the spots I retained ou the cover; that result satisfied me as to the nature of the deposit; with one or two other of the spots I tried nitric acid to see if I wouhl get the white oxide of antimony, but as I got no satisfac¬ tory result, I did not try any farther experi¬ ments on the spots; the cover and spot as I obtained it I retained. Mr. Steele—-“You mean the original porcelain cover?” Yes,sir,replied Prof. Tonry. He then continued—I then took another part of the solntiou. To Mr. Steele— “My notes were taken almost always while the experiment was going on; I have no objection to your seeing them.” Prof. Tonry continued—I took part of the solution to see if I could obtain metallic anti in ony; preci pi tati n g first wi th sulphur etted hydrogen I got a precipitate of sulphide; washing this in distilled water, I transferred it with the filter to a porcelain evaporating dish; I got the precipitate and washed it, and 1 wanted to see if it was soluble in potash; so I added a strong solution of potash and filtered in an evaporating dish what was dissolved; the precipitate of antimony by sulphuretted hydrogen would he soluble in potash; applying heat to this, I added tar¬ taric acid; that would give tartrate of anti¬ mony and potash, or leave the antimony in about the condition of tartar emetic; dissolv¬ ing this, and precipitating again with sul¬ phuretted hjdrogen, I took this precipitate, mixed with carbonate of soda and cyonide of potassium, put it on a piece of clean charcoal, that is to say, charcoal which had not been used' before in a. blow-pipe; by using the blow-pipe arid a spirit lamp, 1 fused the mass; by the. naked eye 1 could detect no metallic spots, but putting it under the microscope three or four spots appeared which looked as if they might be metal; the re¬ flection of light on some parts of the charcoal and on some parts of t he flux used would, under the microscope, give a bright appear¬ ance; but these Spots seemed different from either of these two causes; I put that test aside as of no particular value, on account of the exceedingly minute results, if any, ob¬ tained; I now took a very small portion of metallic antimony, tried it with the same flusx and, readily obtained a metallic bead; taking now a very small quan- 66 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. tity of tartar emetic, which I had bought, I wished to S'.e if that would,with the same flux, give a bead; I tried it with the same flux and obtained the metal; taking now a quantity of sulphide of antimony, prepared from tartar emetic bought at a drug store, and iu quan¬ tity about the same, or perhaps a little more than the precipitate obtained from the sus¬ pected solution which I had tried, I did not obtain a visible globule of metal from that; that led me to infer that the quan¬ tity of material I had taken for this experi¬ ment. was too small to operate upon for the production of metallic antimony; now taking another part of the original solution. I treated it with chlorate of potash, to see if I could get rid of the color of the solution, and I ob¬ tained a rather light-colored solution, much lighter than the solution was originally: I pre cipitated this with washed sulphuretted hy¬ drogen, lettiug the gas pass siowly through for an hour or more, and letting the precipitate stand from Wednesday evening until Friday morning; I then decanted ofl the greater part of the liquid, which was over the precipitate; I washed it with distilled water and dissolved it iu strong muriatic acid; I mean I washed the precipitate always; I then transferred it to a porcelain evaporating dish and evaporated it to dryness; part of the precipitate, or rather part of the evaporated solution, contained either- organic matter or some coloring principle—it was a deposit, anyhow; it appeared to be other than a salt: dissolving all this evaporated residue with strong muriatic acid, and diluting with water, and passing sulphuretted hydro¬ gen through it, I obtained a precipitate of sulphide of antimony, or what appeared to he so from the color; it was not the bright, color of tartar emetic which you would get from the pure salt, hut it seemed to be modified by some coloring principle which 1 could not get rid of; the color was mod¬ ified only slightly, and not enough to cause any doubt in inv mind that it was antimony which had given the precipitate; all the colors produced by sulphuretted hydro¬ gen from metals are modified by circum¬ stances, and the color obtained in this precipitate was more like what I would ob¬ tain from pure tartar egietic than any I had obtained solar; this precipitate was shown to Prof. Wilson, who did not hesitate—(Here Mr. Steele quickly interrupted, and Mr. Revell told the witness that the statements of another were inadmissible.) He continued — After pouring oft' the liquid from- this precipitate and drying it; I weighed it in a glass beaker, deducting the weight of the beaker glass from the weight obtained by the beaker with the precipitate ill it; the weight of the precipitate, from the quantity taken, was 25 lOOthsof a milligramme;the quan¬ tity of the solution I had taken was about 1-I6th of the whole; that would give four milli¬ grammes of the sulpliideof antimony, which would have been the quantity I would have obtained from the whole solution; that would have been about t>-10fhs of a grain; this (5-lOtlis would have been of the sul¬ phide of antimony, which would have been equal to 3. perhaps, 4-lOths of a grain of me¬ tallic antimony; as I took a little more than half of the contents of the larger jarflf whatre- ! mains in the jar contained the same quantity, the total amount of antimony would have ] been in round numbers from one-half to three- quarters of a grain; any coloring matter re- j teaming in the solution in which the pre¬ cipitate was formed might he expected to in¬ crease the weight slightly; it might or might not increase it; taking everything into con¬ sideration, I may he safe to say that about one-half of a grain of metallic antimony may he considered present; I say may be con¬ sidered, because what remains in the jar mav contain more or less of antimony, than what I took out; to this precipitate which I had weighed iu the beaker, I added a drop oi two of strong uitrib acid; it was thei; in the beaker: after stirring round the nitric- acid with a glass rod, some little time, I obtained as a result a white insoluble residue; that is, insoluble in nitric acid; tin would havegiven thesame result: I knowof m other metals than tin or antimony which would have given that resuit: arsenic would not; this white insoluble residue is.soluble ii tartartic acid, if antimony: it is notsoluble ifi; is tin; filtering off this white deposit, and col lecting it on filtering paper first before disolv ing, I evaporated todryuessto see if the nitric acid would dissolve it, and the white precipi ■ tate remained; while it was evaporating t( dryness iu the beaker I prepared a solution o tartaric acid in water, and added it to the! white deposit, which it dissolved without much difficulty: now I got a solution of thi white solution iu tartaric acid and passed rlia solution through filtering paper into a cleai vessel, takiug the precaution of not washing the filtering paper lest the water might dis solve something else ; to prove that thi was dissolved and that there could bo no wisi taking it for antimony, I added a few drop of hydrochloric acid to the filtered solution passed sulphuretted hydrogen through the so Intionand got the precipitate of snlphfde o autimouy: this finished my examination of th contents of the larger jar; having obtained th dark spots on porcelain and its subsequent re actions, the obtaining a precipitate by su$ phuretted hydrogen from the acidified orig nal solution, and the color of that precipitate the white precipitate obtained bystrongnitri acid, its solution iu tartaric acid and sttbst quent precipitation by sulphuretted hydroge and the solubility of the sulphide precipitate by sulphuretted hydrogen in cau.-tic potasl leaves no doubt in my miml of the presenc of antimony; that completed my examinatiii of the contents of the larger jar; I now pr< i ceeded to take the contents of the smaller ja which was said to contain the kidneys, etc I treated them in about the same manner had treated the part of the contents of tl larger jar; I only noticed in that analysis thi the solution obtained was of a vet light color after t e first filtratio whereas in the first analysis it was mill darker: in this second analysis, while eyapo ating the solution down to concentrate it tl color remained light till towards the en I when it became much darker; ibis fact wou have little if any bearing on the presence < 1 absence of antimony; it might occur withot TEE WEARTON-KETCEUM TRIAL. 67 antimony; the whole quantity obtained was evaporated down quite low, and to set a defi¬ nite volume of liquid I added distilled water till it reached fifty cubic eentrimetres, which would be between an ounce and a-half and two ounces; about an ounce and a-half; I use the French measures: I took one-tenth of this solution to see if I could obtain spots on por¬ celain; trying- by the same methods, I obtained very light spots, that is small spots; [ mean light as regards weight; these spots seemed not readily volatile by beat and readily soluble in sulphide of ammonium; from the looks of these spots, as far as looks go, I would say they were antimony; there is no doubt of their being antimony or arsenic. Mr.Revell—Did you preserve those spots? Witness—Yes sir, and I s have them here. Professor Tonry then continued—While ibtaining these spots I put a spirit lamp inder the delivery tube; that gave nie iring near the heated part of the tube and nside; that also would indicate antimony or irsenic; then passed the hydrogen as it :amefrom the generating glass, through a so ution of nitrate of silver; then I obtained what appeared last night a dark coloration, which tins morning, on being looked at, kadbe- iome a precipitate, a rather dark precipitate; fom the looks last night by gas light, after he addition of the hydrogen gas, very small 'articles seemed to be floating around; there 3 no mistake this morning about the preeipi- ate; setting this aside I next took tkree- Jths of the original solution, and passed hrough it sulphuretted hydrogen gas, and btained a black or what appeared last night o be a, black precipitate; this black recipitate would not necessarily indicate ntimony, hut antimony being a lighter color light be present with the black precipitate; his black precipitate was washed with dis- llecbwater, and then strong muriatic acid ras added to it, and the resulting solution ltered; the filter was washed, and all the so- ltion which had passed through the filtering aper retained; any antimony present would ave been dissolved by the strong mu- atic acid, and would have passed irough the filtering paper, and would ■a,: of course, in the resulting solu- on; now, passing sulphuretted hydrogen irough this resulting solution, I ob- tined the unmistakable color of antimony, ore so when the precipitate first formed than :terwards; these results induce me to say lat antimony was present in the contents of le second jar; that completed the examina- on I made of th® material brought me, and le silver solution and the ring inside of the she I have not had time to test. The witness here opened a sealed box, took om it a porcelain lid, showed it to the jury, e chemical experts, the respective counsel id the Court. Five spots, of a dark color, I - ; are present. He then continued—When I opened the first c ou one of the pieces there appeared the nn- istakable color of an antimony precipitate • sulphuretted hydrogen; that was as soon I took it from the jar; also a slight canary llow arsenic color; that is under the same ' 5 process; I also looked at one of the pieces of the sample; it struck me that the sulphuretted hydrogen— Mr Steele said any mere guess of the witness would not be evidence. The witness continued—The decom¬ position of the body seemed to have caused any antimony present to have been precipitated; I asked one of the gentlemen to come to the laboratory when I opened the samples; after waiting sometime I requested my friend, Dr. Forster, to be present. <► At this point, the witness having not yet concluded, the Court adjourned to 10 A. M. to¬ morrow. KmETBESTH S>AY. Annapolis, December 27,1871. The large attendance yesterday upon the Wharton-Ketchum trial showed that the interest of the public is still eager and earnest, and though the proceed¬ ings partook of the tedium of the de¬ tails of chemical investigations, the atten¬ tion of the spectators seemed as patient as when the incidents of General Ketckuin’s last sickness were being narrated. An unusually large number of ladies were present, and among them several well known representa¬ tives of t.tie upper circles of Baltimore society Colonel Harwood, the courteous and attentive clerk of the court, has assigned to the ladies nearly one-half of the space allotted to spec¬ tators, and with gallant forethought has pro¬ vided for their special accommodation ele¬ vated seats, from which they can observe all that passes and hear everything that counsel, court and witnesses say. The gentle sex seem duly appreciative, and from the beginning of the great trial, have exhibi¬ ted the most patient interest. A great desire was felt on yesterday to learn the result of Prof. Tonry’s complete analysis, and during the delivery of his testimony marked silence reigned throughout the court room. The five dark spots on the porcelain, lid exhibited by him were observed by those to whom they were shown with the same anxious scrutiny _ which the previous thirteen spots had attract- ' ed, and the experts for the defence were all attention while Prof. Tonry was on the stand. Prof. Tonry’s manner was modest but self- possessed, and he gave his testimony in a quiet, unassuming way, which divested it in great part, of any objectionable, sensational interest. Mrs. Wharton exhibited again on yesterday the remarkable composure which distin¬ guished lier manner previous to the re-call of Dr. Williams, and the introduction of Prof. Tonry’s testimony, and with the exception of a few words exchanged with her daughter and Mrs. Neilson, there was nothing to indi¬ cate that she was nervous or agitated. Her veil hung over her face in heavy folds, and it was impossible, except to those near her, to observe any changes of expression, if, indeed, there were any. She seldom changes her po¬ sition, but sits quietly m the ordinary office cane-bottom chair provided for her, without 68 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. exhibiting the weariness which is experienced bv those around her. Her hands, neatly gloved in black kid, are kept most ot the time in a handsome sable for mutt, which she has carried in Court con¬ stantly since her arraignment; and even when in con versation with those near her, she loses but little of the calmness of manner which she has so long maintained. Her daughter still occupies a seat immediately to her left, and. like her mother, is clad in black and heavily veiled. She was, on yesterday, very attentive to the testimony of Prof. Tonry, but exhibited no unbecoming anxiety. Upon the opening of the Court to-day, Pro¬ fessor Tonry was re-called for cross examina¬ tion by Mr. Steele and test! fieikl was employed in the Surgeon General’s Office in Wash¬ ington, from October, 1S66, to July, 1869,when I accepted the position of chemist for the Baltimore Copper Company; I was with the Baltimore Copper Company for about four months; I was not discharged but resigned; on one or two occasions the President of the Company, Henry Martin, wanted me to re¬ turn less than I found the ores contained, and I refused to do so and resigned; early in 1870 I opened a laboratory in Baltimore; I was set down as hospital steward on the rolls of the Surgeon General’s Office, and was ordered to report for duty in the laboratory of his oilice; I was engaged in assisting Dr. Craig in making chemical analyses; we made them frequently for the Commissary Depart¬ ment, as well as for the Medical Department; I have never before analyzed the organs of a human body supposed to have been poisoned; my directions were “ to examine only for anti¬ mony;” those were, I think, the words used to me, and that was the object of my examina¬ tions; one jar was covered with paper, and the other corked; I received the jars on Sunday, and commenced on Monday morning about 10 o’clock to prepare for the analysis; the color first precipitated was a brown, bordering on red; 1 object to your asking about the color of a precipitate which I took as a guide as to the quantity to he used; I can hardly con¬ sider the precipitate as an orauge red; I cannot remember whether it was Tuesday or Wednes¬ day evening that Dr. Chew said I would have to "come to Annapolis; I measured the quanti¬ ties I used, but not absolutely accurately; I havn’t all the spots here, as of course some were used subsequently, as I have stated; the experiment made in Dr. Chew’s presence was before the solution had been completely fil¬ tered; I would not pretend to decide how much weight of antimony one of those spots contained; the weight would depend upon the time it was kept in the flame; I have not bad experience enough in the weight of those spots to state even an estimate of t heir weight; I would not estimate any weight so contin¬ gent; Wormley says in his Micro-Chemis¬ try, that the thousandth part of a grain would give a spot; I de¬ scribed the test I used as a very delicate one; the weight of the spot would depend upon the strength of solution used; I abso¬ lutely refuse to give any estimate of the weight of antimony in the thirteen spots; the spots I exhibited yesterday were even more minute than those previously exhibited; in regard to their proportion in weight I can give no estimate, but as regards the surface covered I should say that, the live spots shown yesterday covered about one-fifth of the space covered by the thirteen spots first shown: the reason why I said I took one or two of the spots was because the spots were close to¬ gether: the manipulation of the minute quan¬ tity, that is its solubility, would not depend upon its minuteness: I dec.ine supposing i any weights; if a spot contained a thousandth part, of a grain I certainly think I could ma¬ nipulate it; I do not know that chemical au¬ thorities state that the one hundredth part of a grain is the smallest quantity that can be ! manipulated; Wormley, I know, goes further: I am not aware that any substance, other than antimony, under the process I used, would give the dark bpots I obtained; Taylor says selenium, phosphorus, and some organic matter may unite with hydrogen anil give dark spots; I would not think for a moment that organic matter gave me the dark spots I ob¬ tained; I never tried the experiment Taylor re¬ commends: I followed Wormley principally, and he differs from Taylor; the balance I used | was one of the new pattern of Becker &. Bro.’s, of Belgium. [Prof. Tonrv here re¬ ferred to his laboratory notes to recall the exact figures ho was now asked to give] and continued: The beaker glass was 16.019 j grammes; the weight of the whole precipitate i was 16.0215 grammes: I am pretty certain that i the balance was horizontal on the knife edges; j the balance I keep in a glass case which has sliding doors: I have used it for about a year | and a half, and frequently; from these weights I came to the conclusion that the whole weight of the precipitate was twentv-five i ne-hundredths of a gramme; Prof. Tonry here exhibited his notes to Mr. Steele and ex¬ plained to him how he had figured out the quantity; he next, at Mr. Steele’s request, fig¬ ured out the number of milligrammesin a gramme. Hethen continued: Agrammeisequal to fifteen grains and forty-three hundredths one milligramme is equal to fifteen one thous¬ andths of a grain, and a fraction over; I cannot get it otherwise; on my balance I can weigh the three-thousaudth part of a gramme; it is guaranteed to me to weigh the twentieth of a milligramme; I took hold of the top of the beaker and not of the 6ides, lest the moi6-i ture from my fingers should adhere to the; sides of the beaker; a very small portion of moisture from my hand might have adheredi to the rim: I transferred the solution by wastw ing from the filter paper; after settling, Idrew off the supernatant liquid by a pipette, abJ sorbed the greater part of the balance by tiiJ tering paper, by capillary attraction, anil evaporated the slight balance in a beaker glas^ over a water bath, hut I do not know ho long 1 kept it over the water bath. Mr. Steele here recalled the witness to fig¬ ures, and sometime was occupied in figuring in decimals and vulgar fractions, the result-8 being merely tests of the mathematical I accuracy of the witness. He continued— Mj balance's would, I think, turn with the one l twelve-thousandth part of a grain; it it l guaranteed to be accurate to the ono seven THE WHAUTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 69 housandth part of a grain; they are kept ac¬ tuate by means of chloride of calcium pow¬ ers, and are kept thoroughly dry. The witness was here asked if four milli- ;rammes were equal to six tenths of a grain, >nd after figuring said it was equa 1 to six ne-hundredths. Mr. Steele.—“You testified yesterday that it fas six tenths, therefore ten times less than ■ou make it to-day.” The witness admitted he mistake. Mr. Steele—“Assuming that your weights yere correct, and you knowing and admitting hat there was foreign organic matter in the olution, could you treat it as a pure sulphide?” [lie witness replied that the organic matter yas very small: it was coloring matter. Professor Tonry then continued—If the olution of the substance is very acid md the sulphuretted hydrogen passed over lowly, there -would be very little probabilty if a precipitate of sulphur; in none of my olutions did I pass the sulphur through twice yithout first washiug the precipitate obtained md bringing it again into solution; I do not liink there would be an excess of sulphur if he sulphuretted hydrogen passed through a washing bottle; if sulphuretted hydrogen is lassed through a very acid solution there will je an excess of sulphur over that in combina- ;ion; I deny that there would be an excess of ulphur in the precipitate—in the solution here would be an excess; (here Prof. Tonry explained the reasons for this opinion); sul¬ phuretted hydrogen under certain circum- itances may be decomposed in water nto pure sulphur. Here Meesrs. Steele md Hagner referred to the report of ’rofessor Tonry, in the Gazette of to-day, «nd the witness resumed: I added the potash o dissolve the sulphide, and I presumed it yould be antimoniate of potash; I then added artaric acid with the object of obtaining tar- rate of potash; I would not have obtained an ■range precipitate if no antimony had been >resent;Ido not now remember that itnmedi- ,te compound; referring to the spots obtained m porcelain, I let the gas flow ou the spot I lsed until it dried by spontaneous evapora- ion; I cannot, however, estimate the weight f antimony in that spot; I did not have to add ieattodry it: I would prefer to decline to give m estimate of the amount of tartar emetic that he spot would form; I simply say I can’t make he estimate; I did not out anything into the ydrogen gas I used; I have no knowledge of uatomy, and no experience in post mortem xaminations; to my knowledge there are no ubstances but antimony or arsenic that, un- er the circumstaucess, would give those pots; new metals have been discovered from imo to time, but not frequently; I cannot ive you the dates of the discoveries of the arer new metals; all the qualities of the new aetals are not perfectly known; I obtained a oetallic bead fr >m the metallic antimony and rom the tartar emetic I tried for that pur- ose, as I stated yesterday; I took about a half grain or less, and it gave a bead without ifficulty; that amount of tartar emetic would ontain about a-fourth of a grain of anti- Qonv; the color of the pure sulphide of ntimony is generally mentioned as or¬ ange red; I am not aware that any or¬ ganic matter would give the orange red pre¬ cipitate under the process I used; if there be any, then the test I have described is not con¬ clusive, as far as color is considered; I re¬ moved the precipitate from the heaker glass by dissolving it in the glass; it was, perhaps, two hours after that I weighed the heaker glass. [The witness here, at the request of Mr. Hagner, wrote in chemical formula what was in the oeaker glass before he added the potash, and it read “SbS3.”] To Mr. Thomas—I found, by my tests at the Baltimore Copper Company’s Works, that I obtained .almost the same physical results from antimony or arsenic; 1 attached no importance to the physical ap¬ pearance of the spots, as distinguishing between antimony and arsenic, but I rely upon the tests I used. The witness here briefly repeated his statements of the tests he had used. I tried the a nitrie acid as a matter of experiment; I threw that result aside as of no particular value under the circumstances; when I fused the sulphide precipitate on char¬ coal I failed to obtain any of the metal ob¬ servable to the naked eye; one of the solu¬ tions from one sample I had taken, after hav¬ ing passing the sulphuretted hydrogen through it, and decanting the supernatent liquid, I put aside in a flask; when I went home from here on Friday I found in that flask the unmistakable bright red orange color of antimony, but as I broke the test tube in which I obtained what appeared to be the white antimony precipitate with water before it had time to settle, I did not think it necessary to speak of that portion of the sample; I showed the color to one of the ex¬ perts for the defence—Prof. White. To. Mr. Steele—Before I went to the Sur¬ geon General’s office I had been for three years at Georgetown College, the latter part of that time as Adjunct Professor of Chemis¬ try; I was born in Ireland, lived in New Bruns¬ wick for a time, studied one year at Boston College, and also at St. Charles College, Mary- I land; I have lived most of my time in Mary¬ land. To Mr. Eevell—I have seen it mentioned in some of the books that tartar emetic contains traces of arsenic. To the Court—I have examined the stomach of an animal for strychnine. Professor Toury’s cross-examination was con¬ cluded at a quarter of 1 o’clock; Professor Aikin’s cross-examination lasted twice as long. Mr. Syester here stated, in answer to the inquiry of the Chief Judge, that the State had closed its case. Some considerable time was consumed in consultation, but no mention made of an in¬ tention on the part of the defence to make an opening statement. Testimony for tSie Defenee. Francis D. Cleary was first called, and, in answer to Mr. Hagner, testified as follows: I live in Washington and am of the firm of Latimer & Cleary; I remember an interview I had at my office, corner Eleventh street and \ 70 TEE WEARTON-KETCEUM TRIAL. Pennsylvania avenue, on the 24th of last June, about 2 P. M., with Mr. Carnsi and Gen¬ eral Ketchum; it was a very warm day; as I was writing a check for Mr. Carusi a drop of perspiration from my forehead fell on the check, and I tore it up; General Ketchum opened his vest, and his shirt was saturated with perspiration and stained, I suppose from the lining of the vest; I did not notice an in¬ side pocket; my office is about a quarter of a mile from Mr. Carusi’s office; I am very iguo rant about the streets of Georgetown, and as near as I can say, General Ketchum lived a mile and a half or three quarters from Mr. Carnsi’s office; the check was for the money ($11,900) for the house I had sold General Ketchum; I did not know that the whole amount had been deposited; General Ketchum and Mr. Carusi left to get the check casned; it had been deposited to our credit on Juno 13th; I did not know, however, that it had been deposited; I don’t know positively who deposited it; the terms were one-third Cash, the balance nine, fifteen and twenty-one months, with interest from day of sale. The Court here decided that anything General Ketchum may have said of his sufferings and symptoms could go to the jury. The witness then continued—The remark he made tct. me was not as to his state of health or his symp¬ toms. Mr. Hagner here asked if anxiety had been expressed' by General Ketchum as to the time he had to live, would it be within the ruling of the Court to give it in evidence, and the Chief Judge said itwould not. Mr. Thomas said that the Court had admitted testimony of General K’s., health, disposition and religion, and he desired to know if General K’s., state¬ ment of his anxiety about his health would not be admissible ta rebut the presumption raised by such testimony. The Chief Judge said the Court had allowed testimony as to the general habits and char¬ acter of General Ketchum, and if the witness knew of General Ketckum’s habits and dis¬ position he could state what he knew, but he could not state any particular statement. The witness continued—I had no acquaint¬ ance with General Ketchum until the 12th of last June; the terms of sale required $350 on the fall of the hammer, but General Ketchum told me who he was, and paid the money next day. To Mr. Revell—I am in my 39th year; I can’t say whether or not he had an inside vest pocket or that ho had any papers in his pockets. To the Court—General Ketchum had paid the entire purchase money on I3tli of June. Ellen Deddrick, a negro servant of Mrs. Wharton, was next called, and testified: I lived in Baltimore from October, 1S70, to July, 1871; I have been living since in Philadelphia, and lived there before going to Baltimore; I was at my father’s, near Baltimore,during July, August and September of 1870. and went to Mrs. Wharton’s in October, 1870; General Ketchum arrived at Mrs. Wharton’s after 6 o’clock ou the afternoon of the 24th of last June; Su¬ san Jacobs was the only other servant Mrs. Wharton had; I was waiting ou the table when Mrs. Chubb and General Ketchum took tea that evening: they had frizzled beef, ham. biscuit, bread, butter, tea. coffee, and rasp¬ berries: General Ketchum ate a very hearty supper: he took coffee; he ate so heartily as to attract my attention, and spoke as if he had to make up for two meals; he drank three cups of coffee, and I think foil"; he ate several biscuits; I think they must have been five or six; that is more than the usual number: he j ate of all that was on the table, except of the] bread; I don’t remember that he ate any bread except biscuit; he ate of the raspberries, and the meats also; I think he was helped only once to rasp¬ berries. The State objected to the witness repeating what General K. had said about hia having drauk ice water, and the defence did not press the inquiry. The witness continued; —I attended to General K.’s room on Sunday: morning, but not on Monday; General K.J seemed to be a sort, of a peculiar man, and I did not care to wait on him; I took a glass oft cracked ice to him on Monday night about 10; o’clock; he asked me to band his pantaloons! from the closet that he might, get his watelijj key; the pants were in the closet near his hed;< that was Mrs. Wharton’s closet; Mrs. I Wharton’s own room was on the floor below, and there was neither a closet nor wardrobe in her room: Miss Nellie’s room was the back room on the second floor, and that room had a closet and a wardrobeffhe passage from the dining room to the kitchen was narrow;! I can’t give the exact width; several ladies were occupying Mrs. Wharton’s room when General K. was sick; there was an old white! nurse there with a child of one of the ladies; she was quite an old woman; during the sick¬ ness of General K. a great many persons were about the house; Mr. Van Ness was sick in the j parlor, and the dining room was the only] room open down stairs; the doors of the rooms were generally kept open, as the weather was very warm; I saw the little nursery refrige¬ rator on the hearth in the dining room; there is one door on each side of the diningroom,! and in all three doors: one door leads to t.liel cellar, one leads to the kitchen, and the third] is the entrance door from the main passage way; several times servants came there to bring articles for Mr. Van Ness; I don’t know how many times they came; a person could get from the cellar to the kitchen; there was a sreat deal of( passing and repassing from the kitchen to the I dining-room; the nursery refrigerator was not I Mrs. Wharton’s, bnt had been bronght there j it looked like tin; it was not tlie habit in the 1 lionse to keep the closets looked; medicines j were kept in Mrs. Wharton’s wash-stand in tbel second-story room, which Mrs. Van Nessoccn-ll pied; that washstand was not kept, locked:! whenever I wanted to go to it for anything I went; I saw the vial shown here by Cr. Will-1 jams and 1 bad been shown it before by Susan Jacobs on the evening before Gen. Ketclium’s death; I think she showed it. to me while I was in the second-story of Mrs. Wharton's house. Mr. Steele asked what Susan Jacobs bad said about it, but Mr. Syester objected and the inquiry was postponed. The witness continued—As far as I know I had never seen the vial before Susan Jacobs i showed it to me. Mr. Steele next renewed •! THE WHARTON-KETCHTJM TRIAL. 71 his inquiry about what Susan Jacobs had said to the witness about the vial. Mr. Eevell objected to it as hearsay testi¬ mony, and said it ouly related to a conversa¬ tion between the witness and Susan Jacobs, and not held in the hearing of Mrs. Wharton. It was not a part of the res gestae, and not ad¬ missible. Mr. Steele said the finding of the bottle had also been made an important part of the evi¬ dence by the State itself, and the defence wished to confirm the finding of the bottle. The conversation would give color to and confirm the finding of the bottle. The Chief Judge said the Court con¬ sidered that the conversation spoken of was not evidence. Judge Hammond said Susan Jacobs had not yet been impeached, and it was not competent to prove by conversation with another the finding of the bottle. The witness continued—Miss Nellie came home between 1 and 2 o’clock the day Gen¬ eral Ketchum died; she had, I think, been absent since the previous Thursday; the main stairway led up between the dining room and parlor; there is also a stairway leading from the kitch n to the second story, and in coming that way it would be necessary to go through Miss Nellie’s room; I attended to work gener¬ ally throughout the house. To Mr. Syester—Mrs. Wharton, Mrs. Chubb and General Ketchum were present at the tea table; the beef was smoked beef; the ham bad been boiled and was cold; I think Mrs. Chubb ate of nearly all that was on the table, but I did not notice particularly; Mrs. Hutton did not take any tea; I can’t tell what was served for breakfast; there was more quiet on the nest lay, and that is why I can’t say what they had for dinner; I was sent from the room, too; I inow that General K. took three cups of cof- pe, and I think four; General K. wound up his watch when I handed him his pantaloons; I odged in Mrs. Wharton’s house, and I sup lose I went to bed about 11 o’clock; I washed ;he tea dishes, and was in the dining room luring tea; the period I speak of, when per¬ sons were passing in and out, was between Saturday uigbt and Wednesday; I saw per- 10 ns I did not know; Mrs. Wharton presided it the tea table, and poured out the coffee for General Ketchum; it was a roupd table and lot large; I think I banded him the beef; I lon’t remember auy more than one piece of the lam be ate; I kept account of the cups of ;offee, because be said he was making up for ; ;wo meals; General Ketchum ate four or five iv five or six biscuits; sometimes I am in the labit of noticing bow much people eat where am waiting; I generally band every- hing that is on the table; I am not cer- ain bow many biscuits Mrs. Chubb ate; I •lon’t think there were very many vials in he washstand; I have seen four or five vials n there; I don’t remember that I went to the . rashstand while General Ketchum was sick; used to go to the washstand for paregoric ,nd arnica, and also to get the ladies’ shoes, ,nd then to put them back; I don’t think I wer saw any vials any where except in the rashstand; the cups from which General letchum drank were of the size all first-class leople use, not so large as common people use; I don’t think they would hold quite as much as a tumbler; I retired about 11 o’clock on Mon¬ day,and got up about half past 6 o’clock; I don’t remember that during General K.’s sickness my regular hours were broken in upon; I did not go into Geueral K.’s room after Monday even¬ ing; I saw some of the servants who came to bring articles for Mr. Van Ness go into the diniDg-room; they were strangers to me, and I don’t know the names of any of them: I did not have occasion to use often, the medicines in the washstand; there was Jamaica ginger iu there, and I used to go for that; sometimes arnica, and sometimes paregoric would be in there also; there might have been something “simple” there besides; when I went for Ja¬ maica ginger I did not look for anything else. To Mr. Steele.—Sometimes when persons came to Mrs. Wharton’s and took a very hearty meal, Susan and I would pass a joke about it, and we did so about Geueral K.’s supper; I frequently had occasion to go to the washstand when the ladies’ slippers or shoes were left out; it had two shelves; no place in the house was kept locked so that I could not have access to it. Susan Jacobs (colored) was next called, and testified; I was living with Mrs. Wharton at the time of General K.’s death, and had been with her as a cook for nearly six years; I took charge of General K.’s room on Monday morn¬ ing, and I went to his room on that morn¬ ing about 8 o’clock; on that morning, between 9 and 10 o’clock, after breakfast, I saw a little vomit in the slop jar in General K.’s room, and again between 1 and 2 o’clock I found about the same quantity in the jar; General K. took breakfast in liis room on Mon¬ day; I asked what he would have for break¬ fast, and be asked me what I had for breakfast; I told him the breakfast was nearly eaten up: be asked if I had any cold meat, and I told him I had cold roast beef and cold bam left from Sunday’s dinner; he told me to cut him off three or four thin slices of the cold roast beef and to leave no fat on it; he wanted also a coup.e of slices of dry toast, without butter, and a cup of tea; I got them for him about a quarter-past 9 o’clpck; I continued to attend to his room until be died; on Tuesday morning I went to his room with Mrs. Chubb and I beard him tell her he would come in the next train; I found no vomit iu the slop jar on Tuesday. The Court here adjourned until 10 A. M. to¬ morrow, when Susan Jacobs will be recalled for cross-examination by the State. The attendance to-day upon the trial was larger tfian usual, and notwithstanding the tedium of a great part of the proceedings, the spectators remained until the adjournment of tlie Court. Mrs. Wharton and her daughter occupied their accustomed seats, and there was nothing unusual iu the manner of either. Mrs. Nugent, Mrs. Neilson and Miss Rosa Neil- son were present with them. Mr. Charles L. Ketchum was the ouly member of the late General Ketchum’s family present to-day. General Brice is absent in Washington. Among the spectators to-day were Commodore Decatur and Commander McAuley, of the navy; Rev. C. K. Nelson of St. John’s College, and Lieutenant Colonel Louev, of the Fifth Regiment of Baltimore, were also present. 72 THE WHARTON-KETCHTJM TRIAL. TWK.M1ETE1 WAT. Annapolis. December 28, 1871. The first- act of the fearful drama which has for an unprecedented length of time engaged the attention of the Circuit Court for Anue Arundel County,and,in a measure, of the whole State of Maryland, closed on yesterday, but it cannot be said that the curtaiu rose upon the second. Contrary to general expec¬ tation, the learned counsel for Mrs. Wharton made no opening statement to the jury, and they did not, in the testimony of the witnesses they called, more than foreshadow what constituted the grounds of their defence. After the Attorney General announced the close of the State’s case, there was a consider¬ able intermission before a witness for the de¬ fence was called, during which time the counsel for the defence were engaged in close and earnest consultation. The jury. Court, reporters and spectators were evidently awaiting with no little interest the result of their deliberations, and there was a liok of disappointment on many faces when Mr. Hagner, in a restless and somewhat vervous tone of voice, called upon Mr. Cleary, of Washington, to take the witness stand. Mrs. Wharton sat unmoved during all the time Messrs. Steele, Hagner and Thomas were deliberating, and, judging from her manner, her reliance in the wisdom of her counsel was implicit and steadfast. Her whole manner when the State’s officers announced the close of their case was as calm, patient and re¬ signed as when Mr. Kevell moved her ar¬ raignment on the most fearful charge known to the law, and there was no observable change in her bearing during the anxious interval which her counsel occupied. Miss Wharton appeared more anxious and by the close attention she gave to all that was passing around her, and her avoidance of conversation with those of her friends who sat near her, showed that she fully appre¬ ciated the importance of the stage her mother’s trial had reached. Her heavy veil concealed whatever of emotion her face may have be¬ trayed, but it was noticeable that her manner on yesterday more than on auy previous occa¬ sion partook of the sadness and composure whicli has so long characterized her mother. The attendance upon the trial was almost as large "Sis on the opening day, but the interest manifested was calmer and more earnest. Upon the opening of the Court to-daj* Susan Jacobs, the colored cook of Mrs. Wharton, was recalled by the defence, and in answer to Mr. Steele, testified: 1 took'General Ketchum some dinner on Mouday, and also tea at night; I do not recol¬ lect the time of the day Dr. Williams came on Monday; I heard he was there, but I was not in the room; I found vomit in the slop jar after Dr. Williams had left; on Tuesday I found no vomit, and 1 found no uriueon Tues¬ day; I went to his room on Tuesday morning, and he told me to cut him off a couple of slices of the roast beef, and leave no fat on it, and to bring him two slices of toast without butter on it; after Mrs. Chubb left I went to his room and found him in bed; the family breakfasted that morning about!) o’clock, and I took him his breakfast after the family breakfast: ho was in bed when I took up his breakfast; I left his break¬ fast on a little table by the side of his bed and vent down stairs; when I returned he hail eaten a slice of toast and a small piece of beef; I took him up a cup of tea soon after Mrs. Chubb left, but he did not drink that - one; he drank, however, the tea I carried him I for breakfast: I made the tea and took it to him myself; he ate his breakfast in bed; when I thought he had finished breakfast, 1 went up to make up his chamber; he got up and went to the lounge: ho did not seem well, but seemed quite feeble; he did not stagger, but when he sat down he seemed quite weak; he did not require any assistance in sitting down; when he sat down he put his hand under his jaw in this way. [Here the witness showed liow General Ketchum had leaned his head on his hand while sitting on the lounge..1 The witness then continued—Gen. Ketchum did not return to his bed while I was iu the room; I went up again, found him iu bed and in a kind of drowsy sleep; he told me, when 1 asked him how he was, to let him alone, and that he would soon sleep it off and feel better; he took no medicine while 1 was there; I asked him if the doctor had left him any medicine, and he said the doctor had given him but one dose, which he did not think was sufficient, and he had taken a dose of his own medicine, which he knew was sufficient; I went up about dinner time to see what he would have for dinner; I had cooked dinner, and generally got dinner cooked by 3 o’clock; when I went up I found him lying on the bed fast asleep; I woke him and asked him how he felt, and he said if I would let him alone ho would soon sleep it off'and feel better; I asked him what he would have for his dinner, and he said he would take a cup of tea and a piece of toast; he rose up in the bed and said he would try to set up while I was in the room; he got out of the bedaud started over towards the lounge, which was ] between the windows; he got out of the foot of the bed; he appeared as if he was going to pitch over, and 1 ran with a pillow, and by the time 1m got to the lounge, put it under him; lie appeared so weak that 1 fanned him awhile; 1 went down stairs, after fanning him awhile, and found Mrs. Wharton iu the back room of ! the second story, sitting in a chair and read¬ ing; 1 asked Mrs. Wharton if she would go up to see General Ketchum, for he appeared so feeble that he was hardly able to walk across the room; she went up stairs to him; I went then to the kitchen; in a few minutes Mrs. Wharton rang the bell, and I went up to her: when I got up stairs she asked me if I would : make up the bed, for she wanted the General to lie down, and he had said he could not lie ' on that bed. because his feet were up and his head was down: she told me to go down stairs and bring up the feather bolster which was on Miss Nellie’s bed; I brought it up; Mrs. Wharton was sitting by the side of the Gen¬ eral, aud fanning him; 1 went ou to make up the bed; I took off’ the cover, and had started | to take off the bolster, when the General THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 73 spoke to me; I did not understand what be said, and I asked him what he had said: he spoke again, quite stern]y, to me; I looked around to see what it was, and picked up ilie tumbler, which was the only thing I saw at the head of the bed; cracked ice was in the tumbler; it was between the bolster and the head-board; it was wrapped up in a couple of towels; I put the tum¬ bler on the mantel-piece; I then took hold of the bolster to take it off, and as I took it oft a little vial rolled down into the bed from about where the tumbler had been; I picked it up and laid it down on the floor by my side; I went on and made the bed up; the General did not go to bed while I was there; after I had made up the bed Mrs. Wharton left the room; I re¬ mained a few minutes and asked the General if he would get in the bed, and he said he would; he went to sleep and did not get what he had ordered for dinner; I saw him _ several times that evening; he was- “kind of sleepv” the whole time; Mrs. Wharton went out driving with Colonel Loney on that evening; I saw the General quite often while she was absent; he was still drowsy; I found no vomit in the slop-jar on Tuesday night; in ’the morning he breathed very heavily, hut after dark he did not breathe so heavily; I now refer to Tuesday; I came down and left the vial up stairs; I saw Mrs. Wharton after that and told her what I had found; I told her about it before she went out riding; she asked me if I had brought the vial down with me, and I told her I had left it up stairs aud had forgotten it; I told her I would bring it down when I went up again; when I brought it dowu she had gone out riding; I took care of the bottle until she returned; I was ' standing iu the entry, and when she came iu the door, I threw my finger up to her so (here the beckoning motion); she came to me and 1 showed her the bottle; she looked at it and we saw what was in it; she told me to put it away aud take care of it; I then put it away; I showed the bottle to Ellen Deddrick while Mrs. Wharton was out riding, and I told her where I had found it; I did not speak to Mrs. Wharton again about the bottle until Wednesday morning; she came to me, asked me to give her the bottle, and I gave it. to her; she sent me for Dr. Williams on Wednes¬ day morning, about 8 o’clock, i think; I saw him at the door of his office; he did not return with me; I told him the General was quite bad and quite drowsy, and that Mrs. Wharton wished him to see him; I saw here the bottle shown by Dr. Williams; to my knowledge I never saw it be¬ fore I found it iu General K.’sbed; right smart of people were about Mrs. Wharton’s house while General K. was sick there; I had taken the tpcilde.r of cracked ice to General K.; I saw no vomit in any place iu General K.’s room; I liad seen General K. quite often before at Mrs. Wharton’s; I saw him take some medi¬ cine on one of his previous visits last summer; I was in the diningroom putting away the silver, and he was at the mantel-piece with his medicine; I asked him if he would have a spoon, and he said he didn’t want any spoon; he then said he generally drank out what he thought was enough for a dose; 1 did not know what the medicine was; the food I took to General Ketchnm had beeu cooked and prepared by me; nothing was kept locked in the house ex¬ cept one drawer in Miss Nellie’s bureau, where she kept her jewelry, aud one side of the side hoard where the silver was kept, and to which I had the kev. Cross-examined by Attorney General Syester—I now live at 263 Eutaw street, Mrs. Wharton’s late residence, and am taking care of it for her; about halt of the ice hail been used from the tumbler, but I cannot say how much water was in the tumbler; about two hours after I took up the tumbler I went up to make up his bed; I had wrapped it with a tea towel, and when I took it to him he wrapped another towel around it; he then put the tumbler between the bolster and the head of the bed; I did not see where the 1 bottle was sitting; hut it rolled down about, where the tumbler was sitting; I did not look under the bolster when I took the tumbler away, and did not see the vial; it rolled right straight down into the middle of the bed aud I picked it up; the Gen¬ eral took breakfast in bed on Monday morn¬ ing, and I took him four very little thin slices of the beef; he had eaten,when I went back,three slices of beef, two slices of the toast, (eating the crumb out), and had drank a cup of tea; I took him for dinner on Monday iive slices of roast beef, aud he left two slices; I also took him toast.; lie ate one slice, taking out all and leaving the crust; I did not take him any tea; he ate his dinner in bed; 1 took him breakfast on Tuesday morning; I heard him say to Mrs. Chubb that he would come on the next train; on Tuesday morning 1 took him three slices of beef, two slices of toast and a cup of tea; he ate only the toast., and drank the cup of tea; I found no vomit on Tuesday and none on Wednesday morning; I went in his room just before 8 o’clock on Wednesday; he was lying on the lounge, and 1 e was dressed; the cover on the bed was just as I left it op the previous evening; he did not ask for breakfast on Wednesday morning, and I did not take him any; he took breakfast in bed on Monday and Tuesday mornings; it was Tuesday morning when he went to the lounge and laid his head on his hand; he dressed himself on Tuesday morn¬ ing; that was about two hours after Mrs. Chubb left; Gen. Ketehum looked feeble, aud I judge also from the way in which he sat dowu; when I waked him on Tuesday morn¬ ing he seemed quite drowsy; he was suoring very heavily when I entered his room; I don’t know what made him drowsy, but I had to wake him up every time I went into,his room on Tuesday; I did not have to shake him, hut only to call him; he did not say he was sick; I gave him his breakfast, and it was after that time that he told me to let him aione and he would soon sleep it ofl; he did not say what it was he was going to sleep oft; he did not say what had become of the medicine the doctor had left; he said he had taken one dose of his own medicine, and he knew that was sufficient; he did not take any dinner on Tuesday, but I asked him 74 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. ■what lie would Lave, and be said he would take two slices of toast and tea; I went up with it, but he was asleep and I did not dis¬ turb him: I went up quite often, because I was waiting on him; 1 saw the General on Tuesday about mid-day, but did not see him ud Tuesday afternoon; Mrs. Wharton was not in the room when I put, the pillow under the General’s arm. (The witness here repeated her account of notifying Mrs. Wharton and send¬ ing her to General Ketchnm; also her direc¬ tions about the making up of Gen. Ivetchum’s bed.) The witness then continued—It was a little afterS o’clock that Mrs. Wharton gave General Ketchum the pillow; she took it from under his arm, where I had placed it, and put it at the foot of the lounge; the General then laid down, and Mrs. Wharton sat by his side and fanned him: I did not understand what the Geueral said to me, and I know now that I shall never know: I did not understand him when he spoke the second time; I laid the vial down on the carpet on the floor, and in a corner; I thought it was just as cheap to put it there as anywhere else; I saw that, it had only one or two drops in it: Mrs. Wharton was in the room when the vial rolled down; Gen¬ eral Ketchum did not go to bed at tl^rtt time, but told me he would go; I went up frequently to General Ketcbnm’s room while Mrs. Whar¬ ton was out riding; every time I thought of him I went up to see him. and I thought of him very often: the General breathed heavily until 1 or 2 o’clock on Tuesday, but when I went up at 3 o’clock he was breathingfreeer; I thought then that he was quite feeble; I havn’t, often found vials in the beds of gen¬ tlemen, and I am old enough to know it was not there for any good; I smelled the bottle, and it smelled like laudanum to me; I told Mrs. Wharton that it smelled like laudanum; I dont think I told her that but once; I had not touched the stonper when I first told Mrs. Wharton about the bottle; Geueral Ketchum did not tell me what kind of medicine he had been taking; Mrs. Wharton told me to take care of the bottle, and I did not think it worth while to take it back to General Ketchum, because ho was asleep; I can’t say at what time it was that I saw General K. taking medicine in the dining room; I don’t know the month, but I know it was warm; I can’t say how many weeks it was before Gen¬ eral K.’s death; the General took a vial from the mantel, and I offered him a spoon before he took his medicine; that was ou a Sunday morning, and he had come ou the Saturday before; I spoke about seeing the General tak¬ ing his medicine iu that way; I thought it was a peculiar way of taking medicine; I did not notice the color of the medicine; I didn’t look to see the color: I can’t say whether it was be¬ fore or after the mouth of April; I can’t say either that it was before or after the month of March; I only know it was one time he was there, and iu the same year; some of the people in Mrs. Wharton’s house were strangers; I can give the names of Mrs. Van Ness. Mrs. Loney, Mrs. Hutton, old Mrs. Van Ness, Mr. Suowden, Mrs. Snowden, Col. Loney, an old nurse, a baby, and Mr. Hutton; some gentlemen came whose names I don’t, know; I saw old Mrs. Van Ness there; I did not meet her on the lauding near General Ketchum’s room; she came to the kitchen and asked to go to General Ketchum s room: I had no conversation with her on the steps; Mrs. Loney came to the kitchen with her mother and asked if any one was with the General; I told her no one was with him: she said her mother would go up and sit with him; I told her I would advise her mother not to go, as the General was a queer man, and he would not like to find, when he waked up, any lady in his room; Mrs. Loney and her mother gave no reason for wanting to go into General K.’s room; they did not say that the General was vomiting and should be attended to; I did not think he wanted me in his room: he had not told mo that he did not; I had always waited upon him and I knew he was queer and wonld. not like to find a lady sitting up in his room; I didn’tt.hink be would want any¬ body but me to come up and attend to him: I was afraid the General would ask me why I had sent a lady into his room; I had a conversation with Marshal Frev at bis office; he asked me if General K., was taken the same way Mr. Van Ness was, and I told him no, and that the Geueral had kind of slept; I did not tell Marshall Frey what I had taken General K., at his meals; he did not ask me anything about General K. Mr Steele here objected to the conversation between Marshal Frey and the witness beiug given, and said if was not evidence. The Court decided that the conversation could be given as laying the foundation for the offer of rebutting testimony. Mr. Syester—“We will see about that after a while ” The witness continued—I did not tell Mar¬ shal Frey anything about the vial; I took General K. a cup of tea and a slice of toast on Monday evening, after I had sent my tea in: General K. theu sat upon the side of the bed aud took his tea; I moved a table up to him as he sat on the side of the bed: I can’t give any idea of the hour; there was no vomit in the room at that time; Dr. Williams came be¬ fore. I took up his supper; I was confused on yesterday when I first came on the witness stand; after Dr. Williams got there, I found vomit there in the evening soihe time before I took tea up; I made a mistake yesterday about 1 and 2 o’clock; it was not on Monday between 1 and 2 o’clock, but it was after Dr. Williams came; I saw Mrs. Wharton at the dinner table before she went out riding; I told Ellen yesterday of the mistake I had made, and I thought if you would allow me the privilege I would 'speak it over right: I still live in Mrs. Wharton’s house; I don’t ask about my pay; I have not received any wages: I make my liv-' ing by washing aud sewing; I am not married now, but have been. Colonel George Andrews was next called, and testified—I am a Lieutenant Colonel in the army, on the retired list; I graduated on the first of July, 1823, and was retired on the 15th of February, 1862: I knew General Ketchum asaCaptainintheSixth Infantry,in 1857 and 1858; he was under my command; it was during the Kansas difficulties; General THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 75 Ketchum was put in command of one of the 5omp,anies of my command, and in April, 1858 [ saw him when he was thrown from a horse: he first I saw was the horse plunging, and letchum w r as thrown off on the left hand ;ide, and apparently struck ou his lead and shoulder; he was un- ler treatment for about two weeks, but I lever inquired particularly about his injuries; Dr. Milpao attended him, and is still in the truly; I moved on the 7th of May three hun- Ired miles—to Fort Kearney, and thence to Tort Bridget’, in Utah, in all 2,240 miles; Cap- ain Ketchum went but a few marches, and isked permission to drive his ambulance, and tssigned as a reason that he did not have onfidence in his driver; I granted the favor because of his recent sickness; whenever I sbed him how he was he would say he was veil with the exception of a little heat in his lead; I can’t say whether or not ;e was on the sick list during that ime; we were in camp near Fort Leaven- rorth; I suppose General K., was nearly six eet in height: he was not an active man; be ras a bad rider, and I don’t think a good aareher: he was neither stout nor thin; his igure did not indicate strength or activity. To Mr. Syester—He was what we of West ’oint would say, “well set up.” To Mr. Revell—I suppose it was two weeks, lore or less, before he reported for duty after is fall; I never served with General K., after hat: I think I saw him in 1860; I saw him hut moment; he made no complaint then of his ead; he was then married: I reached my des- ination on the 14tli of December, 1858. To Mr. Hagner—If he had given his sick- pess as a reason for wishing to drive the mbulance, that would have deprived him imporarily of the command of his company. Miss Nellie Wharton now took the witness i ;and, and, after removing her veil, testified— was at home on ly about an hour and a-half efore General K. died; I had left home the hursday previous; I had been away before, at ir. Hamilton Stump’s, in Baltimore county, ad had returned the previous Tuesday; I had aen at Mr. Stump’s nearly a week, I think; carried to Mr. Stump’s a bottle of paregoric, hich I took from home; I gave it to Mrs. ost, at Mr. Stump’s, when I came away: it id been kept in the washstand in my other’s room, and I got it from that wash- aud; my room was the back room on the cond-story, and my mother’s room was the oht room on the same floor; there was neither oset nor wardrobe in my mother’s room, and le used a wardrobe in the third-story; in my om there wasa closet and a wardrobe; noth- g was kept locked except one drawer of my ireau where I kept my jewelry, and one side the side-board to which Susan kept the key; lien had access to all the places which were leu; she generally put away ourclothes; we ways kept the medicines in the washstand; was never kept locked, and was used also put slippers iu; there was not there ordi- irily very much medicine; I went to constantly. [The vial shown by Dr. Wil- ims was now shown the witness. J le continued—I am positive that I d never seen this vial in our house before it I was shown me after General K.’s death; when I reached home, after Geueral K.’s death, I found my mother very much exhausted; my mother had written for me to come home; I was then at Mr. Neilson’s, in Harford county; there was no male friend in our house when I reached home, and I went for Mr. Crawford Neilson; mother and I talked about Mr. Neil- son, and we agreed that it was best to go for him; I took a carriage and went for him; I reached the house ou my return just as General K died; both at Mr. Neilson’s and Mr. Stump’s I have intimate young lady friends, and I was making them farewell visits before going to Europe; my mother and I had determined nearly a year previous to go to Europe iu the month of last June; as far hack as the October previous I had spoken of our intention of leaving for Europe at that time; I mentioned it to Mr. Her¬ mann Stump; tickets were purchased in March iu New York by my mother to go in June; I went with my mother to purchase them; our intention of going in June was changed late in May, be¬ cause of my sickness; the tickets had been bought for the 7th of June, and the day was changed to the 12th of July; I was quite sick in May; my mother also, at that time, was not very well; I know that efforts had been made by my mother to lease out her house prepara¬ tory to her European trip; I had at that time $15,000, iu United States bonds, in my own money. Mr. Revell objected to the offer of testimony as to Miss Wharton’s money. Mr. Steele—“Well, you have said Mrs. Wharton wms running away from justice, and wo offer the testimony for what it is worth.” Mr. Revell said if this was persisted iu it could probably be shown that a number of Mrs. Wharton’s relatives had $10,000 or $15,000. After some further desultory discussion,[the Court decided that the testimony was admis- bl®, and the witness continued—1 was the sole owner of the $15,000 in bonds, and could do with them as I pleased; I was with my mother all the time after I reached home; I was not away from her more than live min¬ utes at a time; generally when I wasaway one of the Misses Mayer remained with her; I was in my room with Miss Mayer, and Mrs. Hutton came in and asked where my mother was; I asked her what she wanted, and if I could do it for her, my mother not be¬ ing in the room; she said she had brought General Ketchum’s watch, pocket-book, keys, knife and matchbox; she said he wished to give them to my mother to lock up; I told her to give them to me, and I would lock them up in my drawer; I then took them, put them in my drawer, and locked them up; I always kept the key to that drawer; I kept them until Mr. Charles Ketchum came over on the 4th of July; I did not see him until dinner time, but my mother, after talking with him a while, let him go up stairs; my mother came into my room, and I unlocked my drawer, took out what Mrs. Hutton had given me, and gave them to her; I heard her as she went up stairs, and I heard her go into the front room into 4 76 TEE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. which Mr. Chas. Ketchum had gone; the key of the valise was among the things I gave my mother; I don’t recollect distinctly, hut I "think Mrs. Hutton gave me the key to the valise after giving me the other things, and on the same evening; I did not give the key of the valise to my mother; she did not have the keys until I gave them to her on the day Mr. Charles Ketchum came; General Ketchum was in the habit of paying frequent visits to our house; he came several times in the year; I am certain of his being at our house three or four times a year Mrs. Chubb came also frequently; sometimes she would come up several Saturdays in sue cession, and spend Sunday; I think she aver¬ aged a visit a month; I weut both to my ward¬ robe and my closet almost immediately after my return at the time of General Ketch urn’s death; very few things were in them; I had left my trunk at Mr Neilson’s and most of my things were in it; the winter things had been packed up; I wished to change my dress, as 1 had been travelling and was very dusty; I saw no vest in either the closet or wardrobe; I found a pair of Mr. Van Ness’ pants hanging in my wardrobe: Mrs. Van Ness said she had put them there; if a vest had been in the wardrobe I would certainly have seen it; a great many persons were about the house at the time I arrived; old Mrs. Van Ness, Mrs. Van Ness, Mrs. Hutton, Mrs Loney, Mrs. Frick, Miss Sophie Frick, Mrs. Snowden, and an old nurse and a baby were there; the doors of the dining room and parlor were kept open all the time after I ar¬ rived; my mother had not been very strong for some time. To Mr. Hagner—I left my trunk at Mr. Neil son’s; I had intended staying, hut was recalled by the letter from my mother; I tele¬ graphed Mrs. Chubb to come from Washing¬ ton: I wished her to come in consequence of a telegram she had sent the day before. Mr. Syester here objected to the contents of the telegram being given, and. after some de¬ sultory remarks, Mr. Steele said he would ask the witness her motive in sending the tele¬ gram. Miss Wharton then continued—It was about the beginning, you know, and I wanted Mrs. Chubb to come up; my telegram was in reply to one from Mrs. Chubb; I did not originate the interchange of telegraphic communica¬ tion. Mr. Syester—Gentlemen,we havenot stopped the witness: let her go on and say what was in the telegram. Mr. Steele—No. I stopped her; I take the responsibility, if there is any, for obvious reasons, which you would have seen if you had been looking at Miss Nellie; I saw that her feelings were about to overcome her. Cross-examined by Mr. Syester—The prop erty my mother desired to lease was her house and furniture, at 2f>3 North Eutaw street; she had offered it to Mr. Webster Wil¬ son: the house and fnrurtnre were advertised for rent; I don’t remember the mouth in which the advertisement was put in, but it was last spring: the house belonged to Mr. Latimer; I am not positive, but I think my mother leased the house for fifteen or eigbtee months; we had lived in the nouse for thre years, and had renewed the lease for tw years; the advertisements also offered tb furniture for rent; the keys remained in m drawer until about 6 P. M. of the da General Ketchum died, when Mrs. Hutto came for them; I think it was Mrs. Hutto who brought the keys back to me; I do nc recollect what time last spring it was tb: General Ketchum was at our house; I was nc at home when he was there; I was away froi home a great deal last spring. Miss Wharton was now released, and r< suming her seat by the side of her mother sb again drew down her veil. There was quite stir when she arose to proceed to the witnes stand, and when she raised her veil the spec tators manifested a desire to observe be closely. She gave her testimony in an exceet ingly quiet and lady-like manner. Miss Nellie Mayer next testified—I am daughter of Colonel Brantz Mayer, of Balt more; I have known Mrs. Wharton for abon eight years; I went almost daily to her houst i visited the house every day during Genera Ketchum’s sickness, and two days. I think, was there twice; I found the trou t, door alway open, and I do not remember having to rin the bell; always a great many peisonswer there: I saw there Mr. and Mrs. Hutton, M. Van Ness’ mother, Mrs. George: Frick, Mr: Charles Frick, Mr. and Mrs. Snowden, Mi Tom Sargent, Mr. George Sargent, Mrt Van Ness’ nurse and two children Mr. and Mrs. Henry Loney, Mr. Got ham Moale and Mr. McAvoy, Mrs.SChnbb an Mrs. Wharton’s two servants; during the tin) I was there, while General K. was sick in th house, a great many persons were coming i' and out; I had seen General K. frequently be fore at Mrs. Wharton’s; I had seen him prevj ously during the present year; 1 had a convei sation with him about his taking medicine and he said he drank his medicine from I bottle; he said he did not see tho use of hav ing a teaspoon, as all teaspoons were not cj the same size; that occurred duriu Lent; we were going to churc and I was talking with him: I sai General Ketchum at Mrs. Wharton’s on Sin day night, June 2o; I don’t remember h dress; it did not make any impression upo me: I have been intimate with Mrs. Wharto and her family for six years; at one time lived within one square of her house; she w: always considered very amiable, very char table", and very hospitable iudeed. To Mr. Svest.er—The doors were kept opd only while General Ketchum aud Mr. Val Ness lay sick in Mrs. Wharton’s house; I head several times in Baltimore that Gener: Ketchum drank medicine from a bottle, In I don’t remember where I heard or from who I heard it; General Ketchum did not. tell n why he was taking medicine or who pr scribed it for him; I do not reiner her seeing him taking medicine; he did n< say that he had his medicine with him; v were on the street at the time; I don’t reuiey her whether he said bottle or vial: I saw hi between !) and 10 Sunday night, at Mr Wharton’s; Mrs. Chubb, Mrs. Wharton, an TEE WEARTON-KETCEUM TRIAL. Mr. Lewis Mayer were also present; I don’t remember hearing General K. complain when [ went to church with him and had the con¬ versation about the medicine, which way he preferred to take his medicine. To Mr. Revell—The next time I saw General Ketchum he was in a carriage in Washing- son, and I did not speak to him; I can’t remember when Lent,commenced last winter; [ think I had the conversation with General Ketchum about his medicine about the latter part of Lent; Lent lasts forty days; I may have leen General Ketchum at Mrs. Wharton’s be¬ tween the time I had the conversation with aim about his medicine and last June, hut I lon’t remember; I don’t remember how long I rad heard about his taking medicine from a >ottle before my conversation with him about t; I think it was at least a month previous; I iommenced the conversation by telling him I lad beard he took medicine that way, and hat I thought it was very imprudent. Miss Mayer was here allowed to leave the wit¬ less stand, and took a seat by Miss Wharton. The Court, after ordering the audience to eave the court room without delay, that he jury might be retired, adjourned until 10 ,1. M. to-morrow. The court room was crowded to-day during the entire proceedings, and uuch interest was manifested. Among the Baltimoreans present to-day vere Archibald Stirling, Jr., United States listrict Attorney; Andrew J. George, Clerk f the City Court of Baltimore; Colonel M. S. less, President of the Concordia Society; 'rofessor Aikin and George C. Maund, Esq. laptain Waddell, famous as a Confederate ruiser, was also present to-day. The weight of the precipitate obtained hy 'rofessor Tonrv from l-16th of the solution was i 025 expressed iu fractions of a gramme. This muld be equal to about 6-10ths of a grain of irtar emetic from the w’hole solutiou. TWENTY-FIRST 0A¥. Annapolis, December 29,1871. The testimony for the defencein the Wbarton- ietebum trial promises to be fully as tedious as as the greater part of that given bv the fate. It is understood that Mrs. Wharton’s ealth is too feeble to admit of afternoon ses- ons of the Court, and the list of her wit- esses is very lengthy, a large number of bom will testify to her character and reputa- on. Interest iu the trial continues unabated. Miss Jennie Mayer was lirst called and tes- fied—I am the daughter of Colonel Brantz layer; I have known Mrs. Wharton very inti- lately for five or six years; I was at Mrs. ^barton’s on the day General K. died; I went Mere about half past 2 o’clock; I went down ie street with Miss Nellie for Mr. Neilson >ad came back, arriving before General K. jied; I then went home to dinner; I returned i the afternoon and was present when Mrs. "utton brought in General K.’s effects; she landed them to Miss Nellie; I know that Mrs. | 7 harton has the reputation of being very 77 amiable and kind, and always willing to do anything she could for her friends. To Mr. Syester—I could not see all Mrs.Hut- ton brought in; she broughtthem in her hands in this way [here Miss Mayer held her hands togetherj; I do not remember seeing a ring. Capt Henry F. Brewerton next testified—I am a Captain of the Fifth Artillery, United States Army; I am at preseut stationed at Fort Preble, Maine; I have known Mrs. Whar¬ ton between three or four years; I was for a long time at her house under circumstances which enabled me to judge of her high char¬ acter and remarkable aruiabilty; I knew her in Baltimore; her general character for amia¬ bility and kindness were very well known and proverbial; every one who knew her knew her to be both kind and amiable, and an ex¬ cellent triend. To Mr. Revell—This opinion is based upon what I saw and experienced; I was at her house for several days, and again for two or three weeks; Mrs. Wharton then visited me at Portland, Maine; she paid me only one visit; I have seen her, I think, or.lv four times in the time I speak of: Mrs. Wharton is an old friend of my wife; I knew of her well by reputation; I have also heard officers of the army speak of her repu¬ tation; she is well known in the army; I re¬ member hearing General Sackett, Inspector General of the Army, speak of her; that was since her arrest; I have heard army officers speak of her amiability; I can’t recall the exact words; it was simply that she was an amiable lady, or a very pleasant lady; it was of that nature. Prof. It. S. McCulloch was next called, and testified—I am hy profession a chemist and engineer; I am now a Professor in Washington- Lee University, Virginia; I teach natural phil¬ osophy and mechanics, and chemistry applied to metaiurgy; I have been a professor iu Jef¬ ferson College, Pennsylvania, and also at Princeton, New Jersey; I made chemical analyses for the United States Government for three or four years; I was also engaged as chemist in the United States Mint at Philadel¬ phia; I was also employed as chemist and min¬ ing engineer hy the Confederate Govern¬ ment; I heard all the testimony of Pro¬ fessor Aikin, and I read last night a paper purporting to be his report to Mr. Knott; Mr. Thomas had sent me a copy which did not differ from that I saw last night, with the exceptions of alterations made by Professor Aikin in his testimony; in my opinion the tests used by Professor Aikin were insufficient to establish the presence of antimony; I con¬ sider his analysis radically defective; in order to establish the presence of anti¬ mony it is absolutely necessary to get the metal itself, and then subject it afterwards to test after test to prove that it actually is antimony; antimony is a simple elementary substance, having very many prop¬ erties by which it can be recognized, and if, in testing for it, any experiment fails, that would vitiate any conclusion; it must, of course, cor¬ respond to all of its properties; the quantity obtained must be sufficient to he subjected to all tests.to preclude the possibility of its being something else; if any one of the tests fail it 78 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. would prove that something else is there, or that the metal, if there, is not pure: if it is there it must correspond to all its properties which are positive; I con¬ sider Dr. Aikin’s analysis radically defective because he did not get the substance, and operated more or less on organic matter, which would render the tests fallacious. Mr. Steele here read section 503 of Wharton and Stille’s medical jurisprudence, as to the necessity for care, accuracy and absolute cer¬ tainty iu the discovery of a poison; Prof. McCulloch said that was the opinion he held, and added: “I have just said the substance must be found,’and in sufficient quantity.” He then continued—Orfila is a good book and high authority; on some matters it is not con¬ sidered so good as more modern authorities. Mr. Steele now handed the witness a work of Orfila on poisons, and stated to him that, as he could not read French as fluently as he desired, he would be obliged if the witness would read it. Prof. McCulloch said he read Freuch freely, and, after reading over the paragraph shown him, translated it into English and read it to the jury; it stated that as a txbe had been broken in the analysis of the body of La Farge, the presence of arsenic could not be determined; Ortila further stated, in a letter appended, that (metallic) arsenic must be found to make it conclusive. The witness continued—If Dr. Aikin had been operating on a metal, and knew it to be a metal, the three tests he used would constitute a very strong probability that it was antimony I say a very strong probability, and not an ab • 6olute certainty, solely because there are other tests in addition to which antimony can be sub¬ jected, and, moreover, because new metals are constantly being discovered in chemistry; it is possible that even if a chemist possessed this metal it might fail in properties involving an¬ timony: in a case iuvolving life and death— [Here Mr. Syester interrupted aud said that iu this matter the witness was not competent to give an opinion.] The Court decided that the witness could not give such an opinion to the jury. Mr. fcteele said the witness could say what reliance was to be placed in tests. After some further desultory discus¬ sion, Professor McCulloch continued—In any case requiring certainty I should consider it necessary to go beyond the tests used by Pro¬ fessor Aikin, even in a commercial matter. Mr. Syester said the witness could not add his opinion as to commercial matters, and he wished the witness to so understand. Professor McCulloch continued—I wmuld consider Professor Aikiu’s tests insufficient in any case; in a case iu which a chemist operates on the contents of a stomach, containing I substauces of organic kind, animal or vegeta¬ ble. it has been held for many years that such reactions as Professor Aikin described may prove entirely fallacious, especially in hunting for a metal; for that 1 can give you authorities if you wish them; those three tests are that a liquid supposed to contain auti- mony shall give with sulphuretted hydro¬ gen or with sulphide of ammonium, an orange red precipitate; that is No. 1; the 2d is that this orange red precipitate shall be soluble in hydrochloric acid; aud the 3d h that solution iu hydrochloric acid, if dropped into water, shall give a white precipitate: if there are other substances which would produce these reactions, then they would not prove ttie presence of antimony; ars<-nic has also certain color tests, and it has been held that such tests are not reliable; the books art full of references to that matter; that doc¬ trine is no new one; I have made a memor¬ andum of the authorities I would name: 1 will first refer to a volume of Orfila, pub¬ lished iu 1818, page 0S3; Orfila there says that I the presence of articles of food in the stomach may produce fallacious tests I refer you to the case of Donald, tried in Eugland in 1817—2d Beck, p. 539; in that case it was in evidence that the deceased! had eaten onions the day before his death, and Dr. Neal testified that a decoction of onions gave nitrate of silver a yellow color, resembling the yellow color arsenic also gives with nitrate of silver; he also testified that a, decoction of onions gives a green precipitate with copper as arsenic does; and also that the phosphates of the human body give r- yellow precipitate; in that case there was a failure to produce the metal, and the prisonei was acquitted. Mr. Syester said to the Court that the wit¬ ness could do more than give the results olj the scientific experiments. The Chief Judge said that the witness could give only the scientific results. Mr. Syester said he did not find any fault with the witness, but he desired him to re¬ frain from giving the results of criminal trials. Professor McCulloch continued—1 will refei now to Rose’s Analytical Chemistry, page 186 a high authority among chemists, aud also tc Barresville’s Analytical Chemistry— Mr. Syester—If they are Freuch you had better translate them. Mr. Steele—I will give you a rough transla¬ tion. Mr. Steele then read from Rose that it was necessary to drive out or destroy the organic matter. The witness continued—I have made experiments in this particular case; I tried the reaction of sulphuretted hydrogen on chloral and got from it a precipi¬ tate which might readily be mistaker by its color for one of sulphide of antimony I repeated that experiment with sulphide o; ammonium and with sulphide of sodium, auc I got similar results; I then experimented simi¬ larly with yellow jasmine (gelsemiuum); I goi also a precipitate which might readily he mis j taken by its color for one of antimony; I ther mixed these substances, gelsemiuum auc chloral, and found they gave me similar re suits when mixed; I then put that mixture o: chloral and yellow jasmine into or ganic substances: the tincture of yellow jasmine was sent to md at Lexiugton and boro the label of Gasman A Co.; I then tried the experiments with s mixture containing organic matter, such ai the w T hite of an egg aud milk that had sourec for some days, using the whey and not the TEE WEARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 79 oagulum; I then mixed them with beef tea nd added a drop of lactic acid and a drop of ydroeliloric acid, and a little pepsin, to try o imitate what is usually found in the human toinach; I tried these experiments, supposing hese organic substances to he as near as 1 ould get to what were the contents of Gen- ral Ketchum’s stomach; I obtained a ed precipitate, closely resembling such a one s antimony would give: when thus mixed with nimal matter, the precipit.tes were more ulky, more voluminous, than in aqueous so- ition; I did this in Lexington, Va., two or tree days before coming to Annapolis; I have nee repeated those experiments on other lecimens of chloral and yellow jasmine, and ith similar results; 1 have done it here i the presence of others, Dr. Reese, Dr. enth and some others; another irnport- mt experiment, which I performed at Lex igton, and have repeated here in concur- ;nce with Drs. Genth and Reese, is this: the id precipitate thrown down by sulphuretted ydrogen in tincture of yellow jasmine, dis- ilves in hydrochloric acid, as that from an- rnony does; in other words, tne two resemble icli other in this property; they act alike; hen this solution in hydrochloric acid is copped into water it also gives a white oud, just as antimony does; that white oud is soluble in an excess of hydrochloric :id, which is also true of antimony; this so- tion, with sulphuretted hydrogen, again ves a precipitate -which might be mistaken r one of antimony; the resemblance of the actions is truly remarkable, so much so that was astonished when I made the experi- ents; I made, last night, a mixture of chloral id yellow jasmine, in about the proportions . which they were administered to General etchum by Dr. Williams, and to this I added hat Dr. Aikin added to the contents of the omach in his search for strychnia, to wit: rtaric acid neutralized by bicarbonate of da; I did this to make an aqueous solution resemble, as near as possible, what was in jneral K.’s stomach; I have that solution in rart, and if desired I will show its reac- m with sulphide of ammonium; I cannot V it here with sulphuretted hydrogen, be- use the gas would make the air of the room respirable, and moreover, it would take too Qg a time; when I put in hydrosulphate of imonia I do not consider that I put in reign matter. Professor McCulloch now showed the ex- riment, and while going through the opera- in was closely watched by every person esent in the court room. His experiments monstrated the results he had described, b precipitates being of an unmistakable red lor. 3e continued—I have tried the experiment the reaction of the sulphide of ammo- im on several specimens of tartar emetic, d in only one or two did I get the pure red; iy the pure article will give the re red; the mixture with yellow jas- ne and the mixture with tartar etic have been placed side by side, and very tie difference could be observed; when I hd the experiments in Lexington I had a ter from Mr. Thomas enclosing one from Dr. Williams, in which Dr. Williams stated, as he has here described, how he treated General K.; as far as I am aware there is noth¬ ing in any book on this subject, no such ex¬ periments as I have made being reported; now that I have made these tests they go very far to make me of the opinion that it was the medicines administered to General K. which gave Dr. Aikin his results. After some time had been occupied by Messrs. Steele and Hagner m examining the short¬ hand report of Prof. Aikin’s testimony, the witness continued, in answer to Mr. Steele— In addition to the three tests used by Dr.. Aikin, there are quite a number of others which are used in testing for antimony; I beard Dr. Aikin say he had weighed one- grain of the sediment, and estimated from that; that could not be relied upon; the practice of chemists is to weigh always with great care; moreover, he operated in organic matter; to judge of quantity by eye comparisons of bulk would be utterly fallacious; no such estimate could be made with any accu¬ racy; it is also not easy to weigh four-tenths of a grain with accuracy; the precipitates might, unless antimony was known to be present, contain nothing but organic matter, just as I have shown here; there is always more or less of free sulphur even in operating with metals; in operating chemists must always guard against free sulphur; water charged with sulphuretted hydrogen will not keep, but rapidly decomposes, and the sulphur falls; in no case would an eye comparison be suffi¬ ciently accurate; an estimate of weight can¬ not be made by observation of the bulk; it is of course more difficult to make comparisons by- memory than by observations, and in analyti¬ cal operations you must weigh, and must weigh accurately, too; the tests applied by Dr. Aikin to the sediment in the tumbler were not sufficient; he should have gotten the metal there, and then tested that metal; it is necessary in all cases that the metal be gotten of sufficient quantity to manipulate with the critical tests of analytical chemistry; the chemist must first know that he is operating with a metal; one test relating to the crystals would go to prove that something other than antimony was present; the fact that the crystals formed by a drop of tartar 1 emetic, and those formed with a drop of the sediment were not alike, makes it absolutely certain that tartar emetic was not present; Dr. Aikin’s testimony about the sediment dif¬ fered from what he made in the written state¬ ment to Mr. Knott, and he corrected it here; in the written statement a chemical impossi¬ bility was given; it would have been, if any¬ thing, a proof that something else than tartar emetic was present; I heard the testimony of Professor Tonry; in my judgment the tests he employed, and the results he exhibited, did not prove in any manner that anti¬ mony was present in the substances he used; he got a number of little spots, but even if these were metallic, they were in insufficient quantities to prove of what metal they were composed; if they had been antimony they would have been abundantly and sufficiently explained by the mere impuri- 80 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. ties of the chemicals used; hydrochloric acid is liable to contain impurities; it often con¬ tains arsenic, and may contain antimony; the test used by Professor Toury for the purity of liis sulphuric acid, his zinc and his ■water was not sufficient; if you refer to the last London edition of Taylor’s Medical Jurisprudence, you will find that when zinc is dissolved in sul¬ phuric acid that dark flakes are found float; iug in the solution, and that these flakes are hydride of arsenic, which do not decompose as long as there is no organic matter present, but suffer decomposition as soon as any or¬ ganic matter is added, and give rise to the escape of arseniuretted hydrogen, which would produce black spots; I have in the United States Mint passed many tons of zinc through dilute sulphuric acid, and I never yet saw a specimen of zinc so pure that it did not give those dark flakes; it was almost a daily op¬ eration in the mint, and we used the best materials, regardless of cost;Professor Tonry’s spots may have been caused by just such an impurity in the zinc he used. Mr. Thomas here read from pages 211 and 212 of Taylor’s Medical Jurisprudence, London edition, in reference to the decomposition of organic matter in sulphuric acid. The witness continued—I believe hydro¬ chloric acid also contains antimony, but oftener arsenic, either of which would give black spots; Professor Tonry stated particularly that he washed all his vessels with hydrochloric acid, aud then washed them with water; it is possible then that the hydrochloric acid introduced the antimony; I saw the spots first shown and can form a very probable estimate of their value from experiments I have made. The witness here showed a porcelain lid to the jury upon which were thirty spots; each spot, he said, represented the one forty-thous¬ andth part of a grain; they appear to me larger than those of the first set exhibited by Pi. f. Tonry; the second set exhibited by him appeared to me very small, indeed, barely visible; the size of the spots is, how¬ ever, a matter of judgment by the eye; I weut to the Naval Academy Laboratory, where Professor Fisher, in my presence, weighed by his balances one gramme of tar¬ tar emetic; he kindly lent me a graduated pipette—a glass tube so graduated as to meas¬ ure cubic centremetres; with that tube I made a solution in which the proportion of water to the tartar emetic was as one to a hundred; in other words 1 dissolved the gramme of tar¬ tar emetic in oue hundred centimetres of water; I could then dilute this solution, or rather, a portion of it successively un¬ til I obtained an extremely dilute solution, a measured quantity of which contained, by calculation, reducing French weights to Troy grains, three-fourths of oue-thousandth of a grain; those three-fourths of a one-thousandth part of a grain gave me the thirty spots, aud seemed then exhausted; each spot represented the fortieth part of one one-thousandth of a grain; it is only by such a process that it could be performed; I don’t think it possible that chemical manipulations could be performed on such minute.quantities; I am confident I could not do it, and I have had a great deal of experience,and have been reqn ired to do my work very accurately; I say required, because part of the time I was absolutely required by law; I would not like to operate on the teutn or twentieth of a spot or even on a fifth; I doubt if I could operate on a spot containing so little as one thousandth, and I am certain I could not subject it to many tests; I doubt if I could subject a spot of oue thousaudth to tests to establish the presence of antimony; it may be possible, even assuming that the spots contained antimony or arsenic, that the impurities of the materials used would ex¬ plain it all; it might even occur by accident; the merest particle of antimony or arsenic may have adhered to the hands of the chem¬ ist; I have seen a number of spots much larger than those shown here subjected to tht sul¬ phide of ammonium test, which spots were antimony; and, collectively, giving no result, as many as ten being used at a time: I don’t think Professor Tonry could have obtained re¬ sults from two or three of the spots he ex¬ hibited; the result he sought ought to have been obtained if antimony' had been there, and their non-obtention would prove the con¬ trary; the spots were, however, so small that I doubt if he could subject them to any deci¬ sive tests whatever; I regarded them as insignificantly small; some vegetable and ani¬ mal matters may produce the black spots; hy¬ drocarbons can do it; also chloroform and sul¬ phide of carbon, and these will do it in com¬ bination; in order to determine what is in the black spots they must be well tested, aud must be in sufficient quantities to be thor¬ oughly tested, otherwise they prove nothing; I heard Professor Tonrv’s statement of his weights; I don’t think it possible to weigh twenty-five one-hundredths of a milli¬ gramme; on that subject of weighing I have had a great deal of experience, aud had to weigh accurately, both while a mint officer and while engaged in Washington with the late Professor Bache, of the Coast Survey,! and aiso of the Office of Weights and Meas-I ures; from making investigations my experi* ence enables me to say positively what can' aud what cauuot be done in weighing; the 1 balances in the mint are celebrated for their 1 accuracy and workmanship as well as those! made at the Office of Weights aud Measures in Washington; both have been executed by a workmau (Mr. Saxton) who isrenowued for his mechanical skill; in the mints our assay balances, which were in-fl tended to be ten times as delicate as the balances usually employed by chemistsi and which were also much smaller aud much i lighter, and therefore far more delicate, did! not permit weighings to be made with aceu-4 racy closer than the one-thousandth of at grain; great accuracy' is necessary in mint cab culatious, or else gross errors would arise,! unless the balances were extremely accurate? the smallest weight ever attempted iu tbef assay balances was one-half of one one thou¬ sandth of a grain, and that on a balance far more accurate than those ordinarily used hy chemists; Professor Toury stated that his balances were guaranteed to be aoourate THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 81 3 the one-twentieth of a milligramme; that ;duced is seventy-seven one-hundred tlmu- rndth of a grain, or approximately one one- iousandth of a grain; this would he about ie performance of one of the most delicate ssay balances at the mint, which are far lore accurate than those chemists use; the sual chemist’s balances are reliable to deter- iine the hundredths of a grain, but not the housandths of a grain; wheu Professor Tonry tated that his balances had been guarau- 3ed to him, he merely stated the ordi- arv commercial guarantee; it is abso- jtelv necessary to the accuracy of a balance, bat its knife edges be parallel, without which be lengths of the arms of the balance will not e equal, except by accident; without that the alance is worthless as to accuracy; when ice weighings are made it is necessary to lake corrections for temperature, hygrome- ricity, atmospheric bouyancy and barometric reesure; a beaker glass couid not have been ut upon an ascay balance; in handling a eaker glass even the moisture from the ands would make a difference, and demists should always use forceps in deb¬ ate weighings; Professor Tonry would ecessarily have obtained by his tests con- derable organic matter; it would be impos- ble to say how much organic matter was in ie mixture besides sulphur; in so small a uantity any other substance would have een almost inappreciable; the precipitate rof. Tonry got with nitrate of silver don’t rove anything, as he did not follow it up; he lid he did not have time; I don’t consider lat the analyses of Prof. Aikin or of Prof, onry prove anything; they do not prove the resence of any poison, and, in my opinion, aly prove the presence in General K.’s stom- ih of the medicines administered to him y order of Dr. Williams. Prof. McCulloch was now turned over to ie State, and under cross-examination by r. Syester, testified—I think Professor ikin’s analysis radically defective and in- iffioient. because he did not get the metahand it in sufficient quantity to test it; 1 don’t low of any tests to determine the presence | antimony when the metal cannot be pro- iced; I would not consider anything proof iort of the production of the metal itself; ■me writers do not express that opinion; I umore governed in my opinion by chemical cts than by what I have read in books; I ive not hunted up the authorities, but can rnish you to-morrow with as many as you ease; I will give now a book written by Drs. ood and Bache, of Philadelphia, of high putatiou; it is Wood & Bache’s Dispensa¬ ry; under the head of arsenic, you will find at Dr. Christison says that the color tests r arsenic are sufficient to prove its presence, it the authors (Wood & Bache) say they nsider the production of the metal all cases absolutely necessary; I ink you will find in Barres- Lll, page'l79, that the metal must be found; was taught in a medical school, forty years :o, that the metal must be found; Taylor is gh authority; I rarely refer to him; I am a emist, and not a medico-jurist; I have been ught that mental satisfaction is not suffi¬ cient, but the direct, absolute proof; in cases of antimonial or arsenical poisoning it is the generally received opinion that the metal must be obtained, and for the reason that unless you operate on the metal your tests will be fallacious; I do not mean to say that some persons may not entertain a different opinion, but I should attach no importance to their opinions; it is a rule with me to find unmistakable, absolute proof in all scientific investigations; so far as strychnine is concerned, I cannot speak from experimental knowledge; I presume that some vegetable poison may be produced after ab¬ sorption into the system; the tests Dr. Aikin applied to the organic matter may have pro¬ duced fallacious results; Dr. Aikiu’s tests were utterly insufficient; I repeat that a chemist must know that he is operating on a metal; I know that chloral and yellow jasmine will produce similar results to those obtained by Dr. Aikin; two specimens will not produce exactly the same results; I have never tested all the properties of antimony, chloral or yellow jasmine; I will not. say that the colors i have exhibited are identical with those produced by Dr. Aikin; in one solution Pro¬ fessor Aikin, when he precipitated with sul¬ phuretted hydrogen, got one color, according to his report, anil according to his testimony here he got another; I don’t remember pre¬ cisely what was his description of the color of ' the precipitate he gave in his testimony; chem¬ istry may be very fallacious in examining or¬ ganic substances, and chemists too, especially if they are careless; I should say that it would be very difficult to determine the presence of vegetable poisons; I don’t know when anti¬ mony was discovered, but we read in the Bible that Jezebel put her eyes into a sul- phuret of antimony, which in the English version is translated “She painted her face; organic chemistry is yet in its infancy; I do not think that any pro¬ cess used by Professor Aikin was sufficient to destroy the organic matter in General Ketchum’s stomach; I cau’t say that any of the substances I dropped in water were colorless; when I made a precipitate with sulphuretted hydrogen, I got what, in the present state of chemical knowledge, it is impossible to say what it was; the simplest experiment is to precipitate gel- seminum with sulphuretted hydrogen gas, well washed, dissolved in hydrochloric acid, and drop that solution into water, which will give a white cloud, but not an abundant pre¬ cipitate; I did not undertake to dissolve that white cloud with tartaric acid; in one of Dr. Aikin’s experiments he dissolved the white cloud with tartaric acid; the white precipitate, thrown down by antimony, dissolves iu tar¬ taric acid; I dissolved the white cloud, but not with tartaric acid; I used a different acid, and I did not use tartaric acid, because that acid holds substances in solution, and does not precipitate; I did not think it worth while to repeat the experiments Dr. Aikin made; I dissolved the white cloud in hydro¬ chloric acid, precipitated with sulphuretted hydrogen, and got a yellow precipitate; I never got a pure orange red from antimony except when in pure aqueous solution. 82 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. Professor McCulloch was now subjected to a rigid test of his knowledge of the color tests known to chemistry. He continued—Wormlev is not good author¬ ity iu inorganic chemistry; his work contains some mistakes; chloral is soluble in cold water, and I presume in boiling water; yel¬ low jasmine when dropped in ordinarily cool water gives a turbidity to the water; there is a small portion which 1 suppose to be resinous matter, and it appears in the water. The Court here adjourned until 10 A. M. to¬ morrow. Rev. George Leeds, Profs. Aiken and Tonry, Drs Chew and Williams, and Marshal Frey, | of Baltimore, were among those present to- I day. Drs- William and Hiram Corson, of Norristown, Pennsylvania (the birthplace of ' Mrs. Wharton), arrived yesterday, having ; been summoned by the defence. The ladies were present to-day in full force, and, not¬ withstanding the tedium of a great part of Prof. McCulloch’s testimony, sat patiently until the Court adjourned. - TWE.\TY.SECOiMi> I»AY. Annapolis, December 80,1871. The great Wliarton-Ketchum trial has again degenerated into a chemical lecture, and science has usurped the place of law and nar¬ rative. Prof. McCulloch on yesterday gave the jury, Court, counsel and spectators an idea ol’how certainly and uncertainly chem¬ ical investigations have or may have resulted. He proved himself a veritable free lauce, and from the beginning stood strongly upon the offensive. For a time it seemed that Pro¬ fessors Aikiu and Tonry had practiced a de¬ lusion and a snare; then it appeared that aftt r ail there is far more tiction than fact connected with the search of chemists for poisons. In Professor Me- j Culloch’s opinion there was nothing re- [ liable in the analyses of Profs. Aikiu and Tonry, from the first steps in their investiga¬ tions to the weighing of the minutest particle; j weights, colors, spots, and precipitates were J alike utterly fallacious and too insignificant to he considered for a moment. Attor¬ ney General Syester, in a most astute man¬ ner, managed, however, by closely in¬ terrogating the Professor from Washington- Lee University to elicit some ■ chemical truths, and to base upon them a framework upon wlAeh the chemical experts for the State might find a comfortable footing. It was doubtless all very interesting to those who had been initiated into the hidden mys¬ teries of chemical lore, but to the great major¬ ity of those present the proceedings were de¬ cidedly tedious. Upon the opening of the Court to-day Sir. Revell was sworn in by the Chief Judge for another term of four years as State’s Attorney for Anne Arundel county, it being the fourth successive term with which ho has been hon¬ ored by the people of his native county. Professor AcCullocli, upon being recalled, said he desired to modify an answer he gave yesterday, by saying that oxide of anti mony is soluble in boiling water. Attorney General Syester then resumed his cross-examination of the witness. Mr. Syester—You say you experimented on tartar emetic and obtained the spots exhibited in Court yesterday; why was not that experi¬ ment made on the pure metal itself? Ans.—Simply because I had no pure metal: it had been given me by a chemist as tartai emetic. Mr. Syester—Tartar emetic is white, is it notl Ans.—Yes, sir, said the witness; because it responded to one test antimony was prob¬ ably present; I do not swear that the deposit! on the lid I exhibited yesterday were froir pure tartar emetic. Mr. Syester—In your experiment on the one gramme of tartar emetic, did you examine for its purity ? Ans.—I only examined by a test of sulphide of ammonium. Mr. Syester—You say you dissolved that one gramme iu 100 cubic centremetres of water; Was that water distilled? Aus.—It was hydrant water. What reagents were employed in that ex¬ periment, and were they purified? Ans.—I did not test their purity. Mr. Syester—In getting those spots, your j aim was to get the metal, and spread it oufi over the largest space, was it not? Aus.—I went on making spots until the gat] stopped making them; my object was to make! a succession of spots and take their average] value. Mr. Syester—Did you aim at collecting oni any one spot the largest amount of deposit possible to be collected there? Ans.—No, sir; I did not. Mr. Syester—Are not the spots on your plate] less distinct than were those on Professor] Toury’s plate? Ans.—I think mine were larger; they were] to my eye. Mr. Syester—You say you obtained spots] from chloral and yellow jasmine similar to] those obtained and shown here by Professor] Tonry; did you make any experiments onl those spots to discover or test their nature! and quality? Ans.—I never got any such spots from chloral i and yellow jasmine. Mr. Syester—You said yesterday you had; tested many tons of zinc anil never saw a specimen of zinc so pure that it did not give the dark spots spoken of, and that when Pro¬ fessor Tonry collected the spots on the por-i celain lid, those spots were litely to have been: produced by the zinc which he used; so youl uudertake to declare that no zinc can be made absolutely free from the impuritiy which will produce such spots? I did not say that no zinc was so absolutely: free. Here some discussion followed between; Messrs. Syester and Steele iu reference to the manner of the Attorney General iu iuterroi gating the witness, and after some explana-i tions the witness continued: I thought the one test of the zinc used by Prof. Tonry was insufficient, and I spoke of its because I thought it was the object here to ascertain the truth; the liquid above a precip-' itate is no part of the precipitate. THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 83 Mr. Syester here showed to the witness the ■ecipitate shown by him on yesterday, and ie witness said it had turned dark, as lie had ■cdicted, and it did not now look like an itimonial precipitate. He continued—An orange red precipitate ill change if the organic substance changes; said yesterday that the precipitate I showed ire might readily be mistaken for an anti- onial precipitate; I can’t say how long I jpt the precipitates in the experiments made at Lexington, Va.; I don’t remember lat Dr. Aikin said the color test was not ifficient; I merely showed those experiments i the jury to show them one result that eould i obtained; I did not have time to go further ith the test; at Lexington I dissolved seve- .1 of my precipitates in hydrochloric acid; was strong, but I don’t remember that it as hot or cold;- I have used it both hot id cold; I don’t remember what particular pre- pitates I treated with boiling water: I simply ied the Laboratory chloric acid, bought as ire; I did not test it; I cleaned my tubes well; did not consider it necessary to test the irity of the chloric acid I used; I doubted y reagents and tested them; sulphide of ali¬ mony is not readily soluble in hydrochloric iid, but requires boiling hydrochloric acid; threw my precipitates away, and of course ■ought nono of them here; I experimented i some before I threw them away; I got a bite cloud by dropping the acid solution in ater, and that white cloud became a precip- rite; I did not try to precipitate that white oud with tartaric acid; if it had been an itimonial precipitate tartaric acid would ive dissolved it: a chemist would ordinarily ) as I did, that is, to dissolve in hydrochloric ;id instead of tartaric acid, having the first Lined just at hand; the acid in the water he¬ me clear; I tried the addition of the sulphide ammonium, and got a yellow precipitate; lylor is a standard author on medical juris- udence, but not on chemistry. Mr. Syester ire read to the witness from page 484 of i.ylor on Poisonings, 2d American edition, id the witness said he did not agree with ivlor’s opinion, because he considered that ■jiiemist should know that he was operating . the metal. He continued—I want the ,3tal always; at the Naval Academy I was 3rely experimenting for comparative results organic substances; I quoted Orlila as an thority, who, fifty vears ago, had said the mils produced by inorganic food were fal- iious; I would not say that antimony is poisonous; other authors than Oriila V that organic matter may produce lacious results; Orfila begins with the dte powder, and there are millions of white Iwders; Mr. Syester here read to the witness, ni page 214 of Wormley on Micro-Chemistry; :1 the witness said other things might pro- ice the results Wormley there speaks of as Is pecubar results of antimony. He con¬ ned—I think Wormley asserts more in he knows in that regard; I know j substance that would give the precipi¬ ces exactly as desciibed by Professor Aikin; I don’t think that tartar emetic ever jiuld give those results; when a precipi- 1 e is thrown down from an acid solution !! it would become contaminated with sulphur, if sulphide of ammonium was used; I have not read Taylor on Poisonings; Wormley is more recent than Rose; no test is sufficient in iny opinion in the search for antimony unless the metal itself is obtained; when the quan¬ tity is too small to work with, you can do nothing with it chemically; as a chemist I want something to work upon, and not an im¬ aginary thing; if it was too small I could do i nothing with it and could come to no conclu¬ sions: if I used the same tests Dr. Aikin used, and got the results he did, I would not be satisfied; if I got. under the same treat¬ ment, the results^ he got, I would have only a suspicion that antimony was present; after getting the metal I would try on that ■ all the tests I know of; there is no one test that is sufficient, nor any two, or three, or four in my judgment; I yesterday said new metals might have new properties unknown to chemistry; about sixty-five elementary metals are known. To Mr Revel 1—I say theie might he a new metal, which would give the results ob¬ tained by Dr. Aikin, but I know of no such new metal; in my opinion the sediment in the tumbler contained organic matter largely; his correction of his report of his analysis of that sediment is unintelligible to me; as well as I can remember his oral testimony differed ma¬ terially from his report; I did hot say the an¬ alyses of Professors Aikin and Toury proved the presence of tartar emetic or antimony,but that they were radically defective; Professor Aikin did not show what was in the sediment in the tumbler; I do not think that only white sugar, fresh milk, and a tablesDoonful of brandy or whiskey would give the results that Dr. Aikin got from the sediment: some¬ thing else must have been in the sediment; if chloral or yellow jasmine, it might have given Professor Aikin in his analysis of the tumbler the results he obtained; his results would create the basis for a suspicion that antimony was present; I have been at chemistry sin ’e a boy of 11 years; over 40 years; I have exam¬ ined only one body for poisons; I did it when a young man as a lesson; I found nothing; no one assisted me; I applied ali the tests for arsenic or antimony; I particularly examined for arsenic; that was before Marsh’stests were in use; that was as far back as 1832; I attrib¬ ute the results Dr. Aikin obtained, in a great measure, to the fact that chloral and yellow jasmine had been administered by Dr. Wil¬ liams; I have experimented with antimony mixed with those substances; I have no ex¬ perimental knowledge on the subject; the books say that if antimony had been pres¬ ent the results would have been those obtained by Professor Aikin; I believe they might, however, be masked; if either chloral or yellow jasmine had been present, the re¬ sults would havebeen modified; I se^ noreason why chloral, yellow jasmine and chloroform may not have given Professor Tonry his re¬ sults; if everything was pure with which he operated there may be a probability that antimony was present; hydrochloric acid often contains arsenic, but if it is chemically pure it does not contain it; the absence of spots would show that the hydrochloric acid used 84 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. by Professor Tonry was pure; on a gold assay balance nothing less than the half of a thousandth of a grain could be weighed; I judge Prof. Tonry’s balance only by this description of it; tartar emetic has very little taste to me; to me it tastes slightly saline, will you taste it ? Here the witness took a vial of it from his pocket. Mr. Revell quickly said; No, I thank you, sir, I don’t want to taste poison! The witness continued: I believe Governor Bowie’s tongue was blistered by it. Mr. Steele—The Governor don’t want that stated. Mr. ftevell—I dont know that he does, but we have a right to get at the truth. Professor McCulloch continued—The books say its taste is acrid and made up with metal¬ lic; 1 have seen some books which said its taste was uot. metallic; it don’t blister my tongue, but it did the Governor’s; it left in n y mouth only a little abiding taste, something like pepper. To Mr. Syester—I would hesitate to say that spots produced by a process used by Professor Tonry wonld contain autimony. To the Court.—Organic substances might give such spots as Professor Tonry obtained; where organic matter was present Marsh's tests would be of no practical value. Mr. Hagner here quietly but earnestly pro¬ tested to the Chief Judge that he was cross examining the witness. The Chief Judge explained his reasons for interrogating the witness. To Mr. Syester—The spot test is not deemed of importance in giving the arser.ic or anti¬ mony in sufficient quantity to test for the metals; I have seen spots produced from an article obtained as tartar emetic dissolved in sulphide of ammonia; Marshs’ test is not abso¬ lutely certain, but needs verification; my chemistry is more experimental than from books; I think one chemical fact of more value than all the books say; I do not think the books authorities. Mr. Syester—“Your friends of the defence, thought they were in the beginning of this trial.” Mr. Steele—“Yes, sir, and we will argue it with you now or at any time.’ The witness continued—One fact is worth all the books. Mr. Steele here read to the witness from Taylor in reference to a precipitate given by sulphuretted hydrogen in hydrochloric acid, and the -witness explained his opinion on that subject. Mr. Steele then read from page 356 on the same work, as to the necessity in crim¬ inal trials to rtuder the presence of poison most clear by other than Marsh’s test. Prof. Tonry expressed then his agreement with the authority quoted, and said the quantity ob¬ tained should be large enough to be manipu¬ lated and put through other tests. Sir. Steele again read from page 3S4, and the witness ex¬ pressed liis opinion, with qualifications. To Mr. Steele—I have given tartar emetic to about a dozen persons, besides Governor Bowie, and. his tongue was the ouly one blis¬ tered. To Mr. Thomas—Marsh’s test consists in the obtaining of the spots and their verification. To Mr. Syester—Bismuth, which I have sal would give me a white cloud, is often used it goes by the name of pearl, or lily-wbitt and the ladies use it on their faces; the doc tors also use. it foi chronic indigestion: if bit ninth had been present, it would not hav given the same results as antimony. The witness was here dismissed, and Di Frederick A. Gentli was next called, and tei tified—I reside in Philadelphia and am au an; lyticalehemist; I made my first analysis in 1SK and have been ever since, connected with am lytical chemistry; I studied in Germany, firs withLeopold Gmelin.iu Heidelberg: then wit Leibig, iu Giessen, and afterwards Bunsen, i Marlburg; Leibig is the great chemist wh made organic chemistry; I heard the en tire testimony of Dr. Aikin; I have rea his report to Mr. Knott, State’s Atrorne of Baltimore city; his tests and resnli obtained do not establish any present of antimony; whenever a subject is to I treated for the presence of any poisoi antimony for instance, it is necessary, uude all circumstances, to use the best method- and those not liable to error, and iu cases < metallic poisons, to produce the metal, and I produce it in such a quantity that by subs., quent investigations of that metal no doul i at all can be left as to its nature. Mr. Steele here read to the witness from portion of Professor Aikin’s testimony as ! the characteristic results of tests for ant mony. Dr. Genth said in answer—The three tes used by Professor Aikin are not certain; it always absolutely necessary to obtai the metal and then to verify tha by tests; there are about a dozen dift'erei methods of testing for autimony; if the qua tity of metal obtained is sufficiently large use all the tests, then all the tests should 1 used; if the quantity is not very large it shou at least be large enough for the chemist make all the characteristic tests after the met been produced; the copper test would autimony had been present, have prodttc a crystalline powder like small needli I very minute of course, and they would ha covered the inside of the tube: I ba tried the experiment lately in Pbiladelpli i and have observed it; the prismatic form w; very distinct; I tried the experiment on a timony which was coating copper; the di \ tinctiou between an amorphous cloud at I crystalline powder is undoubtedly ve important; I would now refer you to Willis Allan Miller’s Chemistry, page 602. He re; first from page 589, under the head of arson He then read from page 602, iu which it said that the coating becomes eoudeused in needles. Hecontiuued—I recollect the tv methods used by Dr. Aikin iu testing his si phuric acid. The witness here repeated t tests Dr. Aikin had used. He then said—1 first test was altogether erroneous: I undi stand that he said that concentrated suiphu acid would have decomposed sulphide of a monia. He continued— IIis tests for acids were li sufficient or reliable; he did not test, them f this particular case, which should have bo done under all circumstances; hydroelilo THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 85 eid is certainly liable to have impurities in i. and it is a very difficult thing to get pure hy- roehloric acid; I have been trying experiments 1 Philadelphia inreference to this case, and ■hen I first tested the hydrochloric acid, ■hich I had bought as chemically pure from neof the best manufacturers, I found, to my reat surprise, that it gave a dark coating on tipper, which proved the presence of anti- louy or arsenic. The witness here showed a jecimen to the jury, and continued.—I imme- iately sent to another one of the best houses ealing in chemicals to obtain another sarn¬ ie, and on testing that I found it too con- lined antimony or arsenic; at last I suc- seded in obtaining a specimen,which did not ive a dark coating on copper; last winter I ad a number of students of analytical chem- itry, and I gave them samples to find out what ley were composed of; they invariably re- arted antimony: I saw it, too, myself; we ent, ou for some time and I could not believe lat there was antimony in that hydrochloric cid until a persoual examination proved it. to le; hydrochloric acid frequently contains atimony or arsenic, and it is very difficult to sparate them; if antimony had been present rof^ssor Aikin would have obtained crystals i the same form in each of the particular )sts he used; it could not have been tartar net.ic if the crystals differed: if both ilutions had been tartar emetic the crys- ils would have been both of the same >rm, or with very slight modifications of the line form; Professor Aikin’s analysis of the idiment in the tumbler does not prove that i contained either antimony or tartar emetic; heard Dr. Aikin’s statement of the manner i which he made his estimates of weights, ad it is quite a new mode, but one to which would not resort, because it is so full of in- ccuracies that it is quite an impossibility to et anything out of it; I heard, also, Professor onrv’s testimony, and I saw the spots he cbibited; I have made experiments to deter- ine the amount of antimony in those lots; such an experiment cannot be made ac- irately,and I could only follow him as near as could; I first produced a hydrogen by the se of pure zinc, sulphuric acid and water; I leu satisfied myself by testing the purity of rnt hydrogen; I then added a solution of utar emetic containing the fiftieth part of a 'ain; I produced about a hundred and twenty mts; I acted upon the porcelain lids I have ire as long as any were produced (here he mded them to the jury); if my eye is correct believe them to contain twice or four times i much antimony as was in the spots shown 7 Professor Tonry; if I get 120 spots from le fiftieth part of a grain the average quan- ty of one spot is one-sixth thousandth part ! a grain; therefore, one of Mr. Tonry’s spots ould contain from one-twelfth thousandth to ie : twenty-fourtli thousandth part of a ■ain of tartar emetic; it is quite impossible manipulate with such minute quantities; do not believe one of those spots could be sted with sulphide of ammonium and an ange color obtained; I have tried with venty of my spots and did not get it. [Here the witness exhibited to the jury the 1 upon which he had experimented.] He then continued—The color of the spots is yellow, and undoubtedly sulphur is in them to a great extent; Marsh’s test is to get enough of the quantity to test; if it is not large enough it don’t afford any evidence at all; the quantity obtained by Professor Tonry was entirely insufficient to make any reliable test: I heard his description of his experiment with the blowpipe; he took the sulphide precipitate and fused it on charcoal, and if antimony had been present it would have coated the char¬ coal with a white incrustation; Professor Tonry did not mention any such incrustation; no chemist would have used the process he used; the proper w^ay would have been to cut off that portion that was fused, put it in an agate mortar, wash, and then if there had been any metal, it would have remained in the bottom of the mortar; he got a brownish solution in the evening by his nitrate of silver test, and in the morning he got a very small precipitate; nothing has been done with that, and therefore that experiment amounts to nothing; even disregarding the organic matter in such a case no analytical chemist would form an opinion as to the amount of antimony present in such a precip¬ itate as Prof. Tonry obtained; it is laid down in all the books on analytical chemistry that i the antimonial precipitate must be first freed or pumped from the free sulphur which it al¬ ways contains; Prof. Tonry remarked that the precipitate he had did not contain any free sulphur, because he washed it with sulphuretted hydrogen: he exposeri his pre¬ cipitate from Wednesday night to Friday, and every chemist knows that the sulphur falls down in a half hour; the washing did no good; the longer it is exposed to the air, the more the sulphur will fall; I believe twenty-five one-hundredths of a milligramme could not be weighed; his quantantative analysis was absolutely unreliable; his tests did not estab¬ lish anything at all, except that he had a trace of a metal there, and he did not establish what that metal was. To Mr. Hagner—In poisoning cases it is always necessary to produce the metal in sufficient quantities, to be afterwards tested; that is the generally received opinion among scientists in Europe. To Mr. Steele—I assisted in some of the ex¬ periments made by Professor McCulloch, and observed the same results to which he testi¬ fied on yesterday. Mr. Steele next read to the witness from Taylor on Poisoning, page 354, giving his ob¬ jections to some of Marsh’s tests, and the witness said lie held the same opinion. Mr. Steele again read from page 356 of the same work, and the witness said he again agreed as to the great necessity for absolute cer¬ tainty in cases of poisoning, and the authors objections to small quantities The witness then turned to the jury and said: I repeat that the test must be used, and the quantity must be sufficient to admit of the use of all the characteristic tests. Dr. Genth was now turned over to the State, and in answer to Mr. Revell, testified—The character of the crystals was not sufficiently described by Dr. Aikin to say what was their form; if tartar emetic had been present the 86 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL form of the crystals would have been rhom- bicoctohedron. Mr. Revel 1 here showed representations of srrch crystals in Taylor on Poisonings, and he said he recognized them: he then ex¬ plained that though there might he modifica¬ tions they would still be modifications of the same form. He then continued—I understood Professor Aikin to say that, the crystals were not identical in form; the difference between the contents of the beaker glass and the con¬ tents used bv Professor Tonry was six-tenth parts of a grain; I have proved by a test with the fiftieth part of a grain that I could get no results upon which I could place any reliance: I did not go further; when I speak of pure I mean that it was free from all impurities; in a poisoning case I must be sat¬ isfied bv tests that it is free from all impurities; it is perhaps less that two or three seconds before a spot is made on por¬ celain; if I believed that, from the manipula¬ tions of one or two of tte spots shown by Pro¬ fessor Tonry he had produced the orange red color of antimony. I would have to believe his eyes instead of mine, since. I have found yel¬ low spots, and I always prefer to believe my own eyes; when I have tried an experiment and ascertained positive results I will always believe my own eyes instead of another’s; I assume that there was no white incrustation on the charcoal because Professor Toury did not mention it; 1 have aright to pre¬ sume it: I dissolved the spots I got by a drop of sulphide of ammonium; I did not subject them to any tests, hut I know that undoubtedly they were principally composed of sulphur; it was apparent to the eye; I did not test it because I deemed it useless; there is no use testing such things; if Professor Tonry obtained the orange red from a spot, I suppose there was present a minute quantity of antimony; there is no metal known which could have produced all the results testified to by Professor Aikin. Mr. Revell—Would a small quantity of white sugar, two wine glasses of fresh milk and a tablespoonfnl or two of whiskey or brandy, stirred up with a silver spoon, and set. away in a tin refrigerator for an hour or more, give the results testified to by Professor Aiken in his analysis of the sediment in the tnmblcr given him? Dr. Genth—I never tried the experiment; they may or mav not. Continuing—There is so much discrepancy in both Dr. Aikin’s oral and his written testi¬ mony about the sediment that I cannot give an opinion. Mr. Kevi?ll now read to the witness the oral testimony of Professor Aikin, and the witness said he did not think such a mixture would give the results obtained by Professor Aikin. He continued—probabilities are things in chemistry with which we should not deal. The Court here adjourned until 10 A.M. Monday. On Monday Dr. Genth will be re¬ called for further cross examination, and will he followed by Dr. Rease, of Philadel¬ phia; Professor White, of St John's, and Pro¬ fessor Williams, of the Agricultural College of Maryland. The testimony to-day was very tedious, and many of the spectators left before tlm ad¬ journment of the Court. Mrs. Wharton’s manner remains unchanged. Hermann Wil¬ liams, Esq , of Baltimore, was present with her to-day. TWE^'T¥-TI1IK51 MT. Annapolis, January 1,1872. The great Wharton-Ketchum trial has developed more scientific facts and fic¬ tions than ever before accompanied a criminal prosecution in Maryland, and some of them have proved as startling and dramatic in interest, even to the experts themselves, as were many of the de¬ tails of circumstances supposed to connect the accused with the alleged murder bj poisoning. Mrs. Wharton sits unmoved amid all the agitations, and appears perfectly calm and self-sustained. Herdaughter is closely atten¬ tive, and seems more interested than hei mother. The scientific war has now began in earnest, and after the chemical experts have been ex¬ hausted the medical experts for the defenct will take the field in solid column. It it not kuown that they have made any actual, experiments, but the books and their own ex periences will doubtless lurnish numberless precedents. The attendance to-day. upon the opening o the Court, was smaller than it has been dur ing any dav of the trial. No ladies wer< ( present, the "gentle sex being, doubtless.de voted to the pleasures of New Year’s day. Dr, Genth was recalled for cross-examination, an<, in answer to Mr. Steele, said that Prof^ssoi Tonry had stated a chemical impossibility whei he said he got a solution of tartar emetic if he had gotten what he said he did, it woult have proved that no tartar emetic w as there sulphide of antimony is a compound of sul pliur and antimony: potash is a compound o oxygen and potassium; if you dissolve suL phide of antimony in potash you make j double compound; first, potash and oxide oi antimony, and the second, sulphide of potas sium in combination with tersnlphide of an timouv; you get a clear solution auyhow, am if you add an acid to it. you decompose 111 sulphide of potassium, and make snlphurette hydrogen. ‘To Mr. Revell—I have never examined stomach for tartar emetic, but 1 have had ex perience with it. The witness was next shown the sedimen from the precipitate Prof. McCulloch ha. made, and he said it did not, as far as h knew, resemble that from tartar emetu He continued—I ‘am 51 years old; 1 con meDced the study of chemistry in 1889, an graduated in 1845; 1 have been engaged i mineralogy and geology in the silver an gold mines in North Carolina; I have give analytical chemistry my attention rlurin all the time since my graduation; I hav analyzed a stomach for arsenic; I fonn the metal and operated upon it; that was i THE WHAUTON-KETGHUM TRIAL 87 [arburg; I did not testify in the case; after reducing the metal I tested it with all the nown tests. The witness here related one of [arsh’s tests which he had used. He con- nued—The quantity of metal was too small > weigh; you can weigh one milligramme of rsenic, but it requires great care; a milli- ramme is the one sixty-fifih part of a grain; lere are scales which are said to weigh ie tenth of a milligramme,and I have weighed iat quantity, but the scales must be new and erfectly accurate; though I could not weigh ie quantity of arsenic I obtained, 1 yet sub- icted it to all the tests; I proved its presence > my satisfaction; such weights as a teuth ; a midigrane cannot be relied upon to base iy results upon; when Taylor says aquantity : arsenic is “imponderable,” lie means that cannot be weighed, but that it could be iterated upon; reactions could he got- ■n from the one seven-hundred and twen- eth part of a grain of arsenic, but it could it be done with antimony; I do not suppose le investigations could be carried far lough; antimony is not considered a poison nless found in large quantities; I do not now of any substance except antimony which ould give all the results obtained by Dr ikin, that is, if the antimony was pure; I ave. however, known the same “character- tic” tests of antimony to he proved to be srfectly unreliable; I have knq vn bismuth - produce an orange red; if you have an id solution and pour in any snip hide of am- onimn, the sulphide of ammonium is de- tmposed, no matter whether any metals are 'ere or not; a large quantity of sulphur is ■ecipitated: that sulphur has a yellow color, id if minute quantities of metals are pres¬ it which would in their pure state give a own or dark precipitate like bismuth, that ■own precipitate would be covered by theyel- w color from the sulphur, and would be in ipearancelike anantiuionial precipitate; cop- r may give also that result: f have obtained ;i orange red precipitate from lead; that pre- oitate is no proof that antimouy is present: no sulphur was mixed with them they buhl not give those results; bismuth is not liable in tartaric acid. I'o Mr. Syester—I could determine from the nite cloud whether bismuth or antimony lis present. Mr. Syester then read to witness from Tay- • on Medical Jurisprudence, page 137, as to Ie steps necessary to determine the presence antimony, and the witness said Taylor was I'ong. Mr. Syester then read from Wormle.v, ! ge 223, and, after considerable question- the wituess said Wormley and kin made.the same mistake, and both were eng in some of the steps they followed. ! continued—Chemistry certainly gives re- ble results in case of vegetable poisons; joe of them may -be reproduced, among ;rn nicotine and strychnia; morphia is d to have been reproduced, but it is doubt- ; the books say so, but that is not a suffi- nt guarantee to me, but, if I have found ferently, I think I am as good authority as s books themselves; if vegetable poisons ve gone iutothe system, and are still there, their undecomposed state, I believe I could reproduce every one of them; the books say some can be reproduced and others cannot; it is my opinion thatthe vegetable poisons must be chemically reproduced or else there is no Droof that vegetable poison was the cause of death; if such impurities as antimony reside in hydro¬ chloric acid, I have no doubt they could be detected by Marsh’s test; if thus found pure it would not become impure if only allowed to remain in the laboratory; I do not remember that Dr. Aikin said he had not used his hydro¬ chloric acid after testing it by Marsh’s test before he used it in his analysis; Prof. Aikin made a mistake in adding tartaric acid, which is one of the constituents of tartar emetic; I understood him to be looking for tartar emetic; if he was looking for antimony alone he was right in adding tartaric acid; a poisoning case by cream of tartar has been reported; Air. Syester now read from Taylor on Poisons, page 478, and the witness explained his understanding of the statement there made in reference to the dif¬ ference between cream of tartar and tartar emetic. He then continued—Professor Aikin’s tests were characteristic of antimony, but not positive proof. Mr. Syester then read from pages 225 and 226 in reference to copper tests, and the witness said, as he did yester¬ day, that a crystalline and not an amorpheous deposit would be observed under the process there spoken of; pages 589 and 602 were again referred to by the witness, and the vol¬ ume handed to Mr. Syester. To Mr. Steele—The" white cloud obtained by Professor Aikin was too small a quantity to be dried and tested. The witness next showed to the jury a piece of paper weighing ten milligrames, with each milligramme marked off. The jury took the minute piece and ex¬ amined it; the witness then, at Mr. Steele’s request, cut off what he believed to be the 25-100ths of a milligramme, which he took up with great difficulty, on the point of his knife; he then cut off two and a quarter of a milli¬ gramme, and the minute particles were put nto a vial and passed around among the jury. He said the sulphide of antimony would have beeu only one-fourth or one-fifth of the hulk of the particle he exhibited. Dr. Genth was then dismissed, and Dr. John J. Reese was next called, and testified—I re¬ side. in Philadelphia, and am a practicing physician; at present I occupy the Chair of Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology in the University of Pennsylvania, at Philadel¬ phia; I was formerly Professor of Chem¬ istry in the Medical Department of Penn¬ sylvania College, then located in Phila¬ delphia; I have, in connection with my pres¬ ent chair, made toxicology a special study, but I do not give to it the same attention an analytical chemist would; I heard all of Prof. Aikiu’s testimony; his analyses do not, to my mind, establish proof of the presence of antimony in General K.’s stomach or in that tumbler; in m.v opinion a chemical analysis connected with a poisoning case should be so thorough and so exact- Here Mr. Syester interrupted the wituess, and Mr. Revell briefly contended that the witness could not give his opinion in the way in which he was doing. 88 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. After some discussion the witness continued —One reason is the entire omission of some very important and characteristic tests for this poison alleged;another is that when tests, said to be characteristic, were employed, some of them failed; the third reason is that in the tests most relied upon there were sources of fallacy which rendered them uncertain and inconclusive; taking the first lea^on 1 would name, first, the omission to produce the metal antimony, and bringing it into Court, and submitting it- to Ihe defence for examina¬ tion, and in sufficient quantities to enable the j analylist to subject it to all the char¬ acteristic tests; this was in my opin¬ ion a very important omission, es¬ pecially as it is very easy to obtain the inetal antimony, and operate upon it: it is easily obtained if it is there; to my mind no test would be sufficient which did not produce the metal, and in sufficient quantities to be ope¬ rated upon; secondly, of the tests called characteristic, whicn are said to have been used in this analysis, two failed; I heard all of Professor Toury’s analysis, and in my opiuion his tests were also insuf¬ ficient to establish the presence of anti mony; 1 also read Professor Aikin’s report carefully: returning to the characteristic tests which failed |I now allude to Prof. Tonry’s analysis) was the application of nitric acid to one of the spots it failed to give the characteristic reaction of anti¬ mony, and the experiment with the blow¬ pipe also failed to give the characteristic results; I refer also just here, under the first head, to the test called dialysis; it is very important, but is a very simple and beautiful method of separating crystalline substances from organic mixtures, such as tartar emetic, morphia, styrchnia, and indeed all crystalline bodies. The witness here explained how the method was accomplished, by passing the crystalline particles through parch¬ ment paper. Thirdly, was the fallacy necessarily attending the employment of those tests on which the chief re¬ liance appears to have been placed; on the failure of these three tests I pass my opinion of the insufficiency of Professor Aikin’s tests; I would not consider the three tests described by Professor Aikin sufficient to establish the presence of antimony, for the reason that organic matter placed under precisely the same conditions will give precisely the same results; I mean, treated in an acid solutiou and precipitated with sulphuretted hydrogen, they will give an orange red precipitate which will dissolve more or less in hydrochloric acid, and the resulting solu¬ tions, when thrown into water, will give a white cloud, which ultimately becomes a pre¬ cipitate; the color will vary according to the kind of organic matter through which the sul¬ phuretted hydrogen is passed; the general as¬ pect of the precipitate is, however, a dull, reddish yellow or reddish brown; if a stream of sulphuretted hydrogen is passed through a solution of chloral and yellow jasa- mine there is a remarkable resemblance in color in the precipitate thus obtained to an antimonial precipitate; of this I was personally unaware until 1 witnessed Prof. McCulloch’s experiments; I believe those experiments, ii followed out with other organic substances would develop other results in relation b this coincidence; the precipitate I saw hm obtain was, to a great extent, soluble in by drochloric acid, aud produced a white clout when thrown into water, aud that cloud o precipitate was again soluble in bydrtyshlori acid to a great extent, I wili not say entirely and if into this solution sulphide of amine nium be dropped.it will reproduce the red dish color, or yellow red color: when coppr is put into it aud boiled, it will mak a deposit ou the copper orgunio sul stances generally, and especially thos of a complex character, when mixed witl hydrochloric acid and water, and the boiled on a strip of bright copper foil, wi produce on that copper a dull stain whic might be mistaken for an anti monk or arsenical stain; I saw the experimen tried with yellow jasamine, and I tried. - too; it is well known that when a strip of col per is boiled iu an acid solution of antimony j arsenic, mercury, tin and other metals, a dt posit or precipitation is made ou the eoppe by virtue of a known chemical law; th amount of the deposit on the copper will d< pend altogether upon the amount of metal i the solution and the time the copper is sul jected to its action; from an orgauic solutio in which no metal is present, boiled with mr riatic acid, the slip of copper would gatlie a stain; :f sulphur is preseut along with th organic matter, as it is very apt to be, if take from a human body, the stain or deposit wi be most decided and dense; furthermore,: this copper, with the deposit- on it from o ganic matter,, be washed, dried, rolled up an put in a small glass reduction tube, it-wi produce a white sublimate more or less di cided, which, by- an unpractiecd eye.and eve sometimes by a practiced eye, might be mi: taken for the white antimonial sublimate [The witness here handed to the jury a vi: containing strips of copper with tli deposits spoken of on them.] H continued—-I have obtained the same result from yellow jasamine mixed with chloral; speak now from my ownpersoual experience; I is for these reasons that I call the color test fa laciousin the search for antimony or arseniJ by 7 the word fallacious I do not mean that. I condemn the test, hut only that it is liable 11 errors; as evidence of the presence of anti mouy I should require absolutely 7 the prodmj tion of the metal as the only positive, conclj sive proof, and that in such quantities as 1 enable me to practice upon it all the recos nized tests; I think that those only safe ail conclusive tests as determining its presencl my rule in all poisoning cases is to insist npij all the known testsor be satisfied of thcreasi for the failure of an.y one of them; if one the tests failed and was not satisfactorily a counted for, it would go far to vitiate tl conclusion; I cannot go so far as to say 7 that tl failure of oue test would prove the absence the poison; it I made six tests and one faile it would lead me to suspect that there w some intervening cause which gave me reshl not in accordance with previous experienc all the characteristic tests should bo pra THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 89 ticed and should he successful; there are four iistinct methods by which the metal anti- jiony may he reproduced; it i- an established point among toxicologists that it is absolutely necessary that all the reagents should he per- iectly pure, because, unless they are, the very poison sought for may heproduced; theimpuri- iies likely to he found in such reagents as have peen here, sworn to are antimony and arsenic; ;hey are the most important, and are very frequently found in just such reagents as Professors Aikin and Toury used; the anti¬ mony occurs chiefly in the hydrochloric acid; sometimes in the sulphuric aud some¬ times in the zinc; the arsenic occurs in the sulphuric acid and zinc, and is quite fre¬ quently found in the hydrochloric acid; they get admission in the hydrochloric acid chiefly though the sulphuric acid employed in its manufacture; it is not possible to detect im¬ purities in mineral acid by sulphide of am inoniurn; the application of such a re-agent would itself produce an impurity in that acid, namely, the precipitation of sulphur; it would lie impossible, hy such a process, to de¬ tect iu it the acid minute particles of antimony or arsenic, even if they were present; the sul¬ phur thrown down would entirely disguise any reaction which would otherwise ensue; if I was seeking to obtain a uure sulphide of antimony, if iu au organic mixture, it would unquestionably be necessary to get rid of the organic substauccs and the sulnhur; the pres¬ ence of any organic substances weighed with the sulphuret would naturally vitiate the calculation; in regard to portion B of Professor Allan’s solution, he did not use any¬ thing to get rid of the organic matter: where sulphuretted hydrogen is passed through an acid solution, the amount of sulphur would depend upon the amount of mineral present; the whole precipitate might he sulphur and organic matter; 1 could not begin to form a conjecture of the amount of antimony present, if tiiere was any,in Professor Aikin’s solution B from the precipitate he obtained; I can only give au approximate estimate of the amount of antimony in the spots here shown by Professor Tonry; from the 50th part of a grain Dr. Genth aud myself in Marsh’s test ob¬ tained 120 spots which we think twice as large as those obtained by Professor Tonry; we estimated that each spot would represent one 6-lOOOth of a grain of tartar emetic, and that each of Prof. Tonry’s spots represented one 12 1000th of a grain; I there¬ fore consider the thirteen spots shown here, by Prof. Tonry contained the 1000th part of a grain; I have no doubt that, the 1000th of a grain would, by Marsh’s test, give thirteen spots as jarge as those obtained by Prof. Tonry; Ido lot think I could apply tests for antimony to my oue or two of the spots Prof. Tonry ob¬ tained; Dr. Taylor, who has been frequently quoted here as an authority, states that the ..wallest quantity he would consider it safe to operate upon, would be the 150th to the 200th part of a grain, and that even then the results would be very doubtful. Mr. Steele here read |jo the witness, from page 206 of Taylor’s Medical Jurisprudence, and he agreed in the •pinion there expressed. Mr. Steele referred ; text to Guy’s Forensic Medicine, page409, and Dr. Eeese agreed also with the opinion of that author. Dr. Reese then continued—The test Dr. Aikin used for the sediment in the tumbler is notin itself proof of the presence of antimony; the action of hydrochloric acid he described in that connection does not prove anything; Professor Aikin could not have made his estimates of weights with a,nv certainty, or a probability of certainty; it is not the habit of chemists to make any such esti¬ mates; they must weigh and he fully assured, moreover, of the purity of the article they are weighing; it is the practice among chemists to insist upon the most absolute identity of the article pre¬ sented for analysis; I mean, that it should be the very same; it is so important that even after a satisfactory conclusion is ar¬ rived at, if there should he any doubt of the identity of the substance analyzed, the. analysis should he rejected; neither the tests of Professors Aiken nor Tonry are sufficient to establish the proof of the presence of antimony in the stomach or other vis¬ cera of General Ketchum, or in the tumbler; tartar emetic has very little taste to my palate, but I don’t remember to have tasted it before I came to An¬ napolis: most of the hooks follow Orfila, and in mistranslating have made errors; no author would care to test it on himself, and Orfila has been followed, therefore, the more; the French word for the taste is apre, which means rouhg rather than acrid; there is a great diversity of tastes, as we all know, but Dr. Wood did not consider tar¬ tar emetic acid, for he speaks of it as “sweetish;” I have been a practicing physician over twenty-five years: as Professor of Toxi¬ cology 1 have my attention particularly di¬ rected to that branch of chemical investiga¬ tion; I heard the testimony of Drs. Williams, Miles and Chew; I see n.thing in the state¬ ment of the attending physician, or the eye-witnesses, of the symptoms ob¬ served in the deceased before death, nor in the results of the autopsy to exclude the idea that death -was produced hy natural causes, but those causes may have been obscure; it is necessary that the post mortem should have been thorough and exhaustive, leaving no oart of the body not examined;tliat is,I believe, the invariable rule in all medico-legal cases where the autopsy is made to discover the cause of death—such has been my practice always; if the post mortem was not complete it obscures the results in so far as it was not complete. Mr. Syester—“Obscures the result?” Dr. Reese—Yes, sir. Mr. Syester—That is a very good word, the best that could he used. Dr. Reese then alluded to an instance in which a father heat his daughter, and she died, and the father was arrested. • Only the post mortem revealed the cause of death— namely, the -Mng of arsenic hy the girl. Mr. Syester here objected,but it was too late. Dr. Reese continued—Soma years ago I was called upon to examine for poison in the stomach of a man who | had died under suspicious circumstances; 90 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. after a laborious examination I found nothing, but it was discovered that a vessel of the brain had burst, and the man bad died of apoplexy; a poison is a noxious substance, which, when taken into the body, produces dangerous and some¬ times fatal effects; tartar emetic is believed by high authorities to operate iu two ways—by absorption into the blood and irri¬ tation of the mucous membrane of the stomach and intestines: when this or any other noxious substances goes into the circu¬ lation the effort of nature is to throw it out from the system, and that is accomplished by certain organs—the liver, spleen, kidneys, lungs and some other organs; poison is only active, it is believed, while it circulates in the blood, unless of the class which operates by direct irritation of the mucous membrane. The Court here adjourned until 10 A. M. to¬ morrow. The attendance upon the trial to- •day was very small. TWE.liTY-FOl'RTM S>AY. Annapolis, January 2,1872. The war of the experts continues, and a strong effort is being made by the defence to develop what they consider the real state of the case. Upon the opening of the Court to¬ day Ur. lieese, of Philadelphia, was re- \ c riled for continued examination by the defence. In answer to Mr. Steele, who recalled him, to a chemical inquiry, he testified—Crystalline substances always as¬ sume a definite geometrical form when the solution passed inte a solid condition; this crys¬ talline form is i nvariable to the same substance; there may be a variation as regards the corners and edges of the crystals, but the angles of the plane are fixed and invariable; chemists de¬ termined the measurement absolutely by using the gonniometer; if, therefore, a drop of solution bo allowed to evaporate on a glass ! slide and to develope crystals, and another j drop be treated similarly, and there is not an identity of crystals, I should infer that they were not the sftme substances, that is, so far as ; that experiment is concerned; the very first thing to be established iu weighing such a residue as Professor Tonry had is to he abso lutely certain as to the nature of the sub¬ stance you are about to weigh, aud from which .you are to deduce results; the nature of the precipitate in question has not been determined; it has been admitted to have been composed partly, at least, of coloring matter, which is organic matter, aud partly of sulphur; in j my opinion the first step was defective,* namely^, an exact knowledge of the substance; in weighing the greatest possible care is ne¬ cessary and is demanded; in the first place the drying of the substance is a very important matter; if I remember correctly, Professor Tonry stated that he dried his precipitate in a beaker glass over a water bath; I think that would not completely dry the substance as it would leave some moisture iu it I think it should have been exposed to a drying oven for several hours, where the temperature was at least twelve or fifteen degrees higher than two hundred and twelve; then it should have been placed upder a bell glass in which was a ves¬ sel containing sulphuric acid; this should have been continued until the temperature of the precipitate was the same as the tempera ture of the air; then it should have been placed on the balance, carefully’ avoiding the touching of the beaker even at the rim with the hands; it should only be handled with delicate forceps, which would leave no moisture; then, having accurately weighed it, it should have been again placed under the bell glass for several hours, and weighed a second time,aud if weight was found to have been lost, the processvshould have been repeated until it ceased to lose any weight; this is in my opinion what should have been doue; there are no symptoms which are ex¬ clusive to tartar emetic poisoning; none by which it can be recognized infallibly; with the exception of one or two organic poisons, there are no symptoms by which any poison can be exclusively recog¬ nized; there are some dozen irritant poisons, whose symptoms closely’ resemble each other; if a poison could be recognized by the symptoms alone, it would not, of course be uecessary to make a chemical analysis; there are many diseases wiiose symp¬ toms resemble closely’ those produced by symptoms closely resemble those of tartar irritant poisons, and also narcotic poisons, and I may also mention tetanic poisons, so called, or spinal irritants as they are also called; first I will mention cholera morbus, especially in its initial stages, and the disease known to physicians as gastro-entronitis, or inflamma¬ tion of the stomach and bowels; peritonitis might also be confounded with it in some of its stages, and there are some others whose emetic poisoning; when a poisonous dose of tartar emetic is taken it very soon pro¬ duces intense nausea, followed by the most violent vomiting and purging: there is also a sense of constriction iu the throat; there are also violent pains in the ab¬ domen, caused by the irritation of the mucous membrane of the stomach; there is excessive prostration, the whole muscular system being relaxed; the pulse becomes small an frequent, in consequence of the depressing influence of the poison on the heartjthere is usually consid¬ erable perspiration; the secretions generally are increased, especially the secretions from the kidneys; in some exceptional cases the I poison seems to act on the nervous centres I through absorption, producing -onvulsinua and somet imes delirium; that 1 think is about the description; the color of the fact varies; I have seen in my practice but one case of tartar emetic poisoning, and then there was a pallor in the lace; the appearance of the tongue also varies; in the back part of the tongue there are little apthous ulcerations; as tartar emetic is a decided irritant, and occasionally produces that apthous ulceration i on the tongue of even a living person, it fre -1 queutly extends down into the stomach and I bowels. THE WHARTON-KETCHTJM TRIAL. 91 Mr. Steele here read from Wharton and Stille’s Medical Jurisprudence, page 508, and the witness said he emphatically agreed with the opinion there expressed, that the symptoms of tartar emetic poisoning closely resemble those of cholera morbus. Dr. Reese then called the attention of Mr. Steele to the mention made of a parallel case ci¬ ted on page 64 of Dr. Wood’s work on therapeu¬ tics. He continued—I would not pronounce this case here a case of poisoning, from the symp¬ toms alone; a pathological examination would not always determine the cause of death; I heard the testimony of Drs. Williams, Chew and Miles; I should not form the opinion that General K. died of poisoning from the symp¬ toms of the disease and the post mortem combined, and for the reason that such symptoms aud such post mortem signs might be logically accounted for from natural causes; there are many natural causes or diseases to which hi3 death may be logically attributed; a physician who merely hears the details of symptoms in any particular case, cannot so well make up his mind as to the actual cause of death as if he had witnessed them; still, taking together all the symptoms in this c se, they would seem to indicate some disease which spe¬ cially affected the brain and spinal mar¬ row; a disease of this character was indi¬ cated by Prof. Donaldson, of Baltimore ; ce- rebro spinal meningitis is the name of the disease; its name denotes inflammation of the membranes of the brain and of the spinal marrow; the symptoms in General K.’s ease, which strongly resemble those of this disease, were the pain in the head, especially the back part of the head and neck, extending down the back—the pain extending around the ab¬ domen; the lividity of the face, the suppres¬ sion of the secretion of the kidneys, the ex¬ cessive sensitiveness of the skin, termed hy¬ peresthesia; the rigid contraction of the muscles of the neck, and more particularly the bending back of the body in ;he arched form, which is called opos- hotonos, the partial delirium aud the jondition of the eye; those are symptoms char- icteristic of this disease; then there may have ieen possibly another disease called spontan- lous tetanus; though a very rare disease, it lot unfrequently occurs: some of the symp¬ toms strongly resemble those of that disease; hose are the two diseases whose symptoms ■ think most resemble those described by the attending physician: I confess that Gen. K.’s ymptoms all day Tuesday and on Wednes- iay morning presented to my mind an idea if an overdose of laudanum, though the symp oms presented during the last hours of his ife were not those which usually accompany r. fatal dose of opium; convulsions do, how- ver, some time attend fatal cases of opium, mt these are more frequent in children than n adults;in poisoning by opium, as a rule, the (pupils of the eyes are contracted, hut t is by no means invariable; in experi¬ ments made by myself on animals with pium, the pupils were first dilated and then ontracted; Taylor mentions a case of opium oisoning in which one pupil was contracted nd the other dilated, showing the uncertainty of this symptom; I hardly think that an exam¬ ination of only two inches of the spinal cord would have decided whether General Ketehum died of poisoning or from a natural cause; this violent disease (cerebro spinal meningitis) does not invariably leave any lesions by which it can be discovered after death; these are, however, exceptional cases; the examina¬ tion of tho_ membranes of the brain of General K. did not disclose any such lesions; but as the spinal cord was not examined, it is, of course, impossible to say what was the con¬ dition of its membranes; the two inches spoken of as having been examined could not disclose the condition of the whole spinal marrow be¬ low it; I would like to add here nausea as a frequent accompaniment to cerebro spinal meningitis, especially in its early stage; I do not know in my own experience of the absence of these lesions, but the au¬ thorities cite many cases: it not unfre- qnently happens in cases of death from con¬ vulsive diseases that no lesion is discovered after death; this occurs especially m those convulsive diseases known as epilepsy and hydrophobia, and sometimes in tetanus; there are antidotes for many poisons, but for some there are none; an antidote is, chemically speaking, a substance which combines with the poison, rendering it inert, the new chemi¬ cal compound being inert; if a physician finds a case of poison, the first thing is to give a strong emetic, then use the stomach pump, and then administer the antidote; the best antidote for tartar emetic poisoning is some vegetable astringent, such as an in¬ fusion of nut galls and tea and oak bark; their tetanic acid combines with the oxide of anti¬ mony and forms a neutral tannate of anti¬ mony; the post mortem signs, as mentioned, are chiefly of a negative character, and do not show anything of a decided character; they are not such as I would expect to find in a case of tartar emetic poisoning, chiefly for the absence of signs of decided in¬ flammation in the stomackand the alimentary canal; I would add here the absence of con¬ gestion of the lungs- and of the general en¬ gorgement of the venous system; neither the symptoms nor post mortem revelations present to my mind an ind cation of tartar emetic poisoning; viewing the case exclusively as to the symptoms aud post mortem, I may say that the death may he fairly attributed to a natural cause; the symptoms may have been aggravated by what was administered; even an ordinary meal in some eases might result fatally; such cases have been reported. Mr. Steele—You have heaid the testimony of the symptoms and condition of General Ketehum < n Wednesday morning. Supposing the last dose administered to him to have contained tartar emetic, could it have caused his death ? Dr. Reese—From General Ketchnm’s symp¬ toms, especially towards 1 o’clock, 1 should have considered him in a dying condition; if the last dose administered to him contained a fatal dose of tartar emetic, I should certainly have expected it to have produced at once violent symptoms of vomiting and also of purging; as these are the natural aud obvious symptoms of that emetic poison, I should not, 92 THE WHAETON-KETCHUM TRIAL. in their absence, infer that such poison had been given. Dr. Reese continued—I am somewhat ac¬ quainted with the effects of chloral and chlo¬ roform; I think both valuable remedies; deaths from chloroform are, however, of fre¬ quent occurrence when it is used by inhal¬ ing: it is not considered nearly so safe as etlier; as regards hydrate of chloral it has been iu use as a medicine only about two or three years; it is a valuable remedy for relieving pain and producing sleep, but its precise mode of operation is not jmt distinctly under¬ stood: a number of deaths have been reported as resulting from the use of chloral; the Ger¬ man authority, Liebreck, has a notion that when the hydrate of chloral enters the blood it is converted into chloroform and forineate of soda: I think this, however, a mere, specu¬ lation; it has never been proven, but it is quite possible that it might form other substances iu the blood; Berzilleus has shown us that oxalic acid might be one of its products; ox¬ alic acid is poisonous in large quantity; other poisonous substances might be produced by its action; its precise action has not been de¬ termined; I have not used gelseminum in my practice, and cannot speak from personal ob¬ servation; there are various speculations and ideas as to its actions; I should say it was a depressant rather than an excitant; Wood and Bache so speak of it. Cross-examined by Mr. Syester—My only profession is the practice of medicine; I have occupied for seven years my present Chair of Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology; I graduated in the institution of which I am now a Professor; I was for nine years a Pro¬ fessor of Chemistry in the Medical Depart¬ ment of the University of Philadelphia; I can’t say that I have had any prac¬ tical knowledge of the effects of yellow jasamine; the authors do not concur in saying it is a depressant; there is very little literature on the subject of the action of gel- seminum; I have read Dr. Williams’ article on the subject; Berzelius is a chemical writer ex clusively; I do not know that he demonstrated Lis theory which I have here stated; in cases of tartar emetic poisoning there will not al¬ ways be discoverable after death the charac¬ teristic signs; it may be there will also be no signs of irritation in the intestines and ali¬ mentary canal: the congestion of the lungs is not an invariable accompaniment; I cannot say that a general engorgement of the veins is an invariable accompaniment; I have never examined a case of tartar emetic poisoning, and my information on the subject had been obtained from the books and what has been told me; there was nothing special in the post mortem revelations which showed tire cause of death: I should describe them as of a negative character and not as indicating anything specially; the examination made of the brain might indicate some obscure disease ot the brain; they did not, however, to my mind: they might be accounted for as changes occurring after death; I have known deaths from decided diseases of the brain and upper portion of the spinal cord and the brain, and on examination I did not discover more decided lesions than those ob¬ served in the brain of General Ketchmn: that case I attended myself, and the symptoms be¬ fore death brought me to that opinion: they were very similar to those of General Ketehum, namely: Violent pain in the head and back, tetanic rigidity of the muscles of the neck, some delirium and automatic putting of the hands to the head; I had expected to find de¬ cided lesions after death, but merely found some slight congestion, which, if I had merely seen after death, without witnessing the symptoms, I would not have considered as accounting for death; I had been attending the patient for ten days or two weeks, but the se¬ vere symptoms did not come on until within a day or two of deathithey gradually increased in severity from the time of their first appear¬ ance, and the patient died uuconcious, the disease being some disease of the brain, aud I simply gave in the certificate disease of the brain; I only examined the brain and the upper portion of the spinal cord; the patient became very delirious at times two or three days before death; 1 regarded that as a deci¬ ded symptom, and it became more decided and more continuous before his death; it became continuous within one or two days before death. Dr. Reese continued—Berzelius has shown that chloral might produce several substances \ iu he blood; the symptoms from chloroform or oxalic acid would differ from those of an over dose of chloral; the congestion of tho membranes of the brain may ha-^e been pro¬ duced by natural disease or the convulsions before death; there was in the case I ex¬ amined a slight congestion about the base of the brain; I should not term it an active cougestion; it was arterial rather than venous: it was visible to the naked eye; 1 did not examine it with a microscope; I don’t think that Dr. Miles said the por ions of General Ketchnm’s brain which he examined with the microscope presented evidences of active congestion I have some knowledge of diseases of the brain; mere pas¬ sive congestion does not, to my miud, gene¬ rally indicate the presence of disease; a gene¬ ral engorgement of the veins of tho brain would indicate disease, but it might not be a disease of the brain; in deaths front brain dis¬ ease I would say it was a rule that evidences of active rather than passive congestion were discoverable; I don't, recall having examined a case of brain disease iu which 1 there was no evidence of active cou¬ gestion; I don’t remember any particular authority on the subject which states that active cougestiou was not observable; in the case I examined opportunity was not| afforded for further examination than that 1 made; to one of the diseases which 1 have named as having similar symptoms to those described in General K.’s case might be at¬ tributed his death: I attribute it to cerebroi spinal meningitis; in the patient I had, there was a very slight arterial congestion at thel base of the brain, and in General K.’s case there was passive congestion and some little points; there was not in the case 1 examined and General K.’s any decided resemblance or decided difterence; from my recollection of the testimony hore there was au absence of THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 93 one lesion in General K.’s brain which I ob¬ served in mine and which led me to the opinion that he died from cerebro spinal meningitis; in my case there was not an ab¬ sence of passive congestion, but only a very slight arterial congestion; if a patient had been in the condition here described to have been that of General Ketchum on Wednesday morning, and a dose of yellow jassamine had been administered &t 1 o’clock, I am not well enough acquainted with its effects to say what would have been its effects; if tartar emetic had been given at that hour, I do not think it would have produced the symptoms described: tartar emetic produces great pain in the stomach, which is usually accompanied by violent vomiting and purg¬ ing; convulsions are exceptional; they are alternating convulsions, sometimes said to be tetanic; I heard in this case of symptoms which led me to the opinion that he had tetanic convulsions before the last dose was administered; I remember that Gen¬ eral Ketchum said he had pain in his stomach; from my recollection of the symptoms and post mortem, I would ascribe the convul¬ sions to a fuller developement of the disease already existing, and as having no natural connection with the last dose given him; I should not ascribe them to yellow jassamine; I think that at the time the chloral or chloroform were administered it would not have any effect either one way or the other; I think it tartar emetic had been in the last dose, it would have produced great prostration, and that if it had produced any effects at all. it would have re¬ laxed the muscles; tartar emetic was dually used to overcome rigidity of the muscles; if a dose of tartar emetic had been given in anysize, it would not have had the effect of overcoming the effects of the chloral and yellow jassamine; I don’t recall that the books say it would; tar¬ tar emetic might have neutralized the effects of the chloral and yellow jassamine; the books say that by taking repeated small doses of tartar emetic every three or four hours for three or four days the system becomes toleraut to its whole action, and it does not produce vomiting, and, that after the system has be¬ come thus accustomed to it, very large doses may be taken without any effects, except for the cure of certain diseases for which it is in that way used; after a man’s stomach has be¬ come tolerant of tartar emetic it is possible to kill him with it, that is if you give him enough of it; if the system had become so far tolerant of it as not to throw it off, I think it would lie in the stomach perfectly innoxious; I think, however, it is possible to give even then a dose which wouhl kill; Razzori gave as much as 60 to 120 grains a day after a grad¬ uation administration; I don’t know that a person could not be poisoned by tartar emetic after the system had been made tolerant of it; I don’t mean to say that necessarily vomiting and purging would accompany an overdose of tartar emetic; it might be possible to give an overdose without producing vomiting or purg¬ ing; the books say that even a fatal result has been produced without vomiting or purging; they do not account for the absence of those symptoms. To Mr. Revell—I mentioned that the symp¬ toms of Gen. Ketchum may have been those of cholera morbus or other cholera; I do not think he died from cholera morbus; the symp¬ toms of cholera morbus are a cold sweat, pain in the stomach, small and frequent pulse, purging, great prostration and pain sometimes in the calves of the legs; I should think what¬ ever of cholera morbus he may have had ter¬ minated when hisphysician took leave of him on Monday; I don’t think he died from inflam¬ mation of the bowels and stomach, called gas- tro-entrinetis: I do not think he died from peritonitis; the symptoms only suggested that at one stage of his attack; neither of these diseases, in my opinion, caused his death; in my judgment he did not die from an overdose of laudanum, but some of the symptoms indi¬ cated that for the last three or four hours preceding his death; I have seen cases of opium poisoning, but no fatal ones; in those I witnessed there were no convulsions; in cases of death from opium poisoning the pa¬ tient dies in complete coma; in some cases of narcotic poison remissions of insensibility occur; the ulcerations I spoke of finding in the throat, from tartar emetic, do not always oc¬ cur; in some cases the skin has pustules upon it, so violent is the poison; Gnsole is an authority, but I am not familiar with his work. Mr. Revell then read from Grisole the symptoms of tartar emetic poisoning, and the witness said he considered Grisole’s statement, in the main, correct. He continued—I consider the convulsions exceptional. Mr, Revell then read from Taylor On Poisonings, page 476, of the symptoms and effects of tartar emetic, and that “some¬ times” there were tetanic convulsions. Dr. Reese continued—Convulsions may occur in cases of death from any other cause. Mr. Revell next read from Taylor’s Medical Ju¬ risprudence, page 123, as to the symptoms in an acute case of poisoning from tartar emetic, and the witness said he agreed with the Spin- ion there expressed. Dr. Reese continued—The only disease to which I could refer the symptoms in Gene¬ ral It’s case is cerebro spinal meningitis; in its epidemic form it is very violent: Dr. Alfred Stille is a colleague of mine, and has written a monograph on the subject of cerebro spinal meningitis. Mr. Revell now read from page 76 of Dr. Stille’s work, and the witness said he did not agree with Dr. Stille in the opinion there ex¬ pressed, if he meant to exclude the idea that in certain cases the disease may prove fatal without leaving definite and characteristic le¬ sions. He continued—Dr. Stille is not in accord with other writers on the subject of which he writes; I would cite here Drs. Aitkin, of Eng¬ land, Reynolds, Flint and Radcliffe, and, I think, Tanner, another English writer; I have seen those books since I have been in Annap¬ olis, and have refreshed my memory from them; death may occur without leaving any positive pathological lesions. Mr. Revell again read from Stille that con- gestionof the brain was an unfailing accom¬ paniment of the disease, and the witness said that he believed that the general rule was 94 THE WHARTON-KETCHTJM TRIAL. that no positive pathological lesions would he discovered. Dr. Reese continued—There is one form of the disease, called fulminant, which is rapid in its effects, and the, absence of pathological lesions is more particulary confined to cases of that kiud; I think headache is, as a rule, present, but I do not know myself that it is always present: I think it one of the most characteristic symptoms: I do not remember that it was here testified that he had a head¬ ache; I got a very decided impression that he had a headache from his putting his hands to his head, the throwing back of his head: he might, however, have put his hands to his head because of the pain caused by the ice bag put to his head; his disease may have commenced when he had his first sick¬ ness; pain in the head is certainly one of the accompaniments of the disease. Dr. Reese here inquired if Stihe said anything about the spinal marrow, aud Mr. Re veil proceeded to read that another symptom was vertigo, anxiety at the stomach, and activity of the pulse, and Dr. Reese called his attention to the variety of the symptoms, and said thej' all pointed to the brain and spina 1 marrow as the seats of the disease; it was also declared by Stifle that there was great cutaneous sen¬ sitiveness, so great, as to cause a shiver when touched, and the witness agreed that it was a decided symptom. Mr. Revell continued to read at some length as to the symptoms, and the witness said he was willing to accept the exhaustive de¬ scription as generally correct, but there were symptoms stated which he did not recognize. Dr. Reese again asked to be read what lhe author said in reference to the membranes of the spinal marrow, and Mr. Revell re d from page 87 on the subject of t e spinal marrow, an : found that no mention was made of the condition of the membranes.. Dr. Reese said he supposed the author would have mentioned it, and continued--!.do not wish to be under¬ stood as asserting that General Ketchum uied of cerebro spinal meniugitis: I thiuk the cause of his death obscure, but the absence of certain pathological lesions would indicate that he died from that disease; there was in¬ tense pain in the upper part of the spinal cord of the patient I treated for this disease; the pain will sometimes extend further down the cord, owing principally to the inflamma¬ tion; I believe there was pain and inflamma¬ tion in the upper part of General Ketchum’s spinal cord; there would not necessarily be paralysis; paralysis of the bowels would depend upon the condition of the spinal cord; I mean only to say that there was a probability that General Ketchum died from this disease: I do not think he died from poison. Mr. Revell now asked the witness if the autopsy was de¬ scribed correctly, and antimony had been found in the stomach and kidneys and liver of General Ketchum, would he believe that he died from poison. Dr. Reese said it would not necessarily, but would depend upon the qu intity found: if it was found in a small quantity it would be entirely compatible with the idea that it had been originated front a medicine used, or from accident, or intro¬ duced by the impurities of the reactions used by the chemist. He continued—If five grains or upwards had been found, I would then con¬ sider that it had something to do with it: my opinion as to the cause of death would be modified by the discovery of that quantity; General Ketchum’s symptoms strongly indi¬ cated idiopathic tetanus, and the post mortem appearances werecompatible with that disease; in idiopathic tetanus we would look in the spinal column for the cause of death; the symptoms rigid contraction of the muscles of the neck and jaws, usually great pain in those parts, sometimes extending round the back and abdomen, febrile action, not general, very high, general convulsions sometimes, but the mental faculties not usually much disturbed; therefore, I do not consider this disease as answering to the symptoms ex¬ hibited by the deceased as closely as cerebro spinal meningitis: I have never known a case of tetanus to produce exactly the same symp¬ toms General Ketchum exhibited; there is a possibility that General Ketchum died from idiopathic tetanus, and a probability that he died from cerebro spinal meningitis: probably his death might be attributed to many causes, aud there are many causes to which it could not be attributed; it may possibly be attributed to poison; all unknown causes of death may be attributed to poisons, aud that is the reason we make such rigid examinations. By Gonseut, Mrs. J. Hough Cottman was here examined and testified—I am a daughter of Mrs. Chubb, and lived with her in Washington on the 17th of last Jan¬ uary; that day was my sister’s birth¬ day and I remember it distinctly; General Ketchum came to the house; I was iu the parlor when he entered, and Mrs. Wharton was also in the parlor: I left, the parlwr almost as soon as he entered; Mrs. Wharton and Gen¬ eral Ketchum remained in the parlpr; iu a few momentsMrs. Wharton came to my room; I went into the parlor after General Ketchum left and there were scraps of paper lying on the hearth. [The witness was about to nar¬ rate « conversation, when she was interrupted, and it was agreed that it should be under¬ stood that .Mrs. Wharton had on that occasion sent for General Ketchum to come to Mrs. Chubb’s residence.] To Mr. Syester—Gen. K. had not left the house long before I went back to the parlor: l sup¬ pose it was about an hour after Mrs. Wharton had left the room that I re-entered: G n. K. was in the parlor when Mrs. Wharton came into my room; I did not see him: I heard him go out: my mother was in Baltimore; 1 am not certain, but I thiuk I saw him go out; 1 heard him open and shut the door; I was familiar with his walk; there was no one else in the house except myself and servants; Mrs. Whar¬ ton returned to my room; we burned a grate in the parlor; there are two parlors, and my room is over the front parlor; Gen. K. was in the back parlor when I left; the parlors connect; we warmed the front parlor by a Latrobe stove; I do not know which parlor Gen. K. went out of when I heard him go out, as the doors are close together; I had the usual par¬ lor furniture—sofas, chairs aud tables, pic¬ tures and ornaments, mirrors, a piano aud one book case. THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 95 Mr. Syester, emphatically—“Was there a writing ease there.” . Mrs. Cottman, with equal emphasis— No; there was not.” The witness was then allowed to leave the stand. She was the most positive witness in her manner who has yet appeared in the case. The Court then adjourned until 10 A. M. to-morrow, when Dr. Reese will be recalled for continued cross-examination by the State. The attendance upon the trial to-day was again large, and the ladies were present in force. His excellency, Gov. Bowie, was pres¬ ent to-day. TWEKTY-FIFTffi EJA'SG Annapolis, January 3,1872. The scientific prolificacy of the great Wharton trial seems to be unending. Dr. Reese, the first medical witness called for the defence, has given opinions which show that the medi- Ical facts and fictions connected with the death of General Ketchutu are as numerous as the chemical He descended, however, from positive statements of the fallacies of the chemical analyses to medical probabili¬ ties and possibilities of the cause of death. Upon the o eningofthe Court to-day Dr. Reese was recalled by the State, and in an¬ swer to Mr. Revell testified—1 never held an autopsy of a case of tartar emetic poisoning; the lesions usually found in such a case are excessive irritation of the mucous membrane of the stomach and bowels, congestion more or less of the lungs; usually, if I remember right, an empty condition of the left side of the heart, with engorgement of the right side, and general venous fullness; but the lesion most constantly present is the irri¬ tation of the mucous membrane of the stomach and bowels; that irrita¬ tion is produced sometimes even if the sub- . stance be not swallowed into the stomach,but if access be gained to the blood through some other avenue, because tartar emetic, like ar¬ senic, seems to have a special affinity for this membrane, even if applied to the ex¬ ternal skin, it will produce its specific action upon the mucous membrane. Mr. Revell now read to the witness from page 462, of Stille’s Thereapeutics, and called his attention to the statement there made of the discovery of in¬ ternal lesions and the softening of the mu- ! sous membrane, and that none of those les¬ ions occur frequently. Dr. Reese said those lesions were evidences of the most intense ir- "itation, and that he agreed in the main with Dr. Stille. He continued—Sphacelus is very rare, but t sometimes proceeds to produce death or the ■ lestruction of the part it affects. Mr. Revell next read from page 645 of Stille’s work, and Dr. Reese said lie would expect the violent lymptoms of tartar emetic poisoning to show hemselves in fifteen or twenty minutes after ;he administration of the poison. Mr. Revell ihen read the case cited by Stille on page 645. Dr. Reese said Stille alluded to a remarkable exceptional case in which a man took 240 grains and did not vomit for two hours, and finally recovered. Mr. Revell again read from page 646, giving Stille’s statement of the symptoms of tartar emetic poisoning, and Dr. Reese did not agree in the inference there given that the nervous system was afflicted by non-production of vomiting. Dr. Reese continued—Cases are reported of death from poisoning in which the poison could not be discovered by chemical analysis; this is especially true of organic poisons; all the authorities are full of this; in cases of the non-detection of the poison we should always be able to give a reason for not detectingthe poison; if it is there it should be detected in¬ fallibly. Mr. Revell now read the statement of[Worm- ley, on page 56 of his “Micro-Chemistry,” as to tiie large number of cases of poisoning, in which the poison could not be detected, and Dr. Reese said he knew they were frequent. Dr. Reese continued—A fatal dose of tartar emetic is variable; Orfila reports that in one case out of four, forty grains produced death, but cases of death from much smaller doses are reported. Mr. Revell now read from Wormley on the subject of the fatality of tartar emetic. Dr. Reese was now re-called to the case in his practice which he had cited yesterday, in which he had found no active congestion of' the brain, and at Mr. Revell’s request gave a statement of his patient’s symptoms m attacks previous to the one which proved fatal; he was a gentleman largely and closely engaged in financial matters, and the witness attribu¬ ted his death somewhat to that cause. To Mr. Syester—I said Professor Aikin’s an¬ alysis lacked confirmation in three ways; the failure to produce the metal was one of the reasons I gave. Mr. Syester—If antimony or arsenic are present in a given macter. are there any pro¬ cesses known to you by which it can lie proved without separation? Dr. Reese—No, sir; especially if in connec¬ tion with organic matter; some of the books say that the presence of antimony may be proved without its separation in the metallic form, but the weight of the authorities is de¬ cidedly against such an opinion. Mr. Syester now read from Wharton and Stille’s Medical Jurisprudence, section 656, as to the propriety of the addition of the tartaric acid and the reasons for its addition. Dr. Reese said he recognized the work cited as an authority, and said the form there described was a very good form of metallizing anti¬ mony. He continued—If it was not crystal¬ line at all it would be amorphous. Dr. Reese said the further statement of the results from bismuth was perfectly correct if the pure metal was first obtained. Dr. Reese continued—I condemn the use of tartaric acid if you wish to separate the antimony from the arsenic. Mr. Syester read further, comparing the pro¬ cess Wormley commends and the one used by Professor Aikin, and Dr. Reese said Professor Aikin should have first filtered the cloud he obtained, if possible, so as to remove 96 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. the acid, before addins: the sulphide of am¬ monium; if that- precipitate or cloud had been pure oxide chloride of antimony, and had been touched with the sulphide of ammonium, it would have given the characteristic orange red of antimony, and not otherwise; if it was not filtered off, and entirely free from the acid, the result must have been necessarily unre¬ liable; Dr. Aikin boiled his precipitate in hydrochloric acid, but I do not remember what he said was the color of the precipitate he thus obtained; it was brownish red or reddish brown; it ought not to have been colorless,even if it had not been antimonialjif it had been a colorless liquid I cannot say what would have been the result if sulphide of antimony had been put info it; you ask me a chemical impossibility, and I do DOtwish to be understood to be equivocating. Mr. Syester now read from pages 127 and 128 of Taylor’s Medical Jurisprudence, and Dr. Reese said the process there laid down was correct, and that Dr. Aikin had followed that process exactly, yet it was fallacious in it results. Mr. Syester read further, and after considerable questioning Dr. Reese said he found fault with them all, because the same results might be obtained from other substances, especially if yellow jessa¬ mine and chloral were present. Mr. Syster then read from Wormley, page 233, and Dr. Reese said Prof. Aikin was right, except that he got a cloud instead of a pre¬ cipitate. He continued:—Taylor’s Medical Jurisprudence, pages 127, 128; Wharton &. Stille, Medical Jurisprudence, (150 sec; Turner, page 6; Wormley, p. 233, are all right as to their method of proceeding, but their conclu¬ sions of the presence of antimony are erro¬ neous, that is as to the substances being neces¬ sarily antimony, and for this reason, the presence of organic matters and especially of jessamine and chloral, as lately demonstrated by Professor McCulloch will, under the same process produce precisely the same results up to a certain point; first, an orange red pre- cintate is formed, identical in appear¬ ance with the orange red precipitate of ant- mony; second, the boiling of this precipitate in hydrochloric acid, dissolved it; and third, the formation of a white cloud which may become a precipitate when that hydro¬ chloric solution is thrown into water; if this cloud is redissolved in muriatic acid, it will give a yellowish or reddish brown color upon the addition to it' of sul¬ phide of ammonium, and this without the presence of a particle of antimony; here it should be observed that the ouly point of distinction between the two cases is the single fact that this white cloud is soluble in tartaric acid if the anti¬ mony is present, not combined with organic matter, but if there is no antimony present I cannot say what would be the result; I know that all organic matter will give nearly the same result, and the results from yellow jes¬ samine are truly remarkable; I think the ex¬ periments by Professor McCulloch have opened up a new field for investigation, and that is why I say the tests you have found in the books are fallacious; Professor McCulloch has developed the remarkable similar¬ ity in color; a remarkable change takes place after the precipitate is ex¬ posed; it soon changes to a black; if antimony had been present in the stomach of General Ketchum with the yellow jessa¬ mine and chloral, I think the precipitate he obtained would have turned dark. Mr. S.v ester here sent for the vessels containing the mixtures Professor McCulloch had made, and they were brought into Court; they looked black. Dr. Reese continued—Professor McColloch rested the reagents he used in the exper¬ iments he made in my presence; I dont know that, lie tested the yellow jessamine he used, and I don’t know that Dr. Williams tested the yellow jessamine he administered. Mr. Syester—Never mind; Dr. Williams is no chemist. Dr. Reese—But if he had tested the yellow jessamine, and found antimopy, that would nicely account for its presence after using the yellow jessamine. A vial containing a mixture Professor Mc¬ Culloch had made/and one alleged by Mr. Sy¬ ester to contain an antimoaial precipitate, were held up by Mr. Syester, and Dr. Reese said the precipitates were not now identical in color. Dr. Reese continued—The white cloud ob¬ tained by Professor McCulloch redissolved in hydrochloric acid, but he did not use tartaric acid; when treated with a sulphide of ammo¬ nium it turned to a yellowish brown, but not to the antimonial orange red characteristic of pure antimony; I should not say that if Dr. Aikin obtained an orange red pre¬ cipitate it was characteristic of antimony, but only indicative of the presence of an¬ timony; that is as far as I will go; I know of no substances but pure antimony which would give that orange red precipitate but or¬ ganic matters; I do not know, however, that there are any organic matters that would give the orange red precipitate except yellow jessa¬ mine and chloral; in using the copper tests I got an amorphous deposit: I don’t know that Dr. Aikin dissolved his deposit in tartaric acid: I did not attempt to dissolve the one I obtained in tartaric acid: I dissolved the white cloud in muriatic acid, and I don’t know why it was not dissolved in tartaric acid; I saw the tests pursued until the white cloud was obtained from yellow jessamine and chloral: I don’t know why it was stopped there; the great importance I attach to those experi¬ ments is that, they throw doubt upon the whole matter; that is all I claim for them; I would not say that the tests of Prof. McCul¬ loch were analogous to thos 'Obtaiued by Pro¬ fessor Aikin; they were remarkably similar in three points, and perhaps four; I believe the yellow jessamine was not absorbed into General Ketcbum’s system when it was ad¬ ministered: I consider that he was at that time a dying man; an artificial gastric juice can be made; I don’t think the gastric juices would change the yellow jessamine in Gen- ■ oral Ketckum’s / stomach: 1 do undoubt¬ edly assert that the metal antimony ought to bo obtained and brought into court; I think Professor Tonry said he used only one sixteenth part of his solution in making THE WHARTON-EETCHUM TRIAL. 97 his five spots; unless the metal -was obtained in quantities large enough to he tested it would create only a suspicion that it was there; if a little child, three or four months old, was poisoned by tartar emetic, and a very small particle of it was discovered, I think it would be ouly an indication; the books say a grain will kill a child; I would not like to operate on less than the fiftieth part of a grain of tartar emetic, and then I would be skeptical of my results; I cannot say how much would be obtained from the liver of the little child spoken of to whom a grain had been administered; if it was less than the fiftieth part of a grain I would be unwilling to swear that antimony was present; in case of opium poisoning we look for morphia, but more particularly for meconic acid; the morphia would not be reproduced, but. it would be in the form of meconic acid; there are about a dozen principles in morphia; tar¬ tar emetic is dissolved iu the stomach, and enters the blood as a solution of tartar emetic; if forty drops had been administered to Gen¬ eral Ketchum at 1 o’clock, it could have been found in his stomach at 3 o’clock; it would have masked the chemical results, which would have been otherwise obtained if anti¬ mony had been in the stomach: I made no ex¬ periments with chloral alone, but chloral and yellow jessamine would, in my opinion, give the results we have been considering; Prof. Aikin relied upon the same tests iu his analy- ! sis of the sediment inthetumbler, andorganic matter being in it, they were as fallacious as were his tests of the contents of the stomach; sugar, milk and brandy, or whiskey, subjected to the processes described by Pro¬ fessor Aikin, would give nearly the falla¬ cious results Professor Aikin obtained from the sediment in the tumbler; they would give very similar results; I do say that the results obtained from the sediment by sulphuretted hydrogen and the subsequent tests were falla¬ cious, there being organic matter in that sedi¬ ment; those three substances alone, which you have lhsntioned, under the process followed by Professor Aikin, would give a yellowish brown precipitate, which would be more or less soluble m boiling hydrochloric acid, and ■which solution, when dropped into water, would give a white cloud; I am drawing my inference from his report, rather than his oral testimony. Mr. Syester now read Professor Akin’s oral testimony, which gave an account of his first 'steps in satisfying himself that, he should have looked for tartar emetic, and at Dr. Reese’s rsquest continued to read his entire statement. Dr. Reese then said that, under the same circumstances, milk, sugar and brandy or whiskey would have produced essentially the same results. He continued—There was not much coloring matter in the mixture in the tumbler; but or¬ ganic matter in an acid solution would give a similar oraDge red precipitate; neither milk or sugar would give that color test; if I re¬ member correctly Professor Aikin did not use Reinsch’s test except on the acid solution; by the naked eye crystalline subli¬ mates are easily mistaken for amor¬ phous sublimates; Professor Wormley calls them amorphous, and other authors call them crystalline; I understand that Pro¬ fessor Aikin used his eye and not the micro¬ scope; the microscope should have been used. To Mr. Steele—Professor Aikin said the acid solution and not the precipitate gave the dark coating on copper. Mr. Steele here referred to page 503 of Whar¬ ton & Stille’s Medical Jurisprudence, that the most positive proof was necessary, and that a substantial portion of the alleged poison should be subtracted from the dead body, and Dr. Reese agreed in the opinion there ex¬ pressed. Mr. Steele next read from Woods’ Thera¬ peutics, vol. 2, page 63, as to the unmistaka¬ ble inflammation of the mucous membrane of the stomach and bowels, and Dr. Reese said he held the same opinion. Mr. Steele further read that convulsions “oc¬ casionally” occurred from tartar emetic pois¬ oning, and Dr. Reese agreed in that statement also. Mr. Steele again read from Orfila that it is necessary to produce the metal in poison¬ ing cases, and Dr. Reese said he was in perfect accord with Orfila on that point. Mr. Steele again read from Taylor’s Medical Jurispru¬ dence, page 214. the statement that in the case of Madam Lafarge the one hundredth and twentieth part of a grain was only found, and that in the author’s opiuion her convic¬ tion was a disgrace to the age; Dr. Reese ! agreed with the authority quoted, and said the discovery of a minute particle of antimony or arsenic was in no case sufficient. Dr. Reese was here dismissed. He gave his testimony in a very calm and dignified manner, and impressed every one with the candor and impartiality of his opin¬ ions. He is a strikingly handsome gentleman, with a Bismarck cast of features. His cross- examination by the State’s officers showed that they now fully comprehend the chemical and medical questions involved in this case, and have devoted to their study much patient in¬ quiry and research. Dr. Reese’s cross-examination occupied in all more than ten hours. Dr. Edward Warren was next called, and in answer to Mr Steele testified as follows : 1 am a practicing physician in Baltimore city; I have been engaged in the practice of medicine for nearly twenty-two years; I grad¬ uated first in the University of 'Virginia and then in Philadelphia; I completed my studies abroad; before the war I was Professor of Materia Medica iu the University of Mary¬ land; during the war I was Medical Inspect.or- iu-Chief of General Lee’s army, and Surgeon General of North Carolina, mv native State; after the war I held the Chair of Surgery in the Washington University of Baltimore, but, for private reasons, resigned that position in April last, and am now devoting my attention to the practice of medicine and surgery; I have heard the testimony of all the medical witnesses for the State, except that of Dr. Miles, and I have read tbe official copy of his evidence attentively; I can see j nothing in the symptoms described in General 1 Ketchum’s case, or in the revelations of the | post mortem examination of his body, or in them both combined, inconsistent with the • ■i 98 THE WIIARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. operation of natural causes in the production ot' death; I have - seen men die as sud¬ denly, and with identical symptoms, from a disease that, to a certain extent, has been epidemic in Baltimore for the last ten months. This disease is described by all the modern authorities of reputation, and especiallv by Radeliffe, Tanner, Memcyer, Aitken, Flint and Hartshorne, and is known as malignant purpuric fever, or epidemic cerebro spinal meningitis, by the profession generally. When I heard the symptoms of General Ketchum’s case detailed by Dr. Wil¬ liams, 1 was reminded in the most forcible manner, not only of the description given of this fearful malady in the text books, but of some cases of it which have come under my professional observation, and especially of one which I attended in May last, in consultation with Dr.W. H. Baltzell. of Baltimore city. The resemblance between those two cases, that of General Ketclinm and that of Dr. Baltzell’s patient was most remarkable; alike in the sud¬ denness of their development, the violence of their symptoms aud the rapidity of their course, their identity was complete. Both were characterized by a condition of semi- unconsciousness, and increased sensitiveness of the surface, so that they shivered when touched; rigidity of the muscles of the neck, back and inferior extremities; pupils neither contracted nor dilated, but insensitive to light; suppression and retention of urine; rapidity aud compressibility of pulse; lividity of coun¬ tenance; trismus; opisthotonos; convulsive movements; disposition to turn upon one side involuntarily; occasional jactation and restlessness; incoherent articulations, and a speedy and violent death; and to make the parallelism still more patent, the administration of the tincture of gelsemi- num had a similar effect upon the two patients: they were improved by it tempora¬ rily; their eyes grew brighter; the tegumen¬ tary congestion disappeared, and they be¬ came more tranquil and intelligent, only to lapse speedily in articulo mortis, with the same history as described before; I have seen others die in a similar manner, with the same disease, cerebro spinal meningitis, an affec¬ tion of the membranes of the brain and spinal cord; this disease has repeatedly prevailed in different parts of the world, aud is accurately described in the leading text books, and also in the medical jour¬ nals of this aud other countries; Radeliffe gives perhaps, the best description of it; ac¬ cording to this author, it is an acute epidemic disease, characterized by profound disturbance of the central nervous system, beginning with nausea and vomiting, difficulty in walk¬ ing and staggering, and followed by dizziness, lassitude, headache or coma; delirium, alter¬ nating with somuoience; tetanoid spasms, es¬ pecially of the posterior muscles of the neck, back and lower extremities; occasionly retrac¬ tion of the head, an increased sensitiveness of the surface, causing shivering when touched; marked depression of the vital powers indi¬ cated by a feeble and frequent pulse and res¬ piration; lividity of the face and head, severe abdominal pain, countenance rigid and con¬ tracted, indicating great suffering; surface cold and clammy; loud and disjointed com¬ plaints; suppression and retention of urine;tris- mus, with convulsions as in lockjaw; rest¬ lessness, with efforts to get out of bed; pupils dilated, or motionless aud iosensible to light, and the tongue moist and natural in many cases to the last moment of life. Tanner declares that these different symptoms come ou suddenly in the midst of apparent health, so that “ sometimes the sick man can scarceh/ be persuaded that he has not been wilfully poisoned,” and that “this opinion gets continued also, if. as may happen, the symptoms succeed each other rapidly,” etc,; Radeliffe savs that "in the fulminant form of the malady, the onset is without premonition.” It is well known to the profession that no dis¬ ease is more sudden in its attacks, aud that the man who is seemingly the strongest, and in best apparent health ou one day may be fatally prostrated by it on the morrow; it is an epidemic disease,’ and has prevailed to a certain extent in Baltimore for several mouths, as can be easily established by the testimony of several physicians of that | city; I not only know this fact from my own personal observations, but because I have heard it alluded to and discussed in tile medi¬ cal association of which I am a member; aud yet though it be due to some peculiar fer¬ ment which enters the blood and poisons that tluid, making it a source ot irritation and dis¬ turbance to the economy, rather than afoun- | tain of health and vitality, experience teaches that the system is best prepared for its inva- ’ sion by all those circumstances, such as fatigue, mental exertion, irregulari¬ ties of diet, etc., which are calculated | in themselves to lower the tone of j the vital powers; it is a disease of rapi d j development and of a speedy issue in many ; cases: the fulminant or explosive form runs its course with terrific celerity, hurrying the most healthy and athletic to a fearful death, ■ and through the ordeal of tbe terrible symp¬ toms primarily described; indeed.it is stated in Reynolds’ System of Medicine that “life may be extinguished in less than five hours or it may be prolonged for two or threedavs:” the rapidity of its advent and termination has scarcely a precedent in the history of disease; it strikes without warning and kills almost with the certainty and celerity of the dead¬ liest poison; strange to relate^ the fulminant or explosive form of this disease, that variety which is so especially characterized by vio¬ lence of symptoms, rapidity of march and fatality of termination, frequently leaves no lesion behind in the body of its victim; it kills without tracing a sign upon any structure or organ to tell how its fatal work has been doue: under some circumstances the most active and ex¬ haustive post mortem reveals nothing by which the cause of death can be explained, save, perhaps, but not invariably even in that, a slight passive congestion of the nerve centres and of their enveloping membranes; thus Radeliffe, page 513, Reynolds’ System of Medicine, says; “In the fulminant form of this disease they (auatouiical lesions) are often ab¬ sent;” Dr. Murchison records a case in which “no appreciable lesions of the membranes of THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 99 the braiu or spinal cord could be discovered;” I Dr. Lyons reports an epidemic which pre¬ vailed in Dublin in 1866, and describes two forms of this disease—‘‘the one charactei- ized by colapse, &c., great rapidity of course, excessive fatality aud the absence of anatomical lesions in the nervous centres after death;” Hartshorne states that in the most violent form of this disease, no post mortem lesions are discovera¬ ble; Tanner says, essential lesions “are present, save in the explosive (fulminating form) of the dtsiase.” In an autopsy reported by Gerhard, t iere were no products of in¬ flammation within the skull or spinal canal ” Flint concedes that in some cases, the evi¬ dences of cerebro spinal m ningitis are want¬ ing after death; in a recent discussion before the Academy of Medicine, &c., in Philadel¬ phia, this fact—the frequent absence of all pathological lesions in the most fatal form of this disease,was specially adverted to by one of ts members (Dr. Hartshorne), and though various attempts were made to account for the fact, it was controverted by no one, jut, on the contrary, received as an estab- .isbed truth in medicine. Authorities in this regard might b. multiplied indefinitely by :ulling*from the journals the thousands of ;ases which have been reported in confirma¬ tion of this phenomenon, but the occasion loesnot demand such a labor, as the authors jefore mentioned are the latest and most re- iable known to the profession. The absence of pathological lesions is not pe- tuliar to cerebro spinal meningitis; post mor¬ tem examinations in fatal cases of tetanus, epi- ; eps.v, sunstroke, chorea, hysteria, infantile convulsions, &c., have over and over again Been attended with purely negative results, j These circumstances, ken in conjunction I vith the fact that the spinal canal was not inened, and that the coni was examined only or the distance of some two inches, have a nost important hearing in this case, as will >e presently demonstrated. The history of leneral Ketchum’s illness and death cor- espouds, then, in every particular, notonly vith the phenomena observed by me in Dr. laltzell’s case, but with the descriptions rhicli have been given of the disease by the blest authors. In fact, it seems to me, i fter a careful and candid examination of bis whole matter, that if an attempt were lade to convey an adequate idea of cerebro pinal meningitis to the mind of a person □ti .el ignorant of its nature and henomeua, no more effectual mode could e devised than to give an elaborate and dthf ul narrative of General Ketchum’s case, ■om its sudden inceptiou to its fatal termina- on; and to add that, in accordance with the ; revious observations of the most reliable en in the profession, no anatomical lesions ■f an important character were discoverable | fter death; each individual symptom which as been referred to, may be present in vari- us affections, for there are multitudes of laladies, natural and non-natural, which at '! ome points in their history, and especially at ■ leir climax, present a close analogy to each ther; but it is only in this particular cou- ection—in cerebro spinal meningitis, that 1 they are found grouped and blended, as they appeared in General Ketchurn’s case. In other associations they are anoma¬ lies, while in this connexiou they ap¬ pear, as natural phenomena, the legitimate indices of the disease to which they give character and existence; there are but few diseases which have symptoms that present themselves invariably and in a. definite con¬ catenation; certainly but few of the poisons can assert such a claim, whether they be irritants or narcotics, or both combined; the phe¬ nomena which associate themselves with nervous diseases generally are inconstant in their development and irregular in their mode of combination; in this respect cerebro spinal fever presents a character unique and remark¬ able; its essential features—the pathological entities which give it form and being—ap¬ proximate to uniformity in the certainty of their occurrence, and in the order of their succession; head-ache, or stupor, or somno¬ lence, a cerebral disturbance coming on sud¬ denly; prostration so great and rapid as to strike the patient with astonishment; a cuta¬ neous hyperesthesia, such an abnormal sensi¬ tiveness of the skin as constrains a “shiver” when the hand is applied, even though a con¬ dition of coma exists, and as induces the sufferer to remove automatically everything which touches and irritates it; rigidity, espe¬ cially of the muscles of the nes-k, jaws, back, and inferior extremities, causing opisthotonos, etc.; abdominal pain of the most aggravated character,and a delirium which induces rest¬ lessness and signs of distress, taken in con¬ nection with a certain suppression and a positive retention of urine, constitute a groupe or a chain of morbid phenomena too unique and exclusive to admit of a mistake in diag¬ nosis upon the part of those acquainted with the clinical history of this fearful malady; these considerations, strengthened and intensi¬ fied as they are by the facts tfiat the most rapid aud fatal form of cerebro spinal fever gives purely negative results in a post mor¬ tem examination; that the strong and healthy succumb as readily and as suddenly as the mostfeebleto its malignant influence; that fatigue of mind and body together with un¬ usual indulgence in food and drink, predis¬ pose to its invasion, and that at the very time this infortunate man was attacked the potential influences of epidemicity conspired to produce the disastrous result, render t he con¬ clusion notonly probable but almost iuevita- ble that he died from the operation of purely natural causes, and not from the effects of a deadly poison. fried by every test known to the most ad¬ vanced science; by the criteria of symptoms, whether initial, consecutive, or final; by the standards of development, progress and con¬ clusion as established by the critical observa¬ tions of the ablest clinicians; by the require¬ ments of the scapel in the hands of competent experts, the case of General Ketchum, from the first pain to the last convulsion, in all its phases, beariugsand combinations, illustrates nothing more nor less than a typical example of that form of cerebro spinal fever to which the name of fulminant has been so aptly given, as indicating the suddenness of its in- 100 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. vasion, the intensity of its phenomena, the rapidity of its march, and the fatality of its termination. In my opinion no other theory will explain the history of his sie.kness and death; nothing else will adequately account for all the facts which have been detailed in this case. I am familiar with the action of poisons, especially of opium and antimony, having had practical experience with both of them and having accurately investigated the effects which are ascribed to them by the best au¬ thorities. It is unnecessary to give more than a passing notice to opium in this connection, for it has been demonstrated that he did not die from an over dose of that drug, although I think it more than probable that he was narcotized by it to a certain extent at one period in the history of his case; in other words there is certainly nothing inconsistent in the symptoms ascribed to him on Tuesday, the 27th of June, with such an hypothesis. I have seen two cases of poisoning from an¬ timony, and can consequently speak advisedly in regard to the symptoms, etc., which it pro¬ duces; I have also studied faithfully all the cases of antimouial poisoning which are re¬ ported by Taylor, Christison, Wormley and others; in my judgment General Ketchum did not die from the effects of tartar emetic, for the action of that drug, even in the most poisonous doses, and with a due allowance for every anomolous symptom which has been recorded in connection with it, cannot account for the phenomena which were ob- servt d in this case, either before or after death—either for the symptoms or the pathol¬ ogical revelations as described by the wit¬ nesses for the State. When tartar emetic is taken into the stomach of a human being it produces either local or remote effects or both combined; the local effects manifest themselves in the form either of irritation or inflammation, followed by some change of structure in the parts with which it comes in contact, and, though frequently not developed, on account of the rapidity with which the drug is ejected or absorbed, they must be pro¬ duced when from any cause tartar emetic is brought in contact with the mucous coat of the stomach or intestines. At frequent inter¬ vals or protracted periods, as is evidenced in the cases of chronic poisoning with anti¬ mony which have been reported, and in those instances in which vomiting has not occurred, and the process of absorption has been interrupted: taking into consideration the irritant properties of antimony, as illus¬ trated by its effects, even upon the skin aud tongue, and the intrinsic delicacy and suscep¬ tibility of tlie mucous membrane, it may be stated in specific terms that the amount and extent of the inflammation induced by its presence in the stomach anil intestines, must bear a direct proportion to the length of time which it has remained in con tact with them, and to the frequency and amount in which it has been adminis¬ tered. The local effects are also illustrated by a peculiar burning pain in the mouth, throat, stomach and bowels; spasmodic con¬ traction of the fauces and gullet, and by the destruction of the epithelium of the tongue and mucous surface generally, with which it comes in contact. The remote effects result from its absorption into the blood, and subse¬ quent action upon the nervous system, and upon the organs which eliminate it; they may, therefore, be classified into nervous and glan¬ dular phenomena, according as they are de¬ veloped in connection with the structure as above mention#]; the nervous symptoms, con¬ sidered in the order of their occurrence, as well as in the light of their distinctive differences, are primary, intermediate and consecutive: of these the first are developed because of its action as a special sedative upon the par vagum nerve, and manifest themselves in dis¬ turbances of the digestive organs (especially the stomach) of the heart and of the lungs; the second results from a participation of the motor centres in those disturbances, and show them¬ selves in a profound depression of the volun¬ tary muscular system, and almost complete loss of contractile power in those muscles which are ordinarily controlled by the will, or in involuntary contraction of them; and the third are the sequilaeor resultants of that abnormal condition of the circulation, passive congestion, which results from the se¬ dation of its great central organ, aud by de¬ priving the nerve centres generally of a con¬ dition necessary to their proper nutrition, dis¬ turbs their functions, induces coma, delirium, alterations in the pupil, rigidity, convulsions and death. The glandular symptoms result from and indicate the elimination of antimony from the system, and are expressed iu certain aber¬ rations of the secretions peculiar to the special organs by which it is discharged. After being absorbed, this substance is rapidly eliminated by the sjpu, liver and kidneys, especially the last named; that copious pro¬ duction and discharge of urine which has been observed so universally iu antimonial poisoning, aud which is undoubtedly its most infallible phenomena, is a typical example of the glandularsymptoms iuciileut to the toxic, action of that powerful agent. The quantity of tartar emetic necessary to cause death in a healthy adult is variable; I have seen the most positive poisonous effects produced by a dose of two grains,while half an ounce did not prove fatal iu another case, re¬ ported by the toxicologist. The symptoms in- 1 dicative of the toxic or poisonous action of this drug are as follows: A sensation of burn¬ ing in the mouth, constriction iu the throat, and pam iu the stomach, and which are local, phenomena; speedy development of nausea aud vomiting; sedation of the heart’s action as indicated by a feeble, frequent aud compres- pressible pulse; aud disturbance of the respiratory function, together with the most profound muscular prostration: cramp, oil convulsive movements iu certain gioups of muscles, a cold and clammy skin, copious se¬ cretion and discharge of urine, and a constant disposition to syncope qj fainting, which arc the “primary” aud “intermediate” remote symptoms,resulting from the absorption of tin antimony, its direct action on the nerves, and its indirect influence upon the spinal centres: and then, in exceptional cases, when the orig- THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 101 ial dose has been large, and death from syn- Dpe has not occurred, notwithstanding the reat. tendency incident thereto, a profound nd prolonged sedation of the heart, passive angestion is induced in the nerve centres, in- erfering ■with their nutrition, and develop- ]g, as a consequence, stupor, delirium igidity, convulsions, alterations in the pupil, nd, it may be, death, -which are the “consecu- ive,” remote symptoms of tartar emetic oisoning. In some instances, in consequence f a more profound impression upon the vagus ierve, there is neither nausea nor vomiting, ,nd the disturbance in the circulation being peedily and thoroughly developed, the con- ecutive or nerve symptoms are primarily in¬ duced and continuously exhibited until the lose of the scene. The muscular prostration, the insensi- iveness of the skin, the tendency to syn- ope, and the augmented secretion of irineare, however, invariably present in this tage or phase of the antimonial impression, whether it be developed secondarily or pri- narily, complicating it and giving it charac¬ ter to the last. It is a, great mistake to suppose hat tartar emetic kills without producing esions of an appreciable character in the irganism, although it is possible that these esions may not be decided or invariable in hose cases in which a single dose has been wlministered; yet, under other circumstances, hey must he produced, and they have always teen discovered; this drug is an irritant when ;iven in repeated doses within a brief period, ■>r when notimmediately absorbed ore.iected.it necessarily inflames the mucous coat of the uoutb, gullet and intestines, and thus leaves pehind it the product and effects of inflam oatory action as a legacy to the pathologist; ictiug as a special sedative upon the vagus ;erve, and thereby disturbing respiration and ■irculation, it necessarily induces changes in he apparatus by which each of these func- ions is performed; as might reasonably re expected, therefore, Orfila and Taylor re- ■ard pulmonary congestion as one of the post constant of the postmortem appear¬ ances exhibited in this connection; and, so Iso with regard to the circulation; sedation f the heart, especially if profound and pro¬ tracted, must inevitably induce venous ongestions of a decided character, through- ut the organisms; in truth, the most decided I nd dangerous of the symptoms incident to ntimoniai poisoning—its nervous phenomena i -are due to the perversion of nutrition in the [Serve centres, which results from the accu¬ mulation of venous blood within them, the uration and intensity of the one being in the ery nature of things the measure of the de¬ velopment of the other; for the same reason, similar congestion must be developed iu ther organs, and also in the right side of the eart, wherever venous radicals are found nd dark blood circulates; these are not 1 mply logical inferences, for they are Sustained by the recorded observations of llis, Lee, Cristisou, Orfila and Taylor; they Ire the established truths of toxicology. The Court here adjourned until 10 A. M. to- lorrow. The attendance upon the trial to-day as again large. Among those present to-day ' ve J e Dr. Geo. E. Dennis, of Somerset county, and Hon. James T. Earle, of Queen Anne’s county. General Brice and Charles L. Kef chum have been in attendance for the past two days. James D. Ketchum has returned to Slew York. Mrs. Nugent, Mr. and Mrs. J. Crawford Neil- son. Miss Eosa Neilson, Mr. Herman Stump and Mr. H. Moon Wharton have been present with Mrs. Wharton and her daughter each day. Dr. Genth returned to Philadelphia as soon as his testimony was concluded. Prof. McCulloch remains in attends,nee upon the trial. TWEHfTY-SKXTie-I»AY. Annapolis, January 4,1872. The efforts of the defence in the great Wharton-Ketchum trial are at present di¬ rected towards what they consider the medi¬ cal facts in the case. Notwithstanding the tedium of the testimony, much interest is still manifested. Dr. Edward Warren was recalled this morn¬ ing, and, in answer to Mr. Steele, testified— After a dispassionate and faithful review of the facts which have been thus established m regard to the symptoms incident to poisoning by antimony, its modus operandi as a toxic agent, and the pathological lesions which it induces in the human organism, I am con¬ strained to the opinion that General Ketchum could not have died from the effects of that drug for the following reasons: 1st. He could not have been poisoned with it on Saturday night or on Sunday night, as is alleged, for it is in evidence that, after eat¬ ing for the last time on those occasions, he sat up for some time, smoked and talked quietly with his friend, retired without complaint and was not disturbed for some hours afterwards; tartar emetic is not only one of the most powerful but also one of the most prompt of known agents—when it acts at all it acts quickly; the delay in this case is fatal to the theory of poisoning at that time ; the idea of a man smoking, chatting and sleeping for hours with a poisonous dose of tartar emetic in his stomach is an absurdity; he also dresses himself and walks down in the yard, an act entirely inconsistent with that extreme pros¬ tration which is invariably incident to pois¬ oning with this agent. 2d. He could not have been poisoned on Monday, as is alleged, first, for the reason that when Dr. Williams saw him he was “sitting ut> and hohliug a slop jar between his knees,” neither of which is reconcilable with the theory of antimonial poisoning, as no fainting man voluntarily assumes the erect posture, and as the muscular exertion necessary to maintain himself iu such a position and to bold a vessel iu the manner described does not show that profound loss of power in the muscular system which is invariably pro¬ duced by the absorption of antimony; sec¬ ondly. because he was relieved by creosote and lime water, which are not antidotal, in this regard, either chemically or physiologi¬ cally, and which must have proved only to¬ pical anaesthetics without neutralizingthe an- 102 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. timony in bis stomach or counteracting the destructive effects of that portion which had already been absorbed in the blood; and thirdly, such a supposition is entirely pre¬ cluded by the spetdy and complete disap¬ pearance ot the effects and consequences of the supposed toxic agent, under circum stances unprecedented, in the history of such poisons. 3. He could not have been poisoned by tar tar emetic on Tuesday, because neither the local nor remote symptoms showed them¬ selves in auv form, notwithstanding his con¬ tinued impression by some morbific cause dur¬ ing the entire day, and for the additional con¬ sideration that the phenomena which did pre¬ sent themselves were incompatible with the well established action ot that drug; tjiere was neither binning in the throat, uorpam in the stomach, nor cramps in the bowels; he did not vomit or purge, for no ejected or dejected matters were found in the vessels of his room, and he was confined to his chamber during the whole time: there was no tendency to death by fainting and no complete prostra¬ tion of the voluntary muscular system siuce it is proven that he sat up and walked about when it was necessary for him to do so; there was no coma or rigidity or convulsive movement or coldness of the surface, and, in fact, no symptoms connecting themselves with the nervous system, save a disposition to sleep continuously, torpidity of the mental faculties, and unsteadiness of gait in walking; and to complete the disparity, there was no redundancy of the urinary secretion, but on the contrary there were suppression and re¬ tention of urine in a most remarkable degree, as is established by the testimony of the only witness who had an opportunity of observa¬ tion in this regard. If, then, he was poisoned bv antimony on that day. every precedent established in toxi¬ cology and the criteria of symptoms and clini¬ cal history are a delusion and a snare. I. He could not have been poisoned by tartar emetic on Wednesday, lor reasous equally as potent aud palpable. I have shown in this connection that the symp- oms which were observed on that day were essentially those of epidemic cerebro spinal meningitis, such as I have seen in other instances, aud as are graphically de¬ scribed by all modern authors; the differen¬ tial diagnosis Uetweeu the morbid phenomena which characterize that disease, and the symp¬ toms indicative of antimonial poisoning can be determined with almost absolute precision in this case; the fact that when first seen by Dr. Williams on Wednesday morning, not¬ withstanding his condition of semi-nucon- sciousnessfrom which he was with so much dif¬ ficulty aroused,even by rough shaking and loud appeals, a decided shiver passed over his frame when the physician’s hand was simply placed upon him, demonstrates the existence, at that time of cutaneous byperasthesia—a symptom which has never been observed in a single in¬ stance of antimonial poisoning since the dis¬ covery of that metal, and which in numerous outbieaksof nieuingial fever has been one of its most characteristic phenomena; the ad¬ ditional circumstances that “he attempted to get out of bed, slapped the shoulder of an at¬ tendant, and applied bis band at will to vari¬ ous portions of his body,” thus showing the existence of normal contractile power in such of the voluntary' muscles as were Dot rigid or convulsed, a :d the ability to employ it at dis¬ cretion, form another stable link in the chain of proof which associatesthe morbid condition then developed with the operation of a natural cause, and a wide hiatusiu thecouuexion which is sought to be established between it and the action of this or any other poisouons agent. And so, also, with regard to the fact that he abraded his throat and abdomen, apparently in the effort to remove some source of irrita¬ tion in those parts; if he really experienced pain at that time, and sought to relieve it in the manner described, that circumstauce af¬ fords strong confirmation of the existence of meningial fever aud almost positive proof against antimonial poisoning; neuralgic pains in those localities especially in the abdomen, of the most intense character, are the usual concomitants of this affection, and it is far more rational to conclude that he was able to appreciate and respond to them, when in a condition of unconscious¬ ness than that be should feel, under such cir¬ cumstances, the local irritations pr> ducable by an agent which, it is alleged, bad been ad¬ ministered to liirn on several occasions, with impunity in this regard, when perfectly con¬ scious. aud therefore infinitely more sus¬ ceptible to such impressions; the move¬ ments alluded to were, however, more probably' automatic—mere phases of the death struggle, and bad no clinical signifi¬ cance; and finally, the ominous fact that lie bad passed no water during the whole of Tuesday, and that though none was on Wednesday' in the vessels of bis chamber, bis bladder was not preternaturally distended, in other words that there was decided sup¬ pression of urine, completes the line of de-; marcation and furnishes the data for an exact discrimination between the malady from which he actually died and the antimonial poison to which it is alleged that lit suc-i cumbed. The negative results elicited by the post; mortem examination of his body are a dou- bled-tdged sword, cutting iu tw iin alike the hypothesis of death from poisoning by tartar emetic, and all the other theories which have been advanced in connection with the case: it is far more probable that a natural disease should have terminated fatally, under the cir¬ cumstances, without leaving a lesion, than that the, non-natural agent should have had such an issue as the result of its action; cere¬ bro spinal meningitis, iu its fulminant form, often hurries its victims to the grave without the developraeut of any appreciable change whatever: and the same is true of many other maladies well known to the pro¬ fession; it is a matter of physical im¬ possibility, however, that, in a case of tartar emetic poisoning, cbaiacterized by such symptoms as were present in this and with so remarkable a history, could have pro¬ duced death in the manner described,-without the development of unequivocal lesions; had it been applied to the skill of a healthy iudi- 103 THE WpARTON-EETCHUM TRIAL. vidual as often and continuously as it is al¬ leged to have been introduced into the stom¬ ach of General Ketchum, decided inflamma¬ tion would have been the result. And yet, notwithstanding its well known irritant prop¬ erties, and the peculiar sensibility of the lnu- eous surfaces, and the supposed ante mortem evidences of its local action in this particular iustance, nothing was discovered in the stomach and intestines hut some scat¬ tering red patches—such as are frequently produced by the most innocent causes, or as result from the mere act of dying; not a single product or result of inflammatory action—not a trace of cell-proliferation, or of pyogenesis, or of ulceration, is pretended to have been discovered; the supposition of poisoniug by antimony is, therefore, coutradictedby a posi¬ tive fact, eliminated in this connection. Again, the extreme and protracted sedation }f the heart of this man, if he really was poi¬ soned with tartar emetic as alleged, must have produced venous congestion throughout his entire system; while tne nervous symp¬ toms, so prominently and continuously mani¬ fested, could have been nothing more nor less ;han the results and the measure of the levelopment of that passive hyperaemia; ind yet, contrary to the plainest laws of physi¬ ology aud physics, as well as the experience if the most reliable authorities, the lungs were found perfectly normal; there was no accumulation of dark blood in the right side if the heart, and no congestion whatever in my organ save the Imam, and that of a very msiguiticant character Passive congestions, most marked and dis- dnguishable, should have been discovered everywhere, and especially in the lungs and aerve centres, while the autopsy really re¬ vealed it nowhere, save in the piamater and in the brain substance, to a limited aud un- jertain extent; for according to Andral and [Sokitausky, the accumulation of venous blood in the vessels of the membrane referred m, is an ordinary phenomenon of the act of lying, while Nisuieyer declares (page 156, 7ol. II) that the punctiform appearances ob- lerved on the cut surface of the central sub¬ stance, have but little value as proof of irevious byperceuiia, and “dependfar more on ;he fluidity of the blood than'on the fullness )f the vessels.” The results of the post mortem examination vere, therefore, really negative, and that fact )tr se completely negatives the theory of an- ■imonial poisoning in the case, for its svmp- oms, together with its whole history, abso- utely required for their production certain irecedent and essential changes in General ietehum’s body, which would immediately lave been discovered after death in the most io«iti ve form. He might readily have died from cerebro pinal meningitis, with no precedent struc ural changes of sufficient gravity and per¬ manence to be discernahle after death, fora ondition precedent to nutrition may he pre¬ luded by the blood poisoning ine dent to that nd kindred diseases, but it is impossible to uppose that he could have succumbed to the Effects of antimonial poisoning, under the cir- umstances, without the existence of such palpable lesions as would necessarily he re¬ vealed by an adequate autopsy. The negative results, therefore, which have been so persistently and prominently relied upon in this case, to establish death from a toxic agent, prove too much, if they prove anything; they demonstrate the operation of purely natural causes and an inevitable death. After weighing all the facts in this case, as adduced by the testimony of the medical wit¬ nesses for the State, aud devoting to their investigation much patient research and honest labor, I feel constrained to sav, alike in the interests of science, justice and hu¬ manity, that the unfoitunate man died, not from the action of poison, but from the effects of disease—not by human hands, but in the dispensations of Providence. I do not wish to criticise my professional brethren, hut I think it would have been more conclusive if more than two inches of the spinal cord had been examined; negative re¬ sults would, however, in all probability, have been obtained from a further examination of the spinal cord; I have seen several cases of opium poisoning, and also of antimouial poi¬ soning; but one of thecases of opium poisoning terminated fatally. To Mr. Revell—I have been practicing med¬ icine twenty-two years; I do not think opium, chloral, chloroform or yellow jessamine killed General Ketchum; I cannot speak with accu¬ racy as to the time cerebro spinal meningitis ap¬ peared; the first vomiting showed, in my opin¬ ion, the premonitory syinptons of the disease; it is impossible to say accurately from the testimony when the vomitiDg com¬ menced; on Saturday night he went into the yard, and on his return said he had been sick at the stomach; I do not know that vomiting commenced then; I judge that Gen¬ eral K.’s disease belonged to the fulminant form; the vomtings may have been due to in¬ digested matters in his stomach; the disease is divided into the simple, the purpuric and the fulminant forms; that is the classification the hooks give; I have read a portion of Dr. Stille’s monograph, and he describes the in¬ flammatory very well, hut General K. did not have that form; I did not omit chilliness,but I described a chi 11,and gave all the symptoms of a chill; in any form even this chilliness may be absent; headache frequently presents it¬ self; indeed it is one of the most con¬ stant symptoms; I mentioned headache as one of tne symptoms, and used the disjunctive conjaction to show the connection; I spoke of headache as one of the symptoms, but I did not dwell upon it, because it is frequently slight; it is not observed sometimes in the fulminant form, and is then slight; the putting of his hands to his head might indi¬ cate a headache; I was impressed with the opinion that General K. had died of cerebro spinal meningitis as soon as I read a written statement to Mr. Thomas, of the symptoms; when I heard the testimony here, I was more impressed with that opinion; I had not entirely made up my mind before hearing the testimony: I told Mr. Thomas at the time that I did not think the symptoms indicated tatar emetic poisoning, hut another disease; I have seen fifty cases of cerebro spinal 104 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. meningitis, but they -were not all of the fulminant form; I held a post mortem examination in a violent case of cerebro spinal meningitis; all the violent symp¬ toms had manifested themselves; I made the examination with a competent man, and found no decided lesions; after hear¬ ing General K.’s ease described, I was struck with the similarity: we examined thoroughly, the spinal cord partially; we examined all the viscera minutely; that was several years ago, and occurred in Virginia: I suppose I have seen half a dozen persons die from the fulmi¬ nant form o f the disease; the case I spoke of occurred in Baltimore; I think the man’s name was Frederick Hinner, on Hamburg street; he was attacked the latter part of May, and died in two days; the symptoms de¬ veloped themselves rapidly; an autopsy was not held; we were anxious to make it. but it could not be done: evidences of inflammation might be found in the lower portion of the spinal column when they were not present in the upper part of the spinal cord; it might occur, but it is not likely; hyperesthesia is one of the symptoms of cerebro mainly meningitis; 1 infeired hyperesthesia only from the fact that when Dr. Williams touched General K. he shivered or shuddered; in some forms of cerebro spinal meningitis it does not occur, yet it is one of the most con¬ st int symptoms, but in many it is only slightly present; it was present in most of the cases I saw; the absence of it is exceptional, but not very exceptional; Ratcliffe states that in the majority of cases it is present; I mean to say that in a majority of cases it is present; whether slight or exces¬ sive, it is a very important symptom; in Dr. Baltzell’scase there was the same rigidity of muscles which Dr. Williams described; the pupils of the eyes are in cerebro spinal menin¬ gitis always affected; most generally dilated, sometimes of normal size, but not respond¬ ing to light; I had seen the dilation of the pupils in another case than that which I attended with Dr. Baltzell. Mr. Revel! now read from page 19, volume 49, of the Journal of Medical Science, and Dr. War¬ ren said the ab-ence of albumen in the nrine was not an invariable symptom, but many cases had been observed in whi,ch it was, but it was not connected necessarily with the history of the case; not a part of the disease, but a complication; not au essential feature, but an accident. Mr. Kevell read further from page 19 of the above-mentioned volume, that a rapid and profuse effusion of serum was prominent, and Dr. Warren said there were epidemic forms of the disease, in which it did not occur. Mr. Kevell next read from Reynolds’ System of Medicine, 2d vol., page 679, that the patient frequently fell into a collapse, etc., and Dr. Warren expressed liis opinion that the symptoms there described were not invariable, they were fre¬ quently present and frequently absent. Mr. Kevell further read that the urine was loaded with albumen, and Dr. Warren said it was emphatically untrue that such was necessa¬ rily the case; it was a complication, as lie had before said. To Mr. Syester—The very nature of the di- j sease I have described does not necess-irilj I produce the alnuraen in the urine. Dr. War | ren here explained the reason for the failurt to produce albumen in all cases. To Mr. Revell—Chilliness by shivering, ver tigo and persistent vomiting, are not invaria¬ bly indicated at the outset. TDr. Warren here gave the reason why ht could not regard those symptoms as charac | teristic or invariable.] He continued—There is no one invariabh symptoms of cerebro spinal meningitis, but i is only by grouping the symptoms that tin presence of the disease can be determined. Mr. Revell again read from second volume of Reynolds, page 676, and Dr. Warren said the symptoms there described were notin- variable. Mr. Revell again read from the same author, page 677, aud Dr. Warren said there were thousands of cases iu which hem¬ orrhage was not developed, and that he dis¬ agreed with the author on that point on the authority of all the other authors, and be¬ cause ot his own observations. Mr. Revell read further from page 677 of the symptoms aud post moitem evioences which showed themselves in the back of the brain, back and spinal column, and Dr. Warren said he agreed generally with the description there given; it was a good general description. Mr. Revell again read that there was acute shiver¬ ing followed by headache; Dr. Warren said that frequently the shivering aud head¬ ache was slight. Mr. Revell proceeded to read further, and Dr. Warren agreed with some of the opinions of the author and expressed, at some length, his reasons for disagreeing with others. Mr. Revell again read from the same author at some length, aud Dr. Warren expressed his opinion with qualifications. It had been shown, he said, that the amount of lesions discoverable boreno proportion to the duration of the dis¬ ease. Dr. Warren continued—Dr. Ivlebs’ cases and observations of certain conditions in the liver and kidneys are not confirmed by other authors; I cannot believe him if he says such are invariable characteristics, because he is contradicted by all the most respectable au¬ thors on the subject; cerebro spinal asphyxia is only a conclusion of cere¬ bro spinal meningitis; the coating of the tongue is not a characteristic symptom; the case I had in Baltimore was a decided case,and from my previous knowledge of the disease I readily recognized it; the invariable symp¬ toms of tartar emetic poisoning :we the pros¬ tration of the heart, the secretion of urine and the relaxation of the muscles; all the books speak of muscular relaxation being present to a greater or lesser extent; paralysis of the lower extremities sometimes accom¬ panies cerebro spinal meningitis. Mr. Revel read now from Niemyer, 2J volume, page 233, and Dr. Warren said he did not describe the non-iuflammatory form of cerebro spinal men¬ ingitis, which is alluded to iu Valleix. who ob¬ jects to the nomenclature given to the disease. To Mr. Syester—There must be iu the brain some one of the symptoms of one of the forms of cerebro spinal meningitis: it is not, how¬ ever, an inseparable couditiou; there are THE WHAETON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 105 symptoms which are connected with the brain in this disease, but any one may be ab¬ sent and any one present; loss of sight in some rare cases, loss of hearing in some rare cases, congestion of the face in some cases, conges tion of the scalp in some cases, heat of the surface in some cases, coldness of the surface in some cases, loss of memory in some cases, vertigo in some cases, headache in some cases, delirium iu some cases, incoherency of speech in some cases, staring expression of the eyes in some cases, suffusion of the eyes in some cases, loud cries in some cases; coma in its different grades- contraction and dilation and insensibility of the pupils are among the symptoms which connect them¬ selves in this disease with the brain, and I could name a dozen more; none of these might leave a post mortem lesion; the name of the disease indicates inflammation of the mem¬ branes of the brain and of the spinal cord; the name does not properly describe the disease; Niemyer’s description of cerebro spinal meningitis in general does not apply to that form of the disease of which I believe General K. died; he only describes the form in which lesions do occur; Dr. Williams’ let- tersimply suggested to my mind that Gene¬ ral K. had died of cerebro spinal meningitis; that disease is no hobby of miue: the slight passive congestion ouly added to my opinion; the absence of lesions was one link in the chain of proof. Dr. Warren—A link has a connection both wavs. Mr. Svester—Yes, sir, if it is not at the end of the chain. Dr Warren continued—I saw a letter from Dr. Chew, giving an account of the post mortem, and I inferred that the results of the post mortem had been only negative; no fact in this case, except that Dr. Williams found that a shiver passed over General Ketchum when he touched him, brought me to the opinion that he had hyperesthesia; you can’t make anything else out of it; if it had been tartar emetic poisoning, he would not, accord¬ ing to my experience, had felt a mustard plas¬ ter in two hours; differences were observable in the pupils of the eyes in the six cases of cerebro spinal meningitis; no two were, how¬ ever, alike; I did not see Dr. Baltzoll’s patient die, and I did not perform a post mortem; I do not know that he died in tetanic convul¬ sions, but I know that he died in convulsions; in the case I examined in Virginia there was an absence of characteristic post mortem le¬ sions; I examined every orgau likely to be effected; the brain and its membranes, about two inches of the spinal cord, the lungs, the liver, the stomach, the intestines, and the kid¬ neys; I did not examine the brain with a mi¬ croscope, because I was not then familiar with the use of the microscope; Gen. K.’s brain was examined with the microscope and I have no doubt very thoroughly exam¬ ined; there may be cases of active or passive congestion of the hr in which do not reveal themselves to the naked eye; there may be two forms of hyperemia; it is the greatest mistake iu the world to suppose that convulsions or paralysis are caused by the pres¬ sure of that blood upon the brain, but it is ex¬ ceedingly difficult to ascertain whether or not the brain has been congested, and I was, there¬ fore, led to the opinion that though the brain of General K. had been thoroughly examined,the punctiform congestion observed was in all probability negative in its character; the microscop® does not reveal in a post mortem examination the evidences of congestion in the brain in such a case; Dr. Woodward, of the United States army, who is a most ac¬ complished microscopist, says the post mortem lesions could not be discovered with the microscope; I cannot say how many cases of cerebro spinal meningitis were in Baltimore last summer, bat it was more of an epidemic there than I have ever before known; it occurs oftener in winter than in summer; it is called popularly the cold plague; I know of and have seen sev¬ eral cases of it in Baltimore; I suppose I have seen half-a-dozen in Baltimore; some of them died, but I don’t know how many died. Mr. Syester—I want their names and their ages as near you can. Dr. Warren—I can’t do that; Dr. Morris will give them to you. The witness continued—I do not know how- many of the cases were those of infants, but I suppose three or four were infants; in some epidemics, perhaps in a majority, the children are most often attacked; in others it is more indiscriminate in its ravages, and neither age nor condition of health constitute a barrier to its invasion; a difference in that respect manifests itself in various epidemics; old per¬ sons are not so apt to be affected by it as young persons; I think a majority of the cases of the epidemic of the disease in Baltimore last summer were those of children; I don’t recollect ot any old persons being attacked by it; I think the old are less liable to be at¬ tacked than children or the middle aged. The Court here adjourned until 10 A. M. to-morrow, when Dr. Warren will be recalled for continued cross-examination by the State’s officers. Among those present to-day were Hon. Wm. M. Merrick, M. C.; A. Leo Knott, Esq., State’s Attorney, of Baltimore city: Col. H. D. Lonev, of the Fifth Regiment, of Balti¬ more; and Drs. Williams, Miles and Chew. Prof. Tonry was not present to-day, but re¬ mained in attendance until the conclusion of Dr. Reese’s testimony. Dr. Reeese re¬ turned to Philadelphia on yesterday, aud Professor McCulloch left to-day for New York. Professor White, of St. John’s, is still in attendance upon the trial. General Brice was not present to-day. Susan Jacobs still occupies the seat in the corner which she took at the commencement of the trial. Dr. James C. Welling, ex-Presi- dent of St. John’s College, now connected with Princeton College, aud Professors Nel¬ son aud Dashiel, of St. John’s were also pres¬ ent to-rlay. Drs. Hiram and Wm. Corson, of Norristown, Pennsylvania, have been iu at¬ tendance each day since then arrival. Prof. Harvey L. Bird, of Washington University, Baltimore, has been summoned for the de¬ fence, and has been present for several days. 106 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. twenty-seventh day. Annapolis, January 5,1872. It lias been shown, both by the State and the defence,that those who were not cognizant of the circumstances alleged to connect. Mrs. YVbarton with the death of Genera"Ketcbum, have more to say at her trial than those who were present at the death-bed. Medical and chemical science seem to have found in the great trial a happy opportunity for airing themselves; chemistry has shaken oil much of the dust, of years, and put rather a new face on an old body, while medicine has delighted in something of a gladiatorial exhibition. From the looks of the jury it is evident that they have ceased to take much interest in scientific revelations. Dr. Edward Warren was re-called to-day, and in answer to Mr. Svester, testified—I have no recollection that the ages of any of the patients in Baltimore afflicted with cerebro spinal meningitis exceeded fifty years; I cannot say definitely that the age of any of them exceeded fifty years; the cases occurred in various parts of Baltimore;Dr. Baltzell’scase was an South Baltimore; I saw a case in East Baltimore, one on Calvert street, and one on St. Paul street; out of the six cases on'y one was fatal; that was the only case which assumed the fulminant form; the others were ordinary cases: the rule is that the duration of the disease has nothing neces sarily to do with the amount or develop¬ ment of lesion, but it has much to do with the extent of lesion; a case however pro¬ tracted would not necessarily leave le¬ sions; the vepid form of it would not be fol¬ lowed by as extensive lesions as a longer at¬ tack; the lesions depend invariably upon one form or other of the disease; that is qn one form(tke inflammatory)if there be time enough for their development; there is no difference in the symptoms of these two forms which have been distinguished; you cannot tell until after death anu the post mortem examination has been made which of the two forms you have been dealing with; you determ ue that by the lesions; Dr. Balt- zell’s case was of the fulminant form; fulmi¬ nant applies to the inflammatory and the non¬ inflammatory form alike; there may be lesions iu the fulminant form, but they are not so likely; that form is too rapid for the development of lesions; it is impossible to say how long it takes to develop the lesions; they do not depend upon the violence of the symp¬ toms, but upon the duration of the disease; in the fulmiuaut form it is as if a man was stricken down almost by lightning, as it were; the nervous system is so pros¬ trated that inflammatory action cannot be produced; the time and the condition of the system in the fulminant form both concur to hinder the development of the le¬ sions; pathology, like everything else, isnot a matter of accurate exactness. (The witness here explained the prostration of the system in the fulminant form.) He continued—By a post mortem examination and the lesions you could determine, in a majority of cases, whether the inflammatory or non-inflammatory form had existed, but if it had terminated in too brief a period the post mortem would not de¬ termine what had been the disease. To the Court—There is no absolute rule for determinlpg the time in which the lesions would develope. To Mr. Syester—There is no rule as to the length of time in which the fulminant form would develope lesions; the most violent in¬ flammatory form may not develop any le¬ sions; it must be either the inflammatory or the non-inflammatory form; you can’t tell to which form it belongs; I examined one case of the fulminant form; sometimes the inflamma¬ tion limits itself to the brain; sometimes the lesions revealed at post mortem examinations are difficult to determine; it is difficult for an iuexperienced eye to determine the lesions in acaseof passive congestion. The witness here referred to Dr. Woodward, and Mr. Syester said Dr. Woodward was not in Court, and he protested against a reference to him. Mr. Steele replied, and said he hoped the Court would lay down some rule to bo ob¬ served in cross-examinations. Mr. Syester said he was sensible of the in¬ dulgences which had been extended to him on the other side, but he did not think the course of the cioss-examination had gone wrong. He then continued to explain how be con¬ sidered the state of the case. The Chief Judge said it was impossible to lay down any rule but what bad already been enforced; namely, that a direct answer must be given to a catergorical interrogatory, and then, if necessary, an explanation could be made afterwards. Dr. Warren continued—The difficulty of de¬ termining the post mortem lesions may ac¬ count for many of the varying reports, but it cannot account for all. Dr. Warren then re¬ ferred to Reynolds’ System of Medicine, page 513. He continued—Ratcliffe says the lesions are often absent in the fulminant form; ac¬ cording to his observations, it would be in¬ ferred that the lesions are very few; scarlet fever and measles often carry off their victims without leaving traces behind them. Dr. War¬ ren then referred to page 514 of Reynolds’ System of Medicine. v Mr. Syester—We ought to be able to fell where these forms run to, no matter where they run. Dr. Warren—We can tell as much about it as a lawyer. Mr. Syester—Lawyers’ mistakes appear to all the world, and doctors bury their mistakes six feet under ground. Dr. Warren—Yes. but sometimes lawyers hang their mistakes on a tree. The spectators seemed to enjoy this little spat. Dr. Warren continued—The authorities I have quoted do not refer to the microscope, but sav the lesions are not. present, and take the responsibility; they are proficient micro- scopists and I conclude they used the micro¬ scope in their examinations Objection was made to the witness stating that he concluded that the microscope had been used by the authors he had quoted, in their examinations, and the Court decided THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 107 --- 7 - that it was a matter for argument by counsel before the jury, and not one that the witness could give as his conclusion. Dr. Warren continued—There is no exact location for the inflammation of the brain from fulminant cerebro spinal meningitis: it may be found on its surface, in its substance, in its ventricles or in the spinal cord; I said yesterday that I thought it would have been better if the whole spinal cord had been ex¬ amined: it is simply possible that lesions would have been discovered on further ex¬ amination of the spinal cord; I do not know of any laws which would ha ve made it certain that lesions would have been discovered: I do know that lesions might have been dis¬ covered; the books give cases in which lesions were found in the spiDal cord and nowhere else; in those cases the lesions were not found anywhere'else: I do not remember that the cases were of the fulminant form, but I sup¬ pose— Mr. Syester—Never mind, Doctor, what you suppose. Dr. Warren—Well, I doubt the authenticity if the cases reported. He continued— I doubt i a further examination would have devel- iped lesions; if lesions had been found in the lower portion of the spinal cord. I think they would have been of those of the inflammatory torm; they might have been of the fulminant ;orm ; I do not know that the spinal cord is inly affected, if at all, in violent forms of the lisease. ^Mr. Syester now read a note in Reynolds’ system of Medicine, edition of 1868, as the lomenclature of the disease; and the witness repeated in the main what he had said ireviously of the different forms. Mr. Syester here read from Flint, page 651, of wo cases there reported, in which there were io effusions in the nervous centres, and Dr. Warren said he did not think the author eferred to them as the products of inflamrua- ory action. Mr. Syester next read from Stille, page 76, nd Dr. Warren said he agreed with the ’pinion there expressed; he understood the uthor to be treating of the fulminant form, nd continued, I do not know that he treats f anv other form. Mr, Syester then read from Niemyer, vol- me.2, page 222, that in some cases the disease an its rapid course and. no symptoms of etanic convulsions showed themselves, and he witness agreed with the author, and con- inued—A man may be stricken down without eing able to speak or make a sign; headache lay be very slight, and it may not occur; ; might last five hours, and there might be no eadache, and again in two days it might not low itsel f ; I would not conclude that if a tan said two hours before death that the pain as in his stomach, that headache was neces- ; irily absent; I would not conclude either, lat there was general paralysis; when rralysis.is present it connects itself oftener ith the inflammatory form than any other. Mr. Syester again read from Niemyer, page 1/2, as to the symptons and rapid course of ie disease, and Dr. Warren said the author d not refer to the tetanic form in his remarks xmt general paralysis, | He continued—Hyperesthesia may occur at any period of the disease, and may disappear at any time; I think the tremor described by Dr. Williams indicated it; I didnot hear Mrs. Hutton's.testimony about having sat by and rubbed bis hands; I would not consider the fail¬ ure to respond then an indicationof hyperesthe¬ sia; I do not mean to say that it was present at that stage; the tremor observed by Dr. Wil¬ liams was a sufficient indication to my mind of the presence of hyperesthesia; I know from that tremor that hyperesthesia was at that time present; if it did disappear; the fact that he afterwards pub his hands on his body and scratched himself is another indication, not amounting to positive proof, that irrita¬ tion was present; I can well understand how a man in a state of semi-consciousness would, in his efforts to remove the sources of irritation to his skin, abrade his skin; my judgment is that those movements of General K’s hands, in scratching himself,etc , were automatical; but if they had any patho¬ logical significance, they pointed either to the existence of pain or hyperesthesia; a shiver passing from head, to foot never oc¬ curred under such circumstances; his sleep amounted to semi-unco/ sciousness, as he had to be shaken before his physician could awake him; I admitted from the start that it was a slight circumstance; I simply said that at the moment General K. applied his hands aud scratched himself indicated that hyper esthesia might at that time have been present; I would not say that dur¬ ing the time Mrs, Hutton was rubbing General K’s hands that hyperesthesia was present just at that time; I can’t say that it disappeared just at that moment; I have not read Dr. Williams’ letter since yesterday, but I can give you my reason, for the opin¬ ion to which it led my mind. Mr. Syester—Never mind, Doctor; you could not give an opinion yesterday without having re-read the letter,and we don’t want it to-day, as you have not read it since yesterday. Dr. Warren continued—Opium would pre¬ vent vomiting if given in a sufficient quan¬ tity; the urine would be last affected in opium poisoning; I have said that muscular relaxa¬ tion was among the symptoms of tartar emetic poisoning. [Mr. Syester here read from Taylor on Poisons, page 249; Stille on Poi¬ sons, 2d vol., page 40; Taylor on Poisons, page 390, and Wormley, page 216, and Dr. Warren expressed his concurrence with the opinions there expressed.] He continued—Ii the symptoms I have described and agreed to were present,and antimony was discovered in his stomach, I would investigate the case,and if I found the symptoms of antimonial poison¬ ing I would infer antimonial poisoning; but if the post mortem lesions and the symptoms were those of another disease, I would refer it to that disease ; if I found the characteristic symptoms of tartar emetic poisoning, and the post mortem confirmed these symptoms, my opinion would be that tartar emetic had caused death: special tetanic spasms may occur in connection with muscular relaxation; profound coma is some¬ times a symptom of cerebrospinal meningitis; I don’t know how much I get as a fee in this 108 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. case; I expect to be paid a proper fee; it is customary in this country and in England to employ ' proper medical experts; I have fixed upon no sum, and have had no under¬ standing about it; I have heard by common report that there were witnesses for the State are to receive fees; I heard it from Dr. Morris; he told me that a witness for the State had told him he was employed as an ex¬ pert, and expected to be paid a proper remu¬ neration for his services and time; he said Dr. Williams was the gentleman; I uever ex¬ pressed an opinion on the streets of Baltimore that Gen. Ketchum had died of cerebro spinal meningitis before; the letter of Dr. Williams gave me the suspicion of that disease;I can’t re¬ member the symptoms which gave mo that sus¬ picion; I cau name convulsions, also the fact that the catheter was used; also a semi-con¬ scious state of the patient; the symptoms which showed themselves in General K.’scase late on Tuesday and Wednesday may have been those of the fulminant form of the disease; 1 do say that a persou attacked in the way in which General K. was would have the fulminant form; I should not think he could walk about, talk, and then live with an at¬ tack of the fulminant form of the disease. Mr. Kevell now read from Niemyer & Grisole as to the symptoms of tartar enmtic poison¬ ing, and the absence of lesions discoverable li 3 r post mortem examinations, and Dr. War¬ ren said they were generally correct. The State’s officers here announced that they had closed the cross-examination of the witness. Dr. Warren here desired to make a personal explanation as to his connection with Mrs. Wharton’s case, and the Court consented. Mr. Steele said he did not think it was ne¬ cessary, but Dr. Warren insisted, and was pro¬ ceeding to narrate a conversation with Mr. Thomas, who, he said, had called upon him in the interests of justice aad humanity, when Mr. Syester objected, and after some desultory discussion as to the propriety aud right to make the desired explanation, the Attorney General said he had not intended to cast an imputation upon the character of Dr. Warren. The explanation was then left unfinished. Dr. Warren continued, in answer to Mr. Syester (by consent of tho defence)—Cerebro spinal meningitis does notin all its forms begin with a chill; the most violent form occurs in the epidemic; 1 think that was Gen. K.’s case; it had been present for several days, aud fulmi¬ nated on W ednesday. To Mr. Steele—Congestion of the kidneys is one of the complications of cerebro spinal meningitis. Mr. Steele then read from Nie¬ myer on the subject to which he had just re¬ ferred, aud Dr. vVarren agreed with the opin¬ ion held by that author. Mr. Steele read next from Stille. page 93, aud Dr. Warren reiterated his opinion that the symptoms and lesions there described were complications. Mr. Steele again read from Niemyer on the sub¬ ject of headache aud coma in spinal menin¬ gitis, and Dr. Warren said the opinions were in agreement with his own. Dr. Warren continued—The epidemic may recur, aud its influence does not necessarily disappear. Mr. Steele then read from several authorities, as to the microscopic revelations and Dr. Warren briefly expressed his opinions Dr. Warren was then allowed to leave th< stand. Dr. John Morris was next called, and, aftei affirming, testified—I am a medical mao anc reside in Baltimore; I have practiced medi cine nearly six and twenty years; I have hat three unmistakable cases of cerebro spina meningitis; I have one of the three undei treatment now; some of mine were solely ful minant in the manner of invasion and not th( termination: the two first cases recovered, tf my surprise, and ray present patient will, 3 think, recover, though paralysis has super¬ vened. Mr. Hagner now read to the witness the following hypothetical case and interroga¬ tory: A gentleman about fifty-eight years of age, residing on the Heights of Georgetown. D. C.. on the morning of the 24tb of June, 1871, at! o’clock A. M., was in Washington city, more than a mile and a half from his home, having already breakfasted. After other occupations he called about 12 M. at an office more than a mile farther oil, and there he was engaged about important business, in completing which he walked about a mile and a half further. The day was ex¬ cessively warm, aud he seemed to bo mud heated. He took no dinner. He came over tc Baltimore in an afternoon train, and aftei reaching there drove and walked about a mill from the depot to his lodgings, and imme¬ diately walked out again and was absent sometime. Between 8 and 9 o’clock P. M. he partook of a hearty meal of meat, biscuits coffee, etc., of which raspberries were the concluding course, and after smoking and talking with his friends until 11 o’clock P. M lie retires to bed. Some hours afterwards hi is taken sick, and leaves his room aud walki down stairs into the yard. Sauday morning, thougn still complainin} of not feeling well, he goes out, visits < friend, and remains for some time. He thei returns indisposed. Between 8 and 9 o’clocl P. M. ho drinks a glass of lemonade, witl brandy in it. and after an hour or two retire to bed. During the night he is attacked witl symptoms of cholera morbus, and goes to th' yard once about 12 o’clock. On the nex morning (Monday) he is still unwell, and com plaiusof nausea and giddiness, but eatssoui breakfast in bed. He vomits at about 1 o’clock A. M., aud again abaut 4 or 5 o’clocl P. M. At 4 or 5 o’clock P. M. of the same day h is visited by a physician, who finds him ver; much nauseated, pale and prostrated, with rapid and feeble pulse, sitting up and boldin a slop bucket between his knees, into wliic he vomits frequently. A dose consisting o two drops of creosote and a tablespoonfnl n lime water, is giveu him. and ordered toll repeated every second hour, and it relieve him- He is seen again at 2 o’clock P. M.' o Tuesday, sitting upon the side of his bed ex amining his watch, but makes no remark He is visited by his physician again on Tues day morning, about 10 o’clock, and is foun asleep: but on being aroused, expresses bin TEE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 109 self as well enough to leave Baltimore during the day. He continues to sleep during the morning, and when aroused and induced to walk from his bed to a lounge in the room, seems feeble and exhausted. He returns to his bed and sleeps heavily, with heavy breath¬ ing, for several hours. He is again aroused and returns to the lounge while his bed is being made up. In walking from the bed to the lounge, it is observed that ho has difficulty in walking, that his gait is unsteady, and that he staggers as he moves along. He lies down on the lounge. No vomited matters are found in his room during the whole of that day, and he passes no urine. At 0 o’clock P. M. he is discovered sleeping pro¬ foundly and breathing stertoriously, but af¬ terwards, without waking, changes his posi¬ tion and seems to breathe better. He spends the night on the lounge. His physician is sent for on Wednesday morning, and visits him about 10o’clock A. M. andfindshim semi-coma¬ tose, with a feeble and rapid pulse; pupils natural in size and insensible to light; respira¬ tion slightly hurried, and the muscles of the neck, back and extremities rigid; heis aroused with difficulty, and immediately relapses iuto a profound sleep; a remor passes over him when touched; he can only articulate a single word at a time, and is unable to frame a sen¬ tence: be has passed no urine for more than twenty-four hours; no special relaxation of such muscles as are not rigid is observed; his face is turned towards the back of the lounge, and is livid, of a purplish, bluish and reddish ,tinge. At 11 o’clock A. M. forty drops of the tinc¬ ture of yellow jessamine (gelseminum) are administered in two teaspoonfuls of water, his physician having previously removed him to his bed and applied ice to his head; his teeth are clenched, his jaws are opened with difficulty to receive the medicine. In a short time his color improves, and his eyes look notably better, although he still remains un¬ conscious and rigid. He then shows signs of great restlessness, struggles to get out of bed, and then relapses iuto a state of quiescence and semi-consciousness. At live minutes before 1 o’ciock another dose is administered, contain¬ ing more liquid, between two or three table- tpoonfuls, as alleged, and in about 15 minutes afterwards he slaps the shoulder of an attei.d- iant, grasps the back of his neck, seizes various 'parts of his bodv, scratches himself with his nails, utters disjointed words and cries.and then is seized with tetanic convulsions. Opis- iholonos is developed, At each convulsive movement there seemed to be a systematic iffort to throw himself on his left side; be units groans: trismus shows itself; c^ma in¬ creases, and the patient is apparently in arti- lulo mortis. At about 1:30 o’clock P.M. chloro¬ form is administered, and at about 2 o’clock ?. M. 30 grains of chloral are given, and at ,bout 3 o’clock P. M he dies without abate¬ ment in his symptoms. His urine is drawn off about 1:30 o’clock P. f its cause or causes; I incline to the opinion hat it is due to some influence in the itmosphere: it is a blood poison undoubtedly; ipisthonos is a symptom of the disease; I have dso observed in the disease plurost.hotonos, he bending of the bo^y to one side; the cases 1 saw presented plurosthotonos in a very strik- ug mariner; I am not prepared to say that he suppression of urine is another symptom; ’ don’t care to rely upon the books, but I do lot regard my opiuious as superior to those of urt,hors; all the cases, even in an epidemic, do lot present the same symptom; I have known pidemics of yellow fever in which the symp- oms varied and a change of treatment was hen necessary. The Court here adjourned until 10 o’clock to- aorrow. The attendance to-day was not arge, and medical testimony seems to be “dry, tale, flat and unprofitable” in the opinion of hose who have interested themselves in the rial. T JGHITES BAY. Annapolis, Md., January 6,1872. It was expected upon the opening of the lourt to-da.v that the medical testimony for he State would be continued, hut in a few loments after the Court had been called to rder the Chief Judge announced to the jury hat for reasons which the Sheriff would ixplain to them the Court would adjourn until ) A. M. Monday. It has already been announced that during le first week of the trial the mother of one f the jurors, Stephen Beard, Esq , died sull¬ enly, and this morning information was re- jived by Mr. Beard of the death of his ife. In consideration for Mr. Beard in his affliction, the adjournment was ordered to-day, and, by consent of counsel. Sheriff Chairs was instructed to allow him to attend the funeral of his wife, hut only in company with all the other jurors. Wagons were procured soon after the adjournment of the Court to-day,and the jury .under the charge of Sheriff Clairs and Deputy Sheriff Bryan, were taken to the residence of Mr. Beard, about seven miles from Annapolis. The Sheriff was ordered to return to-night, with the jury, to their quarters, at the City Hotel. The jury is evidently much wearied by the length and tedimn of the great trial, and those who were most industrious in the begin¬ ning in taking notes, now recline in their high chairs and look on complacently. Dr. Davidson, the ex-pupil of Professor Aikiu, still takes a note now and then, but the accu¬ racies and inaccuracies of medical and chemi¬ cal science do not seem now to attract the attention of the majority of the all-important twelve. The Court takes the utmost precaution to keep the jury free from even a breath of pop¬ ular feeling, and they are not allowed to leave the court room, after adjournment, until the entire audience has retired. The reporters are also subjected to the order to retire-, and have to gather up their notes in haste, and leave with the rest of the audience. Mrs. Wharton still maintains the remark¬ able composure which she exhibited on the first day of the trial, but seems much wearied, aud at times exhibts considerable restlessness. Miss Wharton is each day at her side, and manifests deep interest in all that occurs. Mrs. Nugent, Mr. and Mrs. ,J. Crawford Neil- son. Miss Rosa Neilson, Mr. H. Moore Whar¬ ton and Herman Stump, Esq., of Harford county, are present with her each day. The counsel in the case show that they too are fatigued and overworked. The trial has entailed great labor upon them aud severely taxed their powers of endurance. Attorney General Syester entered the trial without »re- vious preparation, having been constantly’oc¬ cupied before receiving the order of the Gov¬ ernor to assist in the prosecution of Mrs. Wharton, and Mr. Revell, while conversant with the material facts of the case, had not anticipated the course and length to which it has led. The counsel for the State have, however, shown themselves fully equal to the exigencies and demands of the case. It is well known that the able counsel for the defence, with conscientious fidelity to the interests of their client, have devoted, from the beginning of their acceptance of the case, much study and research to the questions they anticipated, legal, medical and chemical. They have well maintained in this trial their high reputations. The State’s Attorney in his opening state¬ ment to the jury made the issue of a verdict of murder in the first degree or of acquittal, but the terms of the indictment leave the dis¬ cretion to the jury of bringing in a verdict of murder in the first or second degrees, or of manslaughter. Mr. Steele, on yesterday, replied to the ex¬ planatory remarks of the Attorney General as follows: 112 TEE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. “We are glad that the Attorney General has made the remarks he has, because every one who knows Dr. Williams, knows that he is wholly above such an imputation, and we are glad to have the opportunity of saying that we do not propose to offer a challenge to Dr. Williams on any subject whatever.” The following was to day sent to Dr. Williams by the prosecuting counsel: Annapolis, Md„ January 6,1872. Dr. P. C. Williams: Dear Sir—Our attention having been directed to certain accusations charging you with be ing a volunteer prosecutor of Mrs. W harton, &c., we feel it our duty, and do hut a simple act of justice to your high character for integ¬ rity and honor, in stating that your presence during this trial has been cumpulsory, under the State's process, and not voluntary, and your con¬ nection with the case has been in strict ac¬ cordance with our legitimate requirements. You are at liberty to make whatever use ot this letter you see fit. Very truly, yours, &c., Jas. Rrvell, State’s Attorney for A. A. County. Andrew' K. Syester, Attorney General. TWEET'S-YIYTH DAY. The great trial has grown almost monoto¬ nous, and is now- unusually free from the ex¬ citing incidents which ordinarily accompany a criminal prosecution. The ladies, especially, have become tired of the scientific disquisi¬ tions, and comparatively few have been present during the last three or four days. There is a general impatience for the begin¬ ning of the end, and the court room will doubtless be crowded almost to suffocation when the arguments before the jury com¬ mence. All the counsel engaged in the case are earnest and forcible speakers, and in a gravity they will, doubtless. cause of such exert themselves with even more than their j neys, and is absorbed by them: tertained by Mr. Beard’s family during their stay at his home. On Sunday, at2P. M., the funeral sermon of Mrs. Beard was preached by Rev. Mr. Mercer.of the Methodist Episcopal Church South, in the presence of a large concourse of the relatives and friends of the deceased lady, from the text: “The righteous hath hope in His death.” Mr. Beard did not follow to the grave of his wife, but in consideration for his fellow- jurors returned to Annapolis without a further delay than the services a t his residence neces¬ sitated. The death of Mrs. Beard was very sudden. On Friday night, after partaking of a hearty meal, she retired to her room, but in a few moments called for water, which was at once procured. She expired in a few moments froman attack of heart disease. She was (50 years of age, and is spoken of .as a most esti¬ mable lady. Much sympathy is expressed in this community for Mr. Beard in his sudden affliction. The Court was called to order at half-past 10 o’clock to-day, and Prof. Harvey L. Byrd being re-called, testified, in answer to Mr. Thoma, as follows: I have said that, in my opinion, Gen. Ketchum’s death did not arise from unnatural causes; the suppression of urine is a very important point and in certain con¬ ditions of cerebro spinal meningitis it constitutes an almost unfailing symp¬ tom; it is a very common symptom in all rapidly fatal diseases; it is not so in cases of tartar emetic poisoning; there are certain symptoms common to a very large number of diseases, and where they run paralel, as is often the case, but little im¬ portance can be attached to them individu¬ ally; but, again, other symptoms are found oi a marked character; the physician at once begins to form the opinion as to the existence of particular diseases; vomiting oeems both in cerebro spinal meningitis and in tartar emetic poisonings, also the rigidity of the jaws occurs in both; in the case before us we have a paralellism; in tartaremetic poisoning the skin wants sensibility, and in cerebro spinal meningitis the skin is oversensitive: tartar emetic has au affinity for the kid- the urinary accustomed ardor. It is anticipated that the trial will con¬ tinue at least two weeks, aud probably longer. It has been demonstrated that medical and chemical witnesses occupy much time in the delivery of their testimony, and a number of medical gentlemen and two chemists are still on the list of witnesses for the defence. The testimony in relation to Mrs. Wharton’s character will perhaps occupy two days, a large number of her associates having been summoned. The jury was taken on Saturday to the resi¬ dence of Stephen Beard, Esq., in charge of Sheriff Chairs and Deputy Sheriff A. S. Bryan, agreeably to the instructions qf the Court, and the afflicted jurorwasallowed to converse wit h the members of his family in the presence and hearing of the Sheriff. In accordance with the strict orders of the Court the jury was at no time divided, hut were kept in the same room. They were most hospitably en- secretion would, therefore, be increased in tartar emetic poisoning: in cerebro .spinal meningitis the urine would he decreased and suspended; in the cases I have had there was a tendency to bend the body to one side, known as pleurosthotonas; I found that in the four cases I have before spoken of; if the man was in bed ho would still bend to one side; 1 prefer not to refer to the books, and I ant speaking of the cases which have been undei my observation: I think it probable that General K. died from cerebro spinal menin¬ gitis; I came to the conclusion that ho did not die from tartar emetic poisoning, because oi the absence of many of the characteristic symptoms of such poisoning; tartar emetic has an affinity for the stomach, and its action seems to bo directed to that organ, whether taken in by swallowing or applied tc the cuticle surface, the true skin, or injected into the cellular system; when applied locally for some time, its tendency is to first irritate THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 113 ,nd then to pustule the surface: we should lecessarily expect this tendency upon the aucous coat and membranes of the stomach: hen one of the clurasteristic symptoms rould ihe high irritation, and if continued a ang time, abrasion of the mucous membrane if the stomach; in the hypothetical statement here is no mention of these characteristic ymptoms in the stomach; that, taken in con- lection with the want of lesions, would 16 sufficient to satisfy one that Gen¬ ial Ketchum did not die from tartar metic poisoning; the post mortem ippearances revealed nothing to me upon vhieh I could rely, and scarcely anything noxe that we might expect to lind in any other ase than that which we have under consid- ration; I think the symptoms indicate cerebro roinal meningitis more strongly than any¬ thing else; some of the symptoms look in one lirection and others in another; on the whole, regard the case as an anomalous one, and, ndeed, an extraordinary one; some of the ymptoms refer to either variety of tetanus. The witness here went on at some length in xplanation).He continued—I do not, however, mow of any disease which so nearly suits as erebro spiiial meningitis; we could, however, 10 on and hud a hundred parallelisms. The vitness was now turned over to the State. The Chief Judge said the Court did not, in ts ruling on Friday as to the presence of an ipidemie of cerebro spinal meningitis, mean ,o exclude proof that it was so by general •eputation. The Chief Judge then read 1st Itarkie, page 44, touching the point he was Considering. Cross-examined by Mr. Syester—In the cases vhieh came under my observation, in two of hem I was in attendance some hours after he commencement of the attack, and in ot.h- irs from the commencement; in two cases the hill was present at the commencement; chills were reported in the other cases, but I did not ee them; one patient lived four hours and an¬ other five and a-half hours; those cases were if the fulminant form; one of the four cases ixtended for five days and another for seven lays; where the disease is rapid in its char¬ acter I should think they belonged to the pidemic form; it is necessary that there hould be a number of cases before he disease could be well regarded as an epi- leinic; I did not- find a state of general paralysis n the cases I attended; there were symptoms vhieh might at first blush hav6 induced the opinion that traumatic tetanus was present; he patients died within a few hours, and I -annot say that the symptoms disappeared at -ne time and again returned; there was no lartial recovery; a patient once attacked iy the fulminant form would not, in my ipiuion, be able to get up and walk out of the louse; profound coma soon supervenes; I vould not think that Gen. K., had the ful- ainant form if he got up and walked about; audarnun administered in large doses etards the action of the kidneys; I never aw a death from tartar emetic poisoning, and ny knowledge of the symptoms has been Oib- ained from books; I have kept aloof from looks in this case, but I think Taylor is clear hat the stomach is highly irritated; I think some of them, Taylor among them, speak of the ulceration of the stomach; I could not now name the author; I scarcely think I can be mistaken as to the statement that ulcera tion is produced; Taylor being a standard author, I should think if ulceration occurred he would he most likely to state it; I am very happy to say that I think the administration of both yellow jessamine, chloral aud chloro¬ form was judicious; I do unhesitatingly en¬ dorse the treatment by Dr. Williams as proper under the circumstances; I am not sufficiently acquainted with the pathological history of cerebro spinal meningitis to say that it leaves dark red patches in the intes¬ tines; in cases I have examined there was some enlargement of the small glands of the intestines; I am not certain that any yellow substance was found in the intestines; 1 made post mortem examinations of two of my cases; the brain and its membranes and the spinal marrow were examined for some dis¬ tance, and there were no lesions whatever; those were the two last cases in which I had come in after the commencement; we did not use the microscope; it was during the war and we could not obtain a microscope; the failure to observe with the micro¬ scope may account for the absence of the appearance of lesions to our eyes; we examined the ventricles of the superach- noid space, and we could see no lesions what¬ ever; there seemed to be even slight evidences of passive congestion; lesions would, I think, be more likely to occur in the su- perachnoid space than anywhere else; in the two first cases I attended (those which were protracted) the lesions were quite marked; there was decided softening of the brain substance; one of the cases lasted forty- eight hours, and the other for several days; I saw pus as well as lympth; the le¬ sions, I judge from personal experi enoe, depend upon the length of time the attack lasts; if General Iv.’s case was one of cerebro spinal meningitis from the outset, I think the lesions would have most probably appeared; it is very difficult to say when he was attacked with cerebro spinal meningitis; the symptoms stated in the hypothetical state¬ ment are not sufficiently connected to enable me to decide that it was a case of cerebro spinal meningitis; I think there were some of the symptoms on Tuesday; I am aware now that I am going on the record as a professional man and into history, and I wish to ap¬ pear as an intelligent professional man; I would not say that tartar emetic had produced the irritation in the stomach described in the hypothetical statement; I would say that almost any irritant poison might have caused it; any indigested matter in the stomach might have caused the irrita¬ tion; cerebro spinal meningitis would not necessarily have produced it; it is a blood poison; I do not think a fulminant ease would have produced it; I should think that tartar- emetic, if continued for any length of time or given in large doses, would produce the irritation spoken of; I have been obliged to suspend the use of tartar emetic on account of irritation of the stomach: it is a most ex¬ traordinary fact that a half century ago 114 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. members of high standing in the pro¬ fession were in the habit of giving it in huge doses; when a large dose is administered na¬ ture struggles to protect herself, and it then acts more as a sedative; in the hypothetical statement there was rigidity of the muscles, difficult swallowing, a semi-comatose condi¬ tion, suppression of urine, and I infer also hyperesthesia of the skiu; also, a tendency to pleurosthotonas; these I regard as the charac¬ teristic symptoms of cerebro spinal menin¬ gitis; a great many things would give iise to the difficulty in swallowing, and if tartar emetic had been given often it would produce that difficulty; I have Dever looked in the case of Cook, who was poisoned by Palmer, in England, and I cannot, there fore, say that the same symptoms were present in that case as in General Iv.’s; tetanic convulsions sometimes accompany tartar emetic poisoning, but it is not invariable; te¬ tanic convulsions may accompany cases which are not cases of poisoning; rigidity of the muscles is occasionally produced by large doses of tartar emetic, but its usual effect is to relax the muscles. To Mr. Reveli—Tartar emetic very often produces burning in the pit of the stomach; also constriction of the throat; tartar emetic belongs to the corosive class rather thau the irritant; spasmodic contraction of the muscles of the upper part of the abdomen occurs in the latter part of a case of tartar emetic poisoning; suppression of the urine does not always occur, and neither does the absence of albumen in the urine; the eye is not uniform in its appearance; in one of the cases I attended from the inception the pupil of one eye was contracted and of the other dilated; in one case there was also strabismus, particularly during the tetanic spasms; I think the eye would be liable to a great many variations: I remember that in one of my pro¬ tracted cases the eye was turned back, expos¬ ing but little more than the white of the eye, all the visual portion of the eye was ob¬ scured; in both ray cases total suppression of the urine was observed; I have not read Dr. Stille's work on cerebro spinal meningitis, but I know him well, and anything he might say of the general symptoms would be authority for my opinion; headache is one of the most constant symp¬ toms: as long as my patients were capable of complaining they complained of headache; there were no lucid intervals in either of the rapid cases; there was a great degree of sensi¬ tiveness of the skin: it may not have gone all the way with the disease, but I think it was observed in my cases to continue; in the case of an athletic negro man, who I bad to bleed, I observed that as soon as the bandage touched bis arm he showed great sensitive¬ ness, and as soon as the lance was inserted he had a violent convulsion. Mr. Reveli now read from Stille. page 87, and Prof. Byrd said he thought the symptoms which were described were referrable to the fulminant form of cerebro spinal meningitis. Ptof. Byrd continued—I have seen cases of yellow fever, in which there was no black voncit, and also in cases of Asiatic cholera 1 have known of the absence of the charac¬ teristic rice water discharge. Mr. Reveli again read from page 129 of Stilie’s work, as the necessity for the use of the microscope, and Prof. Byrd said he had no doubt that, in many cases, the microscope would reveal lesions, but ho was not prepared to say that cases might not occur in which the microscope would not reveal them. Mr. Reveli read further from pages 129 and 130 of the same author, and Professor Bvrd agreed in the main with the stateme'nts there made, Mr. Reveli again read from page 126, that theprincipal symptoms were refer¬ rable to the brain and the nerv« s. Mr. Reveli then read from page 20, and Professor Byrd said he had observed the peculiar sunken countenance there spoken of. Prof. Byrd continued—Inoticed^inmycasesa disturbanee of the hearing; in the protracted cases there was certainly a disturbance of the hearing, but in the rapid cases we could Dot observe that symptom so closely: in my cases I observed also loud groans and inco¬ herent expressions. Prof. Byrd was now dismissed and Dr. Peter Goolrick was next called, and in answer to Mr. Steele, testified—I have been a prac¬ ticing physician nearly twelve years; part of the time in Baltimore; I heard the tes¬ timony of Drs. Williams and Chew, and read the testimony of Dr. Miles; from the symptoms and the post mortem revelations, I would say that General Ivetchum might have died from natural causes, and not from tar¬ tar emetic or any other poison known to me; I saw a child of Mr. Dyer, of Prince George's county, poisoned from Coxe’s Hive Syrup, which contains tartar emetic, seneca, squills, and simple syrup: I was called to the case as one of croup, and when 1 reached the child I found that it had a pulse scarcely perceptible, with a cold, clammy surface, and was | thoroughly relaxed; 1 ascertained that that preparation had been given by Mrs. Dyer; the case did not prove fatal; it was an old prepa¬ ration, and had, I suppose, grown stronger from age; I should attribute the symptoms I observed to tartar emetic: that istheoulycase of tartar emetic poisoning I have ever seen; I have given tartar emetic in doses of twenty grains, to relax the system in invagination; I saw no appreciable result, and was compelled) to use subsequently tobacco; I don’t think the | death of General Ketclium is traceable at all to tartar emetic poisouing, and I think natural causes will account for it. To Mr. Syester—There are several diseasesi which leave no lesions, and it would be un¬ safe to say that they were caused by tartar emetic poisoning; several diseases would pro-1 duce the symptoms I have heard described in this case; hysteria might produce them; I am not acquainted with cerebro spinal menin¬ gitis, but its symptoms, as described, would resemble those of Gen. K.; the mother of the little child did not tell me how much of Coxe’slj syrup she had given, but said she had given a good deal; the squills are an emetic, and in large doses an aero-narcotic poison; it might j produce relexation; the seneca is au expecto¬ rant.. and is supposed to play that part in the ) combination; I think it likely that it may in THE WEARTON-KETCIIUM TRIAL. U5 irge quantities excite the nervous system; mple syrup is very harmless; in Coxe’s syrup bout a grain of tartar emetic to the ounce'is he proportion; the tetanic spasms in tartar raetic poisoning are a divergence from the isual symptoms; they sometimes appear; Tay- >r says they “may” appear; he says suppresion r urine never occurs; they occur so rarely liat they are omitted from Beck and rom Tanner, and -when they do occur I hink you would find certain morbid condi- ions which did not occur in General K.’s case; don’t know that Taylor at one time swore bat tetanic spasms occurred; with the te- anic spasms present in General K.’s case I would expect passive congestion of the spleen, iver and lungs, and blood in the right side of he heart; I think it qnit6 likely that passive ongestiou would he found in the brain; the light passive congestion observed was less, n my opinion, than would have occurred in tartar emetic poisoning to the development of etanic spasms; I will name also the absence f irritation in the stomach and alimentary anal; opium may have relieved, to a certain xtent, the effects of tartar emetic; to a cer- ,aiu extent laudanum may have modified the limiting. To Mr. Revell—In tetanus, idiopathic or raumatic, spasms occur; in tetanic spasms rom tartar emetic we would have coma; in etanns there is an absence of coma in either arm; in tetanus, lockjaw is among the first ymptoms, and rigidity of the inferior ex- remities succeeds it; I can’t state the order f succession of the symptoms in tartar emetic joisoning, as too few cases are reported; the iiooks say that sometimes in cases of tetanus, 10 lesions occur; I cannot conceive of a case [if tartar emetic poisoning, iu which the ymptoms were so violent as General K’s case Presented, in which lesions would not be dis¬ covered; lockjaw, the books say, rarely oc- urs from tartar emetic poisoning; the red inge in the intestines might be a proof of longestiou from the action of au irritant ioisou; excessive vomiting may have pro- heed the evidences of irritation; I cannot say wnv long after the vomiting ceased the evi¬ dences of irritation would continue; in a case If tartar emetic poisoning there would not be !,ctive hyperemia of the brain, but there Vouhl lie cerebral depression; I think it would i>e passive congestion of the brain and other jirgans too. : Mr. Steele now read from Tanner as to the >ost mortem appearances from tartar emetic oisoning, and Dr. Goolrick agreed with the .escription given by that author. Mr. Kevell read from Tanner as to the symp¬ toms of tartar emetic poisoning, and the wit¬ ness said they would indicate a srate of pas- ive congestion. Dr. Goolrick was now dismissed, and Dr. 'olm li McClurg was next called, and, in an- wer to Mr. Hagner, testified—I reside in West 1 heater, Pennsylvania; 1 graduated at Jeffer- on Medical College in 1846; I have been in Vest Chester nearly four years; previously I iraotieed in Philadelphia, and during the var was a surgeon in the army; I was at one ime stationed at Jelferson Barracks, near St. Louis; I then went to Cleveland, Ohio, and 8 was there eighteen months; I was then sent to Cincinnati, and then I went to Jackson, Michi¬ gan; I was ordered next to Louisville, Kv., and was afterwards assigned to Joe Holt Hospital, and I remained in charge of that hospital until the war closed; at Cleveland I delivered several lectures on military surgery. Mr Hagner now read to the witness the hypothetic statement, and the accompanying interogatory, which has appeared ip the col¬ umns of the Gazette, and Dr. McClurg testified —I have no hesitation in saying that death was the result of natural causes, and I say so after the most mature deliberation, from all the experience I have had; it resembles, un¬ doubtedly, cerehro spinal meningitis more particularly than any other disease; I have had certainly fifty cases of cerehro spinal meningitis; they were in private and military practice; three cases occurred within the past three months; it may be well to say that cer- ebro-spinal meningitis means inflammation of the membranes of the brain and of the spinal cord; it is a blood poison,just as typhoid, fever; both are blood poisons, hut the lesions from them apply in different parts of the or¬ ganisms; yon must have different symptoms in the two, and that is because different nerve centres are affected; iu cerehro spinal menin¬ gitis you have no invariable symptoms; as no tree has no two leaves exactly alike, so no case of cerehro spinal meningitis has the same symptoms of another; the sum total of symptoms makes up the character of the disease; in making up my conclusion from the hypothetical case, I took all the symptoms, etc., into consideration; I start as it were with a strong man on a warm day who had taken no more than his usual exercise: I infer that he took a large quantity of water and no dinner; I found him at the end of that day taking a hearty meal, and he retired to bed doubtlessly before that meal had digested, and he is called up soon after as thousands of others have been; as far as we know there was no more difficulty in the night, and in the morning we find him com¬ plaining of languor, dullness, and with hut little appetite; as I understand it ho took no breakfast. Mr. Hagner here requested the witness to make as few inferences as possible, and Mr. Syester said he did not think the defence had a right to interrupt the witness in his details of the reasons which had brought him to the conclu¬ sion he had expressed. Mr. Steele said it would be laying down a new rule to say that the defence could not di¬ rect their own witness. Mr. Syester further contended that the witness should give all that had led bis mind to the conclusion for which he had been asked to give the reasons present in his mind. Mr. Steele said that the defence had a right to suggest to the witness that he was drawing inferences from the facts stated in the hypo¬ thetical statement. Mr. Hagner expressed his view of the ques tion before the Court. Judge Hayden said the witness had asked to be allowed to give his reasons for his con¬ clusion, and if he had drawn inferences which had gone to make up his conclusion, in his 116 THE WHARTON KETCHUM TRIAL. opinion he should he allowed to state those inferences. The Chief Judge said the witness should he allowed to continue to give his inferences. Dr. McClurg requested that he he allowed to read over the hypothetical statement, aurt he would then give his opinion, so as to avoid any of the objections made to the manner in which he was giving his reasons for his opinion. The written statement was handed to him, and, after reading it for some time, he continued—I find that he complained on Sun¬ day that he was not well, and that his indis¬ position remained unbroken; nothing was taken to relieve him, and on Sunday night he had symptoms of cholera morbus; on Monday morning he was still indisposed, and took breakfast in bed; he vomits about 10 o’clock, and I say to myself that the food he has taken is not digested; about 4 or 5 o’clock he vomits again, and he is seen by his physician at that time and is found sitting up and holding a slopjar between his knees; he is given creosote and lime water, just what he would have given a child for sick stomach; I say to myself that if anything more serious had been present that prescrip¬ tion would not have removed the indisposi¬ tion; on Tuesday he appeared to suffer but lit¬ tle from his sickness, but passes no water; at 6 P. M., Tuesday, he is found asleep and breath¬ ing heavily; on Wednesday morning he is found semi-comatose, pulse rapid, and the muscles of the neck and back rigid; his face is turned to the back of the lounge and is of a purplish bluish tinge; in my opinion his brain was then in a congested condition. (The witness here grasped his arm and showed in explanation how blood would gather in his hand.) Dr. McClurg here referred to Aitkin’s Practice, under the head of apo¬ plexy. He then continued—The tincture of yel¬ low jessamine was not a bad remedy: a worse might have been given; his physician applied ice and he improved, but it was removed too soon, and the passive congestion returned worse than before. Dr. McClurg then contin¬ ued to read of the further treatment de¬ scribed in the written statement, and said—So far as the administration of chloral and chlo¬ roform, it is to be consul red whether or not they were proper; I come to the conclusion, then, that cerebro spinal meningitis had set in; I say that it is impossible that a poisonous dose of tartar emetic could have remained in his stomach from half-past 8 A. M. until half-past 12 o’clock without pro¬ ducing the characteristic symptoms of tartar emetic poisoning; I can’t for the life of me see when the tartar emetic was given; I have seen in my practice many cases of tar¬ tar emetic poisoning, but none of them were fatal; my first patient had taken twenty grains by mistake; he had great pain in the bowels, much prostration, vomiting, and some other characteristic symptoms of tartar emetic poisoning; I relieved him by copious draughts of green tea; it was impossible for him to have walked down stairs,as ho was in a fainting condition; I had another case of a child of five years of age, who drank a glass of water containing ten grains, and the mother said he had thrown up his windpipe; he had thrown up the whole lining of bit throat but recovered; I have seen many otliei cases; a person suffering from tartar emetic poisoning might be able to walk about hi: room even after the vomiting had commenced The Court now adjourned until 10 A. M. to morrow. The attendance to-day was unu¬ sually sni all. Mr. Joseph Becker, a member of Frank Les¬ lie’s corps of special artists, was present to day. and was busily occupied in sketching tin court room, Court, counsel, the prisoner, hei daughter and friends, and the spectators in general. The public will doubt'ess become quite well acquainted with Mrs. Whartou's personal appearance through the medium of illustrated prints- THIRTIETH HAY. Annapolis, January 9,1872. The great trial “drags its slow length along,’ and cerebro spinal meningitis and chemistry are still discussed with tedious prolixity. The counsel for the defence seem determined to fortify the position taken by Dr. Warren, and the State’s officers seem equally deter¬ mined to insist upon their view of the absence of natural causes. Dr. McClurg, of Pennsylvania, was re¬ called upon the opening of the Court to-day, and in answer to Mr. Hagner. testified—I have seen post mortemsof the bodies of persons who had died from cerebro spinal meningitis: the lesions are very various; in some all the mani¬ fest symptoms of the membranes of the brain and spinal cord appear: those vessels appear all injected with blood and an efl'usiou of serum between the dura mater and the eracnoid; there is no external effusion at all; at times we have been able to find no marks of inflammation, but only a congested condition of the blood vessels and membranes of the brain, but without effusion: the lesions are as variable as are the "symptoms; I have seen probably twenty post inortems of cases of cerebro spinal meningitis; Isaw them in Cleveland, Ohio, Louisville, Kentucky, and in private practice; the disease prevailed a good deal during the war; I am very familar with the use of yellow jessamine and use it frequently; I carry it in my pocket almost as faithfully as I do my watch; General K.’s eyes would not have been, in my opinion, improved, as stated, by the use of yellow jessa¬ mine; 1 never heard that it was an antidote for tartar emetic poisoning; I do not know that I would expect yellow jessamine to have im¬ proved the appearance of Gen. Ketch urn’s eyes at the time it was given; in my opinion he was too far goue for any remedy to have much ef- ffect: it would have mattered but little whether strychina or corosive sublimate had been given him, for I consider that he was at that time a dying man: if Gen. Ketchum had not drank a large quantity of ice water, as I in¬ ferred yesterday, my opinion, based upon the hypothetical statement, would not be changed in the slightest. THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 117 To Mr. Syester—I am the only one of my family who belong to the medical profession: after graduating I practiced in New Garden itownship, Chester county, Pennsylvania; I was there twelve or fifteen years; I then went to Philadelphia and remaim d there from Feb¬ ruary, 1859, to October, 1862, when I went into the army as a surgeon; I met with three cases of children attacked with cerebro spinal men¬ ingitis before f left Philadelphia; I gathered the inference that General K. had taken more than the usual amount of exercise from the hypothetical statement; I tried to account, in the first place, for the derangement of the digestive organs; I judged that General Ketchum had taken considerable exercise: I care nothing about the fatigue, as it is no matter to the case; I was not accustomed to address myself to a jury, and being “green ” I brought that matter forward, but I am will¬ ing to drop that and start “fresh;’ 7 I cannot explain to the jury the circumstances which I inferred; if General Ketchum had had a good appetite on Sunday, ate breakfast and tea, it would not alter my opinion; 1 know that it would have been impossible for a man to have eaten three meals under such circumstances; his indisposition on Saturday and continued indisposition on Sunday confirmed my opinion; I am judge of his case as far as ray opinion, as a medical man, goes; it is very often the case that a patient may be better because of the company he has; it may have been so with General Ketchum; if he had had no company he might have been found “niglier” the true state of his case; the removal of the ice and the change for the worse was one circum¬ stance which led me to my opinion; the symptoms of cerebro spinal meningitis were there; the improvement of the patient from the application of ice bags to the head, and his change for ttie worse when it was removed, had their share in making up my opinion; if the application of ice had made him worse instead of better, it would have been like kicking a dead man’s skull, as there was not then blood enough in his head; it would be doubtful whether the application of ice to his head made him better or worse; it makes no difference with the opinion I expressed yester¬ day whether ice was applied with benefit or removed with bad effect; the condition of his countenance was produced by a congested condition of the capillaries; take the converse of the statement as to the effects from ice, and it would make no difference with my opinion; I do not think irritation of the in¬ testines and the finding in them of a yellow, pappisli substance, would change my opinion; I rely entirely on one connected chain of symptoms, from the inception of the attack to its close; there was really no “let up”; I will mention among the symptoms that there was no improvement from Saturday until Sunday night; then he had symptoms of cholera morbus, but was required but once to go to the yard; on Monday morning he was still worse, and the gastric trouble increased, and a new set of symptoms manifested themselves, for with nausea he had giddiness; on that morning, so my record says, he ate some breakfast in bed, vomited about 10 A. M., and again he vomited at 4 P. M.; the doctor finds him prostrated, pale and feeble, aud witb a rapid and feeble pulse; he prescribed creosote and lime water; on Tuesday, about 10 A. M., his phy¬ sician finds him asleep: he is aroused and says he is able to go that day to Washington; yet he continues to sleep; he is no judge of his own case, and his physician was deceived; his symptoms grow more deadly every hour; he grows worse; his gait is unsteady, and he staggers when he walks; he passes no urine; he breathes stertorously; all this was on the day he said he was well enough to go to Washington; on Wednesday morning he was worse, aud his physician finds him at 40 A. M. semi-comatose, and with the symptoms stated in the hypothetical statement. [The witness then went on narrating the symptoms as described in the hypothetical statement,' confining himself to them, and said the symptoms continued without abatement, only giving way to others more deadly.] He continued—The symptoms are ap¬ parently of the same disease; all are due to cerebro spinal meningitis; the apparent trouble commenced on Saturday night: I cannot say that if General K. had been found sitting up at 2 A. M. on Tuesday, looking at his watch aud conversing, that it would have changed my opinion; I say in the face of the medical world that Gen. Iv. was not able to go to Wash¬ ington when he told Dr. Williams that he was, and I can give a case in point; the symp¬ toms which followed showed that he was not able to make the trip; the shiver spoken of is frequently present in cases of cerebrospinal meningitis; it is not of much importance, but was only one circumstance in the chain; I consider that General K.’s case was not oue of the active form, and but resembles the fulmi¬ nant form; if Geueral K. had had the fulmi¬ nant form, lesions might or might not be dis¬ coverable; we may have a case lasting four days, and no lesions would be discoverable; I have examined such a case, but I do not know that it, could be classed as of the fulminant form: I know of cases of the fulminant form occurring when there was no decided epi¬ demic; I have always found some lesions,such as congestion of the brain, but no inflamma¬ tory lesions; the brain and brain substance may be poisoned and no inflammatory lesions be left; I do not know of a case in which no le¬ sions could have been discovered by the microscope; there is always some embarrass¬ ment of the nerve centres, and they may only be deadened by the nerve poison; I never made microscopic examinations after death; I never Knew it to commence with a chill on a child, and it commences only sometimes with a chill on grown persons; I know that the books say it, commences with a chill, but my experience says it does not: I would not be surprised to learn that it had commenced with a chill on a grown person; the symptoms of the case, and not the post mortem appear¬ ances alone, will account for the presence of the disease; one of the peculiarities of the disease is, that the post mortem does not ac¬ count for the symptoms manifested; General Ketchum’s case has the appearance of a semi- fulminant form; that is, one of the congestive forms, without active inflammation. 118 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. To Mr. Revell—In this disease it is very difficult to tell when an improvement com¬ mences; it is very important to be present and observe the symptoms as they occur; I said there would be an enemic condition of the brain previous to the application of the ice bags; the books do not say that the absence of lusions is attributable to the rapidity of the disease. Dr. McClurg here referred to Aitkin, page 1.007, and said that active con¬ gestion of the brain did not necessarily follow. He continued—I have had cases in which this congestion could be observed without the use of the microscope. Mr. Revell here read from Niemver, page 155, and Dr. McClurg said Niemyer was good authority, and he agreed with him in the statement read. He continued—As a general rule, in cerebro spinal meningitis there is a suspension of all the secretions: the suppression of urine is one of the characteristic symptoms of the disease, and as a general rule it is always found: I have failed to find it in chronic cases; the suppression shows itself early in the attack. Mr. Revell here read from Stille. page 53. on the subject of the suppression of the urine, and Dr. McClurg expressed his opinion, with qualifications. He continued—Headache is by no means an invariable symptom in the fulminant form. Mr. Revell here read to the witness a state¬ ment embracing the points which he con¬ tended had been established by the testimony, and those contained in the statement read to Professor Donaldson, and Dr. McClurg testified—I would have no doubt at al. in believing that he had died from some brain trouble and I would conclude from the symptoms that he had died from apo¬ plexy from congestion; the red clots in the brain would not necessarily appear in the post mortem examination; apoplexy fro/u con¬ gestion is a different disease from cerebro spinal meningitis; if antimony had been found in his stomach, liver and kidneys, 1 could not say whether he died from anti- mouial poisoning, cerebro spinal meningitis or apoplexy from congestion; the case is an anomalous one; if I had seen the case and watched the symptoms I might he aide to give an opinion; many things are omitted from the hypothetical statement which I would have looked for. and I have to form my judgment, from the chain of symptoms stated; I would say that he died from a deranged condition of the nerve centres; the finding of antimony would not change my opiniou as to that having been the case; the violence of the symptoms of tartar emetic poisoning, do not always depend upon the quantity adminis¬ tered; three grains may produce as much vomiting as fifty grains; two or three grains is a uniform dose; the secondary effects re¬ sulting from a large dose may not result from a small dose; I do not think that a large do^e would destroy the muscular power of the stomach so suddenly as to suppress vomiting. Air. Revell here read from the l.omlon Medi¬ cal Times and Gazette, volume 12, page 403, as to the cffi-e.ts of a lanre f had taken a smaller dose it might have iied in tetanic convulsions: the books speak )f vertigo as one of the symptoms of tartar iiuetic poisoning, but I do not think it would )e produced; constriction of the throat is uu- loubtedly one of the most marked and violent ymptoms. Mr. Revell read from Taylor on poisons, >age 337, and Stille, page 467, as to the symp¬ toms of tartar emetic poisoning, and Dr. 3altzell agreed generally with the descrip¬ tions given. Dr. Baltzell continned—Opium and its prep- irations might modify the effects of tartar unetic poisoning; I have read of cases in vhich tartar emetic was taken into the itomach and retained without producing ir¬ ritation; but in those cases the lesions were so well marked that a simple post mortem would reveal them. Dr. Baltzell here referred to Orfila, who, he said, had reported such a case. He continued—Fred. Hinner was in a semi-comatose condition when I saw him, and he groaned and shivered when I took hold of him; just prior to his death the application of a stimulant had no effects; I make use of the attachee menin- gitigue without getting a response; his pulse was remarkably feeble, showing a won¬ derful depression of the heart’s action; it was very compressible; in all the fatal cases I saw the laces were congested, livid, purplish; I am familiar with the use of jrelseminum; when I administered it to Fred Hinner I noticed the peculiar paralysis of the upper lids of the eyes; that was the only effect I observed; it expelled-* temporarily the turgidity of the face; that was only momentary; when I said in my ex¬ amination in chief that the administration of yellow jessamine was without results, I meant beneficial effects: the effects I noticed was a falling of the eyelids, and a temporary blanch¬ ing of the cheeks; I gave him only thirty drops, repeated everv four hours. The Court here adjourned until 10 A. M. to¬ morrow. Among those present to-day were Judge William P. Maulsbv and General Shriver. of Frederick City; Colonel Fred. Raiue, editor of the German Correspondent, Baltimore; Col. Brantz Mayer, Dr. Edward Warren, of Balti¬ more; Major H. Ivyd Douglass, of Hagerstown; P. M. Snowden and William Fell Giles, Jr., of Baltimore; Judge Pinckney of the City Circuit Court of Baltimore; and Col. James Howard, of Baltimore. TMUnrY-SECON© DAY. Annapolis, January 11,1872. The State has thus far, in Mrs. Wharton’s trial, examined twenty-six witnesses, the Court has called two (Mrs. Whartons house ser¬ vants), and the defence called yesterday their nineteenth witness. The following witnesses returned summoned for the State have not been called, namely: Mrs. Charles Frick, J. Gorham Moale; General J. H. Eaton. Mr. Zugg, of Washington; T. B. Sargeant; Colonel William Myers. Mr. Latham, of Washington; General George H. Steuart, General Donel- son, the Actuary of the Girard Life Insurance Company, of Philadelphia; J. F. Jones, of Philadelphia; General L Phillips, Dr. William T. Howard, Mr. Gosman (druggist); George M. Gill, E. O. McNair, S. Eugene Poultney, Henry E. Johnston, Professor P. B. Wilson and Elias Livezy. The list of witnesses for the defence still contains more than forty names. The State will, it is believed, probably occupy two days in rebut¬ ting,and more medical and chemical testimony is doubtless in store on the vexed questions which this trial has brought to the surface. Mrs. Wharton appeared ta-day in better spirits, and manifested more interest in the proceedings than she has shown at any time during her trial. Her manner is still very 126 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. calm, but she seems to appreciate that the time draws near when a jury ot her countrs 7 - men will decide the momentous question of her guilt or innocence. Dr. Josiah Simpson was first, called to-day, and in answer to Mr. Thomas, testified—I am a surgeon in the United States army, and was commissioned on the 11th of July, 1837; I am now in charge of the medical post of Fort McHenry; I have known Mrs Wharton for twenty-nine years; I first met her at Fort Gib¬ son, in the winter of 1843; her husband was then stationed there; I was there oh and on for two or three years: I have met Mrs Wharton frequently since, and knew her in Baltimore; I was on intimate personal and profes¬ sional relations with her and her family; I have been stationed in Baltimore since De¬ cember, ’Gl, except for a year in Louisville, Kentucky; I have never known anything of Mrs. Wharton hut what was perfectly correct and proper; no lady stood higher in my acquaintance; I never heard her reputation for amiability and humanity impeached: I read last evening the hypothetical statement of the defence; I may add that no lady en¬ joyed a higher reputation, and among the bet¬ ter class of officers: I see in examining this statement carefully no indication of death from unnatural causes; my conclusion is that his death was from natural caases, and I see nothing in the symptoms or post mortem examination to justify me in any other con¬ clusion; I have seen in children the effect of an overdose of tartar emetic, and I have ex¬ perienced the effects myself; 1 was laboring with acute bronchitis, and took it as medicine: I commenced with a sixth of a grain, and in¬ creased to a fourth, and then to a half; it com¬ pletely prostrated me, and I could not raise my head to vomit: that occurred at Fort Hamilton, but I don’t remember the vear. Cross-examined by Mr. Revell—I entered the army from New Jersey; 1 cou d not say from this hypothetical statement what particular disease the patient had; I never saw a case of cerebro spiual meningitis; I have never read the books attentively on the subject: I have read of it, however, in medical journals, and I have read of it in Reynolds’ Practice of Medi¬ cine; 1 never read Aitkin on the subject: I have read a portion of the article in Dr. Wood’s work; I had been slightly nauseated from tartar emetic before taking the last dose: I vomited after increasing it from a sixth to a half of a grain: I became prostrated after tak¬ ing the last doses, which aggregated three or four grains: I took a-half of a grain every two hours; I had retching before 1 had the vomit¬ ing; alter the retching ceased, my helplessness continued, and I suppose for eighteen or twenty hours; the complete prostration lasted for more than twenty-four hours, and I could not have gotten from my bed if I had tried. Miss Rosa Potts was next called and testi¬ fied—I kuow Mrs. Wharton very well; I live in Washington and am the daughter of Mr. John Potts, the Chief Clerk of the War De¬ partment; I knew Mrs. Wharton in Baltimore in 7863; I saw her every day when I went to Baltimore, and I ha ve visited at her house several times; her reputation could not have been higher or better for amiability, humanity and gentleness; I visited her at he; house in Baltimore last May. To Mr. Revell—I have heard so many per sons speak well of Mrs. Wharton prior to he: arrest that it would be difficult to say wbi did not: 1 have heard General David Hunte: speak of her in the highest possible terms; . have also heard General Dyer, Colonel Chaf lin and Colonel Dupont speak in the bes'. terms of her; if I had never had auy opinioi I in regard to Mrs. Wharton I would give tin same opinion I have expressed from what 1 have learned of her character from others; m 3 personal knowledge of the character of Mrs Wharton has nothing to do with the testi I ruony I have given as to her character by rep utatiou. Mr. Thomas now informed the witness tba he was about to ask her a question, but dii not desire her to answer until she was told tc ] do so. He then proposed to her the followinj question : From your knowledge of Mrs. Wharton’f general reputation as to the qualities of hu inanity, kindness and amiability, as you havi testified to, would you or would you not be lieve her capable of committing the crime o: i murder ? Mr. Revell objected, and after some desul¬ tory remake, Miss Potts was allowed to leavt the stand, and it was agreed among counsel that after the argument of the question she should be recalled if the Court decided that the question of Mr. Thomas was a proper one Dr. William H. Baltzell was here recalled ! and before he proceeded, said he desired to correct his remarks of yesterday by saying that the symptoms and treatment, aud not 1 the symptoms and post mortem, had been th< grounds of his opinion of the cause of the death of Geueral Kotehum. He further stated that Dr. Yeates’ case was in 1885, and Dr. Rostmver’s in 1861. He continued—I still have no idea who handed me in Baltimore the statement of the post mortem; I remember the symptoms stated I remember his position in bed. remaining on his 6 ide; difficulty in using his legs and also red marks on his abdomen; I considered his treatment most admirabl for cerebro spiual meningitis or some brain affection, especially the chloral and yellow jessamine; all those symptoms, except tin brain difficulty, would be present in tetanus I have seen a great many cases of tetanus, ant the mental faculties were perfect to the las moment of life; delirium was mentioned it] the paper I saw iu Baltimore; I think it sail he died unconscious; in tetanus the patienl becomes unconscious only a few moments be fore death; 1 gave. Fred. Hinner yellow jessa¬ mine two days before his death; after tin second visit I noticed the falling of tin eyelid; the momentary blanching of the cited showed the effect upon the capillaries; I thinl the falling of the eyelids continued after hi had taken the third dose: I had three easel last year; one was a Mr. Frank, who enlistee sailors; he was about, fifty-three years old; tin next was a German woman, named Muller who lived on Plum street: two children ant three adults recovered; one of the childrei lived in Henrietta street aud one in Shari THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 127 reet; one adult lived in Howard street near e Depot, one in Green street, and also one in ill street; the case stated in tlie hypothetical atetnenthas the appearance of a semi-fulmi- int case, terminating in a fulminant; I would y. from the hypothetical statement, that the sease commenced on Monday or Tuesday,and ilminated on Wednesday; these hypothetical ),ses are very difficult to determine; in Eng- md cerebro spinal meningitis was first riled “Death by the Grace of God;” suppres on of the urine is a characteristic symptom; ime authors consider it a cause, others an fleet; Dr. Stille has compiled an admirable ook, but unless he has seen the cases he cites have no confidence in his statements about iem; I say bis book is a mere compilation of satisfies; in those cases he has seen and re- orted, I have confidence in his opinion; I gree with Dr. Stille in his general history of ie disease, but I do not stgree with him as re- ards the fulminant form; the headache is resent as long as sensation lasts.and that may ome aud go, but when the disease becomes a violent as to paralyze, the patient does not Bel the headache; paralysis does not always ppear in its semi-fulminant form; in the ulminant form it generally sets in at an early tage: hyperesthesia of the skin and aBnesthe- 1 a of the eye may exist at the same time; yel- jw jessamine may have also paralyzed the all of the eye of Fred. Hinner; he did not sel my finger-nail on his eye-ball; the byper- sthesia of the skin would not make the eyes lore than usually sensitive to light. To Mr. Syester—I have never observed a ase of the fulminant or semi-fulminant, form r hich was not attended with suppression of rine; there may he a retention of the urine nd no suppression; I ascertained by the use f the catheter that there was a suppression E urine in my cases; after the neumograstric erve is paralyzed the patient cannot vomit, lad a speedy death follows. Mr. Syester here asked the witness if he had ^pressed the opinion that General K. had [jed from cholera morbus; and Mr. Haguer bjected. After some brief and desultory discussion, r. Balzell continued—I have never expressed a opinion that General K. died from any jisease but cerebro spinal meningitis, but I at le time thought that the incipient stages ere those of cholera morbus; the condition 1 paralysis is one likely to occur in the dmimant form of cerebro spinal meningitis. Mr. Steele here read from page 1015 of itken, as to the proper nomenclature of rebro spinal meningitis, and its difference pm typhus fever; and Dr. Balzell agreed ith that, author’s opinion. Mr. Steele further read from page 1013 of the me author; and the witness agreed with the 'inions there expressed as to the epidemic laracter of the disease. The desired legal authorities having been plight into Court and the medical and cheini- 1 aufboritiesbeing put under the table for the tie being, Mr. lievell commenced the argu- pntof the legal question involved in the in- rrogatorv propounded to Miss Potts by Mr. nomas. He contended that the jury was the ,ily proper tribunal for the decision of the question of the capability or incapability of the accused to commit murder, and to allow the witness to give her opinion would be to change her into a juror. He believed that the testimony sought to be introduced was against the law, and the reasons upon wffich the law was founded. In support of his view of the question in¬ volved, Mr. Eevell quo ed from 1st Greeuleaf, sections 54 and 55; Wharton on Homicide, pages 244 and 245: and 1st Phillip, page 763. Mr. Revell said he had authority to show how far the inquiry as to character should go, and in none of them could be found a prece¬ dent for the question asked of Miss Potts. Mr. Hagner said the counsel for the defence had raised the question because they believed it to be supported by law and precedent. It was settled iu the books that a witness could be asked if he would believe an accused party on his oath, and the question before the Court was analogous. The witness was not being asked as to the question of guilt or innocence, but only from her knowledge of the reputa¬ tion of the accused she believed Mrs. Whar¬ ton capable of committing murder. Mr. Hagner here referred to 1st Taylor, 325, note A. If it was true, as contended by the State’s Attorney, that the question was an in¬ novation, he still believed that the Court would be warranted in admitting it. Iu 29th Md."the Court of Appeals had turned down Greeuleaf and his supporters and set a prece¬ dent. Mr. Hagner here referred to the trial of Alexander Davidson, reported in 31st State Trials, page 187, who was charged with pecu¬ lation. Mr. Plagner next referred to 10 Cox, Queen vs. Kout, pages 33 and 34; 5th Cox, page 284 (reversed by the decision in 10th Cox), and Wills, on Circumstantial Evidence, page 131, margin, 153 of the top—as to the correct mode of inquiry into character. Mr. Thomas said that the authorities quoted by the State sustained only the point that general, and not particular traits of character, could be inquired into. If the counsel for the defence had asked questions only as to the general reputation aud character of the ac¬ cused, they would have been shown to have been so high that any lady in Maryland soci¬ ety might feel proud of such a record; but the defence had chosen to limit themselves to questions of character involving only the probability or improbability of the capa¬ bility of Mrs. Wharton to commit the crime with which she was charged. The province of the jury was not invaded by the question, but the question was only designed to guide and enlighten them in making up their final decision of her capability or inca¬ pability to commit the murder charged against her. Mr. Thomas here referred to No. 29 Md., page 198, Knight vs. House. Mr. Steele said the objection to the question had been put upon two grounds: First, that it was unsupported by authorities, and, secondly, that it was an innovation. The de¬ fence had cited the decision of Lord Ellen- borough, and he did not suppose that his de¬ cision of a question would be considered an 128 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. innovation upon the common law. The ques¬ tion of character could not be brought down, and the real matter reached unless the wit¬ ness was asked the question propounded. In his opinion, upon principle and upon authority, the question was a proper one. Mr. Syester said the question asked was con¬ ceded to be in the face and teeth of the Court before which it was raised. He oelieved there was but little doubt that it was contrary to the decisions of every Circuit Court of Maryland. The same question had been raised last spring in the Circuit Court for Frederick county, in the great trial of Harry Crawford Black for the murder of Colonel VV. W. McKaig, but was overruled by the Court with but little hesita¬ tion. No Circuit Court of Maryland, as far as lie knew, had ever allowed the introduc¬ tion of such testimony. He knew of no authorities or rules of law which suflered the opinion of a person to go to a jury except in the instances laid down in the books, and those instances are: 1st, where the iden tity of a person or handwriting are involved; 2 d, where questions involving subjects not known to the common experiences of life, as science, &c.; 3d, the opiuions of subscribing witnesses to wills. Mr. Syester further said the decision in 29th Md. presented no antagonism to the opinions expressed by Mr. Revell. No well considered case had been produced upon which the de¬ fence could rest their foundation for the ques¬ tion, and even the elementary books were in opposition to it. The defence relied on a sin¬ gle case in 31st State Trials. From that case, and that alone. Wills had gathered his text as pa. 131. But in that case no objection was raised. No point—no argument. It was not a well considered case. It is true Lord Ellen- borough allowed such question, but at the same time it is to be noted that he also asked the question whether the witness thought the accused capable of committing a fraud. Would any Court in Maryland allow that proof ? If it were competent for the defence to rely on such evidence, of course the State in reply cou.d do the same. And we would be con¬ fronted by the alarming spectacle of the State striking down the liberties and lives of its people, not by the judgment of a jury, but by the opiuions which passion, prejudice and un¬ merited opprobrium had engendered in a com¬ munity. At the conclusion of Mr. Syester’s argu¬ ment Judge Hammond requested Mr. Thomas to read the question again, and Mr. Thomas complied with the reqnest. After a consultation of about a minute the Chief Judge said the Court was clearly of the opinion that the question could not be asked. The question was certainly an innovation upon the practice in Maryland, and the Court could not adopt it in the case at bar. Benjamin B. Hughes was next called, and testified—I live at Bridgeport, Montgomery county, Pa.; I have known Mrs. Wharton since she was three or four years old; I lived within half a mile of her father’s house; I have seen much of her since 1849; I knew her before her marriage; no one’s character in the community stood higher than Mrs. Wharton’s particularly for amiability and kinduess; her general reputation was remarkable, and was spoken of by the neighbors generally; I don’1 remember to have seen her after 1849 until 1 saw her here. To Mr. Revell—At that time I lived about a half mile from her; she was married in 1841: she was generally more kind and more char¬ itable than the other neighbors; very few it the neighborhood stood as high as she did. Wm. H. Holstein next testified—I have re¬ sided in Montgomery county, Pennsylvania all my life; I lived two miles northwest from the residence of her father; I have known hei for thirty-five years; her reputation was good. very good, for amiability, humanity and gen¬ tleness; I have known her from the time she left St. Mary’s Hall, Burlington, New Jersey where she finished her education. To Mr. Syester—Mrs. Wharton left mj neighborhood soon after her marriage, thirty- one years ago; five or six years after her mar¬ riage she returned and lived there some twc or three years; she was then at her father’s house; she came and went during the five oi six years; she repeatedly returned, but not tc make a permanent stay. Colonel James Wallace was next called, and testified—I am a lawyer at Cambridge, Md.; I have lived there since 1840; I became ac¬ quainted with Mrs. Wharton in September, 1861, and I have known her from that time to the present; her husband was sent to the Eastern Shore of Maryland, in command of the Second Delaware Regiment; she camped with him, and lodged in the same tent; I was in company with him: I saw her almost daily she was there until November, 1861; I saw lie; afterwards at Drummondtown, Va.. undei similar circumstances; she was there dating the winters of ’61-’62; her general reputation for kindness and amiability was equal to that of any lady of whom I have ever knewu o: heard; this opinion was held by people on botl sides of the controversy then in the country Mr. Syester objected to this last answer, am after some brief remarks from Mr. Thomas the Court decided that her general reputatioi among all classes could he testified to. Colonel Wallace said her reputation vi general, and was not confined to the army General George H. Steuart next testified— reside in Baltimore, and was former] v in t h United States army; I kuew Mrs. Wharton fifteen years ago; her general reputation fo amiability, humanity and gentleness was no exceptionable: I knew her first at For Kearney; I have known her in Baltimore for a little over five years. General Richard C. Drum next testified— am a Colonel aud Assistant Adjutant, Genera of the army; I am stationed at present ii Philadelphia: I have known Mrs. Whartoi since 1851; I met her at Fort Kearney; I wai her guest four or five days; I was theu onlj temporarily at that nost; I met- her again a Fort Kearney in 1855, and again at. Foil Leavenworth in 1856 or ’57; I have not me her since; her general reputation for amia bility, gentleness aud humanity was uuex, cept-ionabl.v good. To Mr. Syester—In 1851 my proper statio: was at Governor’s Island, and I took out rd cruits to Fort Kearney; I heard he THE WHA B TON-KETCH TIM TRIAL. 129 character then spoken of; from ’57 to the present time, I had not seen her. General Delos B. Sackett next testified—I am Inspector General of the United States army, and am stationed at Philadelphia; I have known Mrs. Wharton since February, 1847; I met her then at Fort Gibson, and I re¬ mained there for about fifteen mouths; I have only met her once since, and that was in Wilmington, Delaware, in 18(34, and then only for a few moments; her reputation could not have been higher for amiability, gentleness and kindness. To Mr. Syester—I only lived fifteen months at a frontier post in Mrs. Wharton’s neighbor¬ hood. Mrs. Col. Brantz Mayer testified—I reside in Baltimore; I have known Mrs. Wharton be¬ tween nine and ten years; a part of the time 1 lived near her, and she has been my near neighbor a long time; when we were in the same street our houses were not a square apart; our families were very intimate in¬ deed; her general reputation for amiability, kindness and gentleness was without re¬ proach, and she had the happy faculty of making friends; she was remarkable for her fidelity to her friends; I saw her very often, and my daughters saw her almost daily; I had a full opportunity of knowing of her gen¬ eral reputation, and everybody spoke well of her. Miss Mary Mayer testified—I reside in Bal¬ timore, and am the daughter of Col. Brantz Mayer; I have known Mrs. Wharton for nme >r ten years, and very intimately for six or seven years; we lived at one time on the same street; I visited at her house daily, and was very intimate with her; we had many mutual icquaintances and friends; her general repu¬ tation for amiability, gentleness and kindness was unexceptionable; I thiDk she was eonsid- jred a most self-sacrificing woman. Mr. Syester objected to this last; answer, and said the question of general character for amiability, kindness and gentleness was the July one upon which, testimony could be riven. After some desultory discussion the ZJourt said the answer that Mrs. Wharton was a “self-sacrificing woman” could be riven, but that the statement that she was ‘remarkable for her fidelity to her friends” was going a little outside of the rules of the .aw on the subject. Mr. Hagner read from the report of the 31ack-McKaig trial iu support of his view hat th‘e question was a proper one, and read he answer to a similar Question propounded jy Mr. Syester in that trial. Miss Emily Eccleson testified—I reside in Cambridge,Md,: I became acquainted with Mrs. Yhartou in September, 1871; I have kept up ny acquaintance with her, and stayed several lays with her during the latter part of last darch: I never heard any one speak of her ixcept in praise; I saw her nearly every day ’or two months while she was in Cambridge, md I became very intimate with her. Frank Henry next testified—I reside at Cambridge, Maryland, and I am Clerk of the lounty Court; 1 first knew Mrs. Wharton in he fall of 1801; I saw her frequently both at ay house and in camp; she made a great many acquaintances in Cambridge; I know that she was universally admired; I never heard her spoken of exceptin acomplimentary way; I never heard her general reputation for kindness, amiability and gentleness discussed or questioned. T. T. Martin next testified—I reside in Bal¬ timore; I have known Mrs. Wharton since September, 1861: Colonel Wharton encamped on my farm, near Cambridge, Md., and I then made acquaintance; I afterwards saw her at Drummondtown, Ya.; I have known her ever since, and have visited her occasionally; I have heard a great many express their opinions about her: her reputation was the very best for kindness, humanity and amiability; she was spoken of by every one in the best terms. Dr. Burton Randall testified—I am on the retired list of the United States Army officers; I first knew Mrs. Wharton at Fort Gibson in 1842; I was there four years; I saw a great deal of Mrs. Wharton and attended her family; she was there during the four years I was there; her reputation was very good for kind¬ ness, amiability and gentleness; her reputa¬ tion was very good for affection; I saw her for a few hours about twelve years ago in Phila- delphiaat ahotelasl was passing through that city. Benjamin F. Price testified—I have resided in Baltimore eleven years and am a member of the bar; I have known Mrs. Wharton about nine years; I think I made her acquaintance iu the fall of 1862; her reputation was espe¬ cially good for kindness, amiability and hu¬ manity. Colonel Frank M. Etting testified—I reside in Philadelphia, and am a member of the bar; I was in the army from the commencement of the war, and resigned a year ago; I have known Mrs. Wharton eight, or nine years; I have known her family intimately, and was much thrown with her, her family and sur¬ roundings, for five years while I was stationed at Baltimore; I think kindness and amiability would have been always mentioned as two of her prominent characteristics. To Mr. Syester—I am a lawyer in Philadel¬ phia, and have do other occupation there. General Winfield S.Hancock was next called, and testified—I am a Major General in the United States army, and now reside at St. Paul, Minnesota: I know Mrs. Wharton quite well; I think I first knew her, in 1842 or 1844; I do not recollect which of those years; I have seen her quite frequently since' that period; for the exercise of amiability, kindness and humanity, she was always admired by all I ever heard speak of her without exception; knew Colonel Wharton very well, and was in the same regiment for sixteen years; he served on my staff for about a year; I knew his family quite well in the army and out of it; they came from my own county. Montgom¬ ery county, Pennsylvania; my father lived about four miles from her father’s residence; I knew of her before I met her in the army; I had not seen her since 1866, before seeing her here; I am now commanding the Military De¬ partment of Dakotah. Mr. Reveil—General Hancock we are very 130 THE WIIARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. glad to have, seen you and have no questions t0 The ^Chief Judge then shook hands with General Hancock, and expressed his gratifica¬ tion at having met him. The Court then ad¬ journed until 10 A. XL to-morrow. The attendance to-day was large have inter¬ est in the trial seems to have revived, ihe attendance of ladies was especially large, and they will doubtless attend in large numbers until the trial closes. TESlRTY-'FlIiRB> WAY. Annapolis, January 12,1872. The increased attendance on yesterday upon Mrs. Wharton's trial shows that, popu- I lar interest and feeling still centres strongly j in her case. Notwithstanding the protraction I of the proceedings (unprecedented, doubtless, j iu the histoiy of criminal prosecutions in Maryland), and the tedium which accom¬ panied a great part of the testimony, both for the State and the defence, it is evident that as the end draws near popular interest is mi- abated. There is too much of a sensational character surronnding and underlying the charges against Airs. Wharton, both in the ease at bar and the minor charge of the attempted murder of Mr. Eugene Vau Vess, to permit popular feeling, even in ; the event of conclusions as to her guilt or in- | nocence. to be lessened except temporarily, and the latter days of the great trial will, no I doubt, be more significant than were the first, of the eagerness and anxiety of the public. For the first time in the history of Maryland has a woman of Mrs. Wharton’s social rank j and antecedents been called to answer the charge of murder, and there naturally gathers around the prisoner a feeling deep in all its currents, and earnest in its every expression. ; It cannot be forgotten that the life of a woman i is at stake, and that in a brief time the momen¬ tous question of her guilt or innocence will be solemnly submitted for final decision. There is. too, so much of uncertainty always attend¬ ing atrial by jury that the idea ol a human life depending upon the opinions of twelve men is at once sufficient t.o awaken fear and excitement. As far as can bo judged. Mrs. Wharton is to-day as calm and resigned iu manner and feeling as when the officers of the law first announced to her that she was a prisoner. There has been uothing in her manner during the whole trial to show that she. was agitated by anything that occurred and was uttered by the Court or couusel. She is, however, by no means, listless, but at times mani¬ fests considerable interest and converses quietly with those around her. Her patience, too, is remarkable, and she shows less weari¬ ness than those who accompany her. It is known that Mrs. Wharton has shown but little feeling against her accusers and prosecutors, and her conduct iu this regard has been unusually free from resentment. Iudeed, not the least remarkable phase of the case has been Mrs. Wharton’s freedom from those feel- iugs which might be naturally expected to find expression from a lady who considered herself the victim of a false prosecution. She has contented herself with a calm expression of her entire innocence, and hasnot seemingly shared in the v feelings of some of her friends who deeply sympathize with her. Mrs. J. Crawford Neilson was first called to-day, and testified:—I reside in Harford county in the summer, and in Baltimore iu the winter: I have known Mrs. Wharton eight or nine years intimately: our lamilies have been as intimate as families could pos¬ sibly be; she has always been spoken of as possessing in the highest degree kind¬ ness, amiability and gentleness: I would be glad to say to the jury what I know per¬ sonally of her;,8hewa8 intimate with Gen. Ketckum, and very kindly disposed towards him, as he was towards her; he preferred to be in her honse in case of sickness or trouble to any other; I came up from Washingtou last February w ith General K.; just before leaviug he was very uneasy about a bottle of medicine, and felt in his pockets for it: he found it, and said he would not. have been willing to have left Washington without it; he said lie was not fond of doctors, and preferred to drink his medicine from the bottle; I have been with Mrs. Wharton constantly, arid with her associates constantly during the last eight or j;iue years, and have had abundant, oppor¬ tunities of knowing of her reputation and character. Mrs. Neilson gave her testimony in a very earnest manner, and evidently de¬ sired to be allowed to say more for her cher¬ ished friend. Mi ss Martha Stump next testified—I am the daughter of Mr. Hamilton Stump, and reside in Baltimore county; I have known Mrs. Wharton intimately for six years; I have known her as well as it was possible to know any one; I have visited at her house during the winter and have travelled w r ith her during the summer; I have had every oppor¬ tunity of judging of her character and Know¬ ing her reputation; she possessed the reputa¬ tion for kindness, amiability and gentleness, to a greater degree tnan any one I know; she had the reputation of possessing them in a re¬ markable degree; my father is President of the George’s Creek Coal Company of Balti¬ more. J. Crawford Neilson next testified—I reside in Harford county, but my time is spent iu Baltimore; I have known Mrs. Whartou very well, indeed, for at least eight years, and our families have been extremely intimate; I have had unusual opportunities forjudging of her character and knowing her reputation; I have met old acquaintances of Mrs. Wharton who spoke to me of her character for thirty years back; for kind-hearteduess. amiability and Christian charity her reputation was such as very few women have ever enjoyed; it was as high as it could be. Dr. Abram Claude next testified—I reside in Annapolis and I have been thirty years en¬ gaged iu the practice of medicine; I am the Professor of Natural Sciences at St. John’s College; I had charge of some wards in the United States hospitals here during most of the war; they were large hospitals and I sometimes had 200 patients; I heard the testi- THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 131 rnony (>f Drs. Miles, Chew and Williams; 1 would, from General Keteliurn’s symptoms and the post mortem revelation, ascribe lus death to rather a natural than anon-natural cause; I am acquainted to some extent with cerebro spinal meningitis; it prevailed here in the winter and spring of ’63 sufficiently to be called an epidemic; I saw a good many cases then; I have seen since sporadic cases; I don’t remember to have seen any case very recently; in describing the symptoms of the disease the authors describe them as they are grouped, as no case presents the same symptoms; hyperesthesia is often a symptom of cerebro spinal meningitis; I observed the insensibility of the eyes to light; if I were to select any one symptom as characteristic of the disease I should think the rigidity of the muscles of the back and neck, and the throw¬ ing back of the head; if I saw a disease wit'' those symptoms cerebro spinal meningitis would be at once suggested to m mind; the rigidity and spasms may be extended to theex- tremities; the pupil is generally insensitive to light, changing its size as the light is thrown on it or withdrawn; in one case I saw one eye was contracted, and the other dilated; in a case which I recall one half of the body was cold, and the other warm; I have seen a pu¬ pil unequally expauded; some cases were ushered in like cases of choleru;the first case I ever saw ended in three hours after 1 saw it; in that case there was great vomiting and purging with coma,rigidity,stertorous breath¬ ing, and the pupil not changing when ex¬ posed to light; 1 did not recognize the case when I first saw it; there were some few spots about the face and chest, and had increased in size and number when he died; they were not post mortem, but such' as accompany cere¬ bro spinal meningitis; different cases have different groups of sj-mptoms; most of the cases I saw were those of colored persons, but the first case I saw was that of a young white man; there is generally some c-urviture to one side or the other; there was retention of urine in some cases; the catheter had to be used for a week iu one case; there was nothing so remarkable about the tongue as to impress itself on my memory; in most cases there were indications of discomfort manifested by more or less restlessness; that may have been more or less a voluntary act; in some case s there is delirium and even talka¬ tiveness; there were evidences of venous en¬ gorgement; oue to the changes of the blood from venous to arterial; I am familiar with tartar emetic as a medicine and have used it very much internally since 1 have been a phy¬ sician; it is used externally as a counter irri¬ tant; I sf ill so use it and would dislike very much to have to abandon it; it has been at one time very popular, but there are tides in the popularity of medicines as in the affairs of men; the estimation of a medicine fluctuates, and does not find its true level until the fluctua¬ tions have been long and constant enough; I have never seen a fatal case of tartar emetic poisoning; from mv reading and experience I should expect to find firstnausea and vomiting, ,then the pulse reduced in frequency and force, muscular relaxation, possibly some purging, but not necessarily; 1 should not, from my | personal observations, expect convulsion or i rigidity; increased secretions, generally by ! the lungs, kidneys and skin, especially from j the skin, kidneys and mucous membrane of the lungs; iu medicinal doses it produces pallor, and in large doses lividity would j ensue from its sedative action upon the heart j and circulation; I never saw any effect upon j the coat of the mouth, but that would j depend upon how it was administered, whether i (or not in solution; I have been tasting it ! for years and it never produced any soreness j about mv mouth or tongue: it is my inference that if General Ketchum had taken a poison¬ ous dose of tartar emetic he could not have gotten up and walked down stairs; I have seen great prostration from medicinal doses; I have never seen an autopsy of a person who had died from tartar emetic poisoning; I should expect to probably meet with some irritation aud inflammation,and in some cases ulceration of the intestinal canal; congestion or engorgement of the lungs would be found where death had been immediately preceded by convulsions; in cases of pneumonia the medicine is given because of its pulmon arv action; a man may die from natural causes aud the post mortem iail to reveal them; it is com¬ mon, and it is true, particularly of dis¬ eases affecting the nervous apparatus; lock¬ jaw, for instance, affects a certain part of the nervous system, and there is no change of structure or lesion to he found after death to account for the diseases. [Dr. Claude then went on at some length, and stated how poi¬ sons were generated in the blood.] He continued—I consider abrasions of the skin might be earned by any feeling of dis¬ tress; I think in General Ketchum’s-case it was for the want of air, and I do not think it necessarily indicated pain; apoplexy would not necessarily leave a clot of blood upon the brain; General Ketchum could not have been in good health if he required the medicines prescribed by Dr. Norris, of Washington; I should think, from the symptoms at 10 A. M. Wednesday, it mattered very little what was done for General K. after that time, and I consider that he was at that time laboring under a mortal disease, which steadily pro¬ gressed un to the time of his death; 1 do not j mean to say that those around him did not think he was improved by the medicines | given him after that time; the administration : of the yellow jessamine and the application of ' the ice appeared to improve him, but as I ua derstand the case the important symptoms were never removed, and his death was but the culmination of the fatal causes under which he was laboring; the last dose did not have any important effect, if any, m hasten¬ ing the termination of the case; in my opin¬ ion he would have died without regard to what was given him after 10 A. M. Wednes¬ day; I don’t think the absence of lesions indi¬ cates anything; the best mode, in my opinion, of aualizing this case is to revert it and go from the post mortem to the inception of the attack; the three great functions cannot cease for any length of time without death follow¬ ing, and all causes of deatli must affect one or the other of these functions; in General K.’s 132 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. case tlie death seems to have resulted from the effect upon the functions of inervation; arti¬ ficial poison must produce death by its opera¬ tion on some of the of the organs, and must leave evidences after death; I am not an an¬ alytical chemist, but I have made chemistry my study; I teach chemistry, but not. analyti¬ cal chemistry; I can’t say that I have studied chemistry thoroughly. Objection being made by the State to Dr. * Claude’s being allowed to give his opinion as a chemist of the analyses of Profs. Aibin and Tonry, the Court decided that it had not. been shown that he possessed sufficient knowledge and experience to entitle him to be considered an expert, and that therefore his opinion could not be given. To. Mr. Syester—I have not said that my conclusion was that General K. bad died of cerebrospinal meningitis: I am not prepared to say positively and decidedly what was his disease; I can’t say bow many eases of cerebro spinal meningitis have fallen under my observation, but I think about twenty; a considerable number of the cases I saw were fatal; I should say it was at one time epidemic in Annapolis, in 1862; we had then a great number of troops encamped here; there was a great, deal of hauling by mule teams, and the roads were nearly im passable; the cases were not, however, con¬ fined to sections most cut up by the wagons; I do not recognize any forms of the disease as a difference of the disease: it is all one dis¬ ease; the term fulminant conveys to my mind only the idea of its sudden invasion and rapidly fatal termination; the first case I sa w occurred with vomiting and purging, and I had some suspicion of poisoniug;it was proved afterwards by the occurrance of other cases to be one of cerebro spinal meningitis; I think Gen. K’.s case might be called of the ful¬ minant form; my theory is that cerebro spinal meningitis is the result of a poison; I cannot say positively whether Gen. K’.s case was of the inflammatory or fulminate form; in my cases the chill was not a prominent symptom; I can’t say it was present at all; I was once poisoned with copper, and the first symptom I had was a chill; all who ate of the food from the same copper kettle had the chill as the first symptom of the poisoning; I Lave never seen but one case of lockjaw from natural causes; I have seen two cases of t.fv tanus: the nervous centres may be disturbed by either natural or unnatural causes, and no post mortem lesions be discoverable; I incline to the opinion that General Ketchum died from a natural cause, but I am not able to say what was that cause; the effects upon the, pupils of the eye in the cases of cerebro spinal meningitis which I saw were very various; I do not know that there was in any of my cases no change in the pupils of the eyes; I have noticed the open and staring expression of the eyes; it is not a constant symptom; there is no one certain symptom which would enable me to diagnosize the disease; I do not remember to have seen the open and staring expression of the eye before a convulsion had set in; that expression of the eye would not. indicate to me the presence of the disease, if unaccompanied by other symptoms; there may be suppression of the urine at one stage of the disease and not at another; I did not test the urine, and, of course, caunot say that it was albumenous; I do not remember to have seen hyperesthesia in all the cases I attended, or in the majority; cases of tartar emetic poisoning without lesions are described; tartar emetic has a-very decided taste to me; it first tastes sweetish, then bitingor peppery, or what is ordinarily described as metallic; the taste is persistent: a man who had takeu an overdose of strychnia might move abont for a time, but the effects of tartar emetic are quite dif¬ ferent; it prostrates the muscular system without exciting it as strychnia; a party might take a medical dose of tartar emetic | and yet get up and walk downstairs; what would prostrate one man would not prostrate other; a man might take a dose of tartar emetic and vomit and purge from its effects, and yet not be prostrated; it is recorded that tlie par vagum nerve was cut from the stomach of an animal, and that afterwards whenever anything was introduced into its stomaeh it was vomited up; I don’t think I , ever observed hyperesthesia of the skin more than once, and that was in a case of spinal meningitis—not cerebro spinal menin¬ gitis: it was not general, but was confined to the lower extremities; the patient was per¬ fectly conscious; he did not abrade his skin; I think General K'-telinm’s abrasions of his skin even after he had said the pain was in Lis stomach, were due more to his want of air than to liis pains; I think if an overdose of tartar emetic was in a concentrated solution nr in a powder it would probably produce a burning sensation about the throat and sto¬ mach of the patient: I can’t say whether or not, an overdose of tartar emetic would have caused General Ketchum to abrade his skin; I suppose any poison may cause convulsions. Mr. Syester now read from the 18th vol¬ ume of the London Medical Gazette, edition of 1856, page 7, a case of antimonial poisoning, and Dr. Claude said he had had no such case and could not express any opiuiou from per¬ sonal knowledge, and that all he could say was that from his reading he would not have expected such symptoms. Mr. Syester then proceeded to read from the same work of the symptoms of Cook, who was poisoned l>y Pal¬ mer with strychnia, but Mr. Hagner objected, and said it was not a statement of Cook’s symptoms. He thought it was an attempt to give the facts in Cook’s case in the guise of cross-examination, and said, the statement proposed to lie read had no authoritative au¬ thenticity, aud did not rise to the dignity of a medical treatise. He had never known a book of such a character to be allowed to be quoted from as an authority. Mr. Steele said the wi ness should be asked if the authority offered was a good one. Mr. Syester said he- had his notions abont medical books, and he knew that it was easy to get almost, any statement into the books, and it was often done b.v ambitious and not over careful physicians. Ho then referred to Taylor, and found that he, in his work, which had been over and over cited in this case, re¬ ferred at. some length to the very case about which he had proposed to read from the Lou- THE WHARTON-EETCHUM TRIAL. 133 don Medical Gazette. Mr. Syester then -went on to comment upon the manner in wjhich cases were introduced into medical works. After some other discussion Mr. byester waived the authority, and said he would not insist upon its being read. Dr. Claude continued—In medicine we must have a great many eases concurring and es¬ tablishing the truth of the disease; apoplexy may occur from an increased quantity of blood in the blood vessels and without any rupture of those vessels; a death may occur with all the symptoms of apoplexy and with¬ out rupturing a blood vessel; I say this on the authority of Andral, who I regard as high as any authority in the world; I do not know that he speaks of having used the microscope; in passive congestion of the brain the veins are fall of blood; in active congestion of the brain the blood is propelled too much into the arteries of the brain. Mrs. Samuel L. Smith was next ca’led, and testified—I reside in Baltimore, and I have known Mrs. Wharton quite well for six or seven years; she has the reputation of being an upright and religious woman; her reputa¬ tion has always been very good for amiability, kindness and humanity; I am a daughter of Thomas W. Levering; I think Mrs. Wharton was kinder than most persons, and more charitable than most persons. To Mr. Revell—I associated with some of Mrs. Wharton’s acquaintances, but I cannot say how many; I have heard some of them express an opinion such as I have expressed be¬ fore her arrest; I talked to Mrs. Neilson fre¬ quently last fall about Mrs. Wharton; I talked with her also before Mrs. Wharton’s arrest. Mr. Steele now asked the witness if she had ever heard that Mrs. Wharton was very kind to Confederate prisoners. Mr, Revell objected, and the Court sus¬ tained the objection. Rev. Dr. George Leeds was next called, and testified—I reside in Baltimore, and have been rector of Grace P. E. Church since 1867; I have known Mrs. W’harton very well for the past four years, and she is a communicant in my church; so far as I ever heard there was no blemish upon her good name for kind:.ess, humanity and amiabi lity; she was above criit- cism as far as I have known. To Mr. Syester—I can’t say I have heard her spoken of frequently: she has been in affliction nearly ever since I knew her; I visit and as¬ sociate with her acquaintances, and from their lips I have heard but one testimony, and that was in her favor; that was long before her arrest; the time I particularly refer to was a year ago la9t summer. Gen. Charles W. Field was next called, and testified—I reside in Baltimore; I was an offi cer of the old army from T9 to ’61;I was a Major General in the Confederate army; I have known Mrs. Wharton since December. 1849, and first met her at Fort Leavenworth; I was not in the same regiment with her husband; I was in the dragoons, and he was in the in¬ fantry; I met Mrs. Wharton again at West Point in ’59 or ’60 for a week or two; I have not met her since; I "was at Fort Leavenworth six months; on the first occasion I met lier I h ad particularly good opportunity: her reputa¬ tion was as good as anybody’s could be. Thomas King was next called, and after af¬ firming, testified—I reside in Harford county, Maryland, and am a son of the late Jos. King, Jr.; 1 have known Mrs. Wharton for six or eight years, and I know her very well; I have visited her in Baltimore, and also in Harford county; her reputation for amiability, kind¬ ness and humanity was very good indeed: her amiability and her charity for the feelings and opinions of others were proverbial. General Henry Lockwood next testified— I reside in Georgetown, D. C.; I am Professor of Mathematics in the United States Navy, and am at present stationed at the Naval Observatory in Washington; I made Mrs. Wharton’s acquaintance in Cambridge, Mary¬ land, in 1861; 1 afterwards knew her very well at Drummondtown, Virginia, and afterwards in Baltimore; in Drummondtown I saw her nearly every day; I commanded the United States troops at Drummondtown, and Major Wharton commanded one of my regi¬ ments; with regard to her amiability I heard nobody abuse her, and I suppose she was amiable; her reputation for humanity was good. To. Mr. Syester—I knew Mrs. Wharton from October, ’61, to January, ’62; I suppose Mrs. Wharton was a month or six weeks at Cam¬ bridge; I saw her frequently after I was ordered to Baltimore after the battle of Gettysburg; I was in Baltimore two or three years; I knew her well, and visited her occasionally 7 . Col. Thos. Hendricks next testified—I am a Major and Brevet Colonel in the United States army, on the retired list; I have known Mrs. Wharton about twenty-nine years; I became acquainted with her at Jefferson Barracks, but I was there only two or three weeks; in 1848 I met her again at Fort Gibson; she was there six weeks or two months; her reputation for kindness, amiability and humanity was very 7 good; I never heard any complaint of her on those points; I have resided in Baltimore for the last four or five years, and knew Mrs. Wharton there; I visited frequently at her house. To Mr. Syester—I have now no fixed resi¬ dence, but was in Wisconsin when I received a summons to attend this trial; I never heard any thing to the contrary of what I have said about Mrs. Wharton’s reputation. J. Gorham Moalenext testified—I reside in Baltimore and am an attorney at law; I have known Mrs. Wharton about 9 years; I visited her family and I am acquainted with a great many of those who visited her; her reputation for kindness, amiability and humanity, was very good; at the request of Miss Nellie Wharton I went to see Marshal Frey and was at the house when he came; no money was of¬ fered in my presence, but Mrs. Wharton.said— Here the witness was interrupted by Mr. Syester, and Mr. Steele said the idea had been attempted to be given that Mrs- Wharton had offered Marshal Frey a bribe. The offer had been openly made, and Mrs. Wharton designed only to compensate Marshal Frey for'his kindness to her servant. The State had brought this out, and was it right that the latter plirt of a 134 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. transaction and not the initiation should be given'? The fact that it was a continuous transaction gave the defence the right to bring it in, and in justice, reason and law the testimony ought to be admitted. Mr. Syester said he did not regard what Mrs. Wharton said as evidence to go to the jury, and what Marshal Frey had said was the only evidence that could be admitted. The act of giving the money was the only thing that could be explained, and Dot the declaration of Mrs. Wharton previous to that act. The Chief Judge said the Court was of the opinion that the declaration of Mrs. Wharton was clearly inadmissible. Mr. Steele said the defence had offered the testimony as part of the res gestae, and con¬ nected with the circumstance of her offering the money to Marshal Gray. The Court repeated its opinion, and the witness was dismissed. The Court then adjourned until 10 o’clock A. M., to-morrow. The defence v ill probably close their case to-morrow, and the arguments before the Jury will, it is believed, commence next Monday afternoon or Tuesday morning. Among those present to-day were Rev. 0. K. Nelson, of St. John’s College: A. W. Machen, Esq., of Baltimore; Professor Tonrv, Dr. Wil¬ liam T. Howard, Commander J. S. Skerrett, of the Navy; Colonel Louey, of the Fifth Reg¬ iment of Baltimore; Hon. Daniel M. Henry, of Dorchester county; Hon. Barnes Compton, of Charles county; Colonel James Howard, of Baltimore; General Thomas W. Campbell, of Baltimore; Colonel Branfz Mayer, William Hollingsworth Whyte, Esq., Hon. Alfred Spates, of Allegany county; Hon. John Thornp son Mason, Secretary of State; Judge George W. Wilson, editor of the Marlboro’ Gazette. TH1RTT-I OI RTH S)AY. Annapolis, Januarv 13,1872. It- was evident from the large attendance to-day upon Mrs. Wharton’s trial that the in¬ terest of the public io unabated. It is antici¬ pated that the crowd during the closing davs will be as great-as ever attended a criminal trial in Maryland. Mrs. Wharton is still very calm. Her daughter. Mrs. Nugent, Mr. and Mrs. J. Craw¬ ford Neilson, and Mr. H. Moore Wharton are still with her. Miss Rosa Neilson has been absent during the past two days. Upon the opening of the Court to-day, H Moore Wharton was called,and testified—I re¬ side in Philadelphia: I was related to Colonel Wharton, but not very near; I know Mrs. Wharton very well indeed: I first met her in the summer of 1860; I again met her in Rhode Island in the summer of 1870; I have stayed at her house very often since that time: her repu¬ tation for kindness, amiability and humanity is beyond reproach; I have had opportunities of knowing her reputation for these qualities. Colonel Brantz Mayer next testified—I am a Paymaster in the United States Army, and am at present stationed at San Francisco; I was summoned in this case, and with the permis¬ sion of the Secretary of War I obeyed the summons: I have known Mrs. Wharton quite intimately for the. past eight years, during which time I was in my native place, Balti¬ more.; I am a brother ot Charles F. Mayer; my family , nd Mrs. Wharton’s have been very intimate; my relations with Mrs. Wharton were also close, friendly and intimate: I have had very good opportunities of knowing her reputation; for amiability, kiudness and hu¬ manity her character was excellent aud, in tact, unimpeached. J. C. Keighier next testified—I reside in Bal¬ timore; I have known Mrs. Wharton since Sep¬ tember, 1S70; I was at her house frequently, and knew those who visited there; her repu¬ tation for kindness, humanity and amia¬ bility was unquestioned as far as I knew. Commander J.S. Skerrett next testified—I am a Commander in the Navy, and am at. present stationed at the Naval Academy; I am ac¬ quainted with Mrs. Wharton; I first, met her in September, 1859; I have hail excellent op¬ portunities of knowing her reputation among those who knew her well; her reputation for amiability, kindness and. humanity was as good as the best. Dr. James C. Welling next testified—I live in Washington aud am at present President of Columbian College; I have known Mrs. Wharton for live or six years; I met her in Washington; I have had friends and relatives who resided in Baltimore Dear Mrs. Wharton; they were my father-in-law,the late Col. Henry T. Garnett, formerly of Virginia, my sister-iu- law, my mother-in-law and my sister; they lived near Mrs. Wharton aud were intimate with her; as derived from those who knew her. I know that her reputation for amiability, humanity and gentleness was very high; I wish to say why it was that Colonel Garnett and Mrs. Garnett had this reputation of Mrs. Wharton impressed upon them; the witness was not, however, allowed to state what he desired in this particular. W. W. Wilson next testified—I reside in Washington, and am employed as au account¬ ant in the United States Treasury; I have J known Mrs. Wharton six or seven years; I 1 visited her house frequently, and have spent, several days at a time at her house; I have heard many of those who have testified here, both for the defence and Stale, speak of her in high terms; Mrs. Chubb spoke of her; she stood very high in the estimation of her friends for \ amiability, humanity and gentleness. Thomas E. Coale next affirmed and testified— 1 I reside now in Baltimore county; 1 formerly lived at 47 McCulloh street. Baltimore, and next door to Mrs. A barton; I have known her five or six years; our steps adjoined; I lived next door to her for two years and I was well acquainted with her; 1 don’t think any one had a better reputation for kindness, gen¬ tleness and humanity. Mr. Haguer next said ho had t wo letters, which it was agreed by the State’s officers should be read in part, if the Court consented. The first letter was from Major General H. Het.h, late of the Confederate army, but now resident in Raleigh, North Carolina. The second leiter was from Dr. Finley, of Phila¬ delphia. THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 135 Mr. Hagner, by consent of the Court, said the letter of Dr. C. A. Finley, late Surgeon General of the United States army, and now a resident of Philadelphia, was to the effect that Mrs. Wharton’s reputation was unex¬ ceptionable good for the qualities of amiabil¬ ity, humanity and gentleness. General Heth’s letter was also to the effect that Mrs. Wharton’s reputation was unexceptiona- blv good for gentleness, kindness and humanity. General Heth wrote that he had known her since 1849, and that he was at one time an officer iu the old army and under her husband’s command. At this point, Mr. Steele said: Our case is now closed. Mr. Syester said the counsel for the State now desired a few minutes for consultation, and the request was granted. An informal recess was'taken, and after more than half an hour Messrs. Revell and Syester returned. Prof. N. R. Smith was then called, and testi¬ fied—I reside in Baltimore, and have resided there 43 or 44 years; I practice medicine and surgery, and have been most of that time con¬ nected with the University of Maryland; I have practiced medicine 53 years; I have also beeu a professor in Vermont, Pennsylvania and Kentucky; my office is at the corner of Saratoga street and College alley; I have still a very large practice, and was not absent from Baltimore for more than a day at a time during last summer; I have often encountered the 'sporadic form of ceiebro spinal men¬ ingitis, especially in children; to my knowl¬ edge it has not, during the past year, as an epidemic, prevailed in Baltimore; I mean the epidemic form of the disease; ray practice embraces the entire limits of Baltimore city, and I am often called in consultation in every part of the city. Mr. Syester said he now proposed to read to Prof. Smith the hypothetical statement of the defence and the accompanying interrogatory, and Mr. Steele objected. Mr. Sy r ester said the defence had offered testimony to prove that cerebrospinal menin¬ gitis was the single cause of Gen. K.’s death, and the State now desired to rebut that evi¬ dence. Mr. Thomas said the rule was clear that the State was required to exhaust the burden of its proof in toe opening of its case. He then read from 1st Greenleaf, sec. 469 (A); also, secs. 74 and 81 of the same work; 1st Starkie, mar¬ ginal page, 425; 1st Taylor on Evidence, secs. 358 and 359; Rex vs. Simpson, 2d Carrington and Paine, page 414; Rex vs. Ilildredge, 5t,h Carrington and Paine, page 299; Regina vs. Powell, 1st Carrington and Marshman, page 500; and Brown vs. B. Murray, Ryan and Moody, page 254, in support of his opinion. Those authorities, he said, established that it was the duty of the plaintiff, in making out that portion of the case which the burden of proof imposed, to exhaust all the evi- deuce necessary to sustain that burden of proof. The very element of the case at bar was, that General Ketchum did not die from natural causes, and unless the prosecution made that out they had, of course, failed to make out their case If the State had a right to introduce new evidence on that point of the case, upon what point th'-n were they pre¬ cluded from offering new testimony"! It was incumbent upon the State to prove, upon every hypothesis, that General Ketchum had died through the instrumentality of the de¬ fendant. Were the witnesses for the defence the first to express the opinion that General Ketchum had died from cerebro spinal menin¬ gitis? The Court would remember that Pro¬ fessor Donaldson, in his elaborate testimony, had given the opinion that General Ketchum had not died from cerebro spiual meningitis, and the State had thus first introduced it into the case. The testimony offered now by the State was not on any new point brought out by the defence, and was therefore not admis¬ sible. Mr Revell said the State’s officers were not disposed to controvert the general principles and practices of the law. The State exhausted its testimony, and reserved only the right to rebut. Professor Donaldson had said that the case, presented in the hypo¬ thetical statement of the State, has some re¬ semblance to cerebro spinal meningitis, but had not said so upon the testimony of Drs. Williams, Chew or Miles. If the Court would examine the hypothetical statement of the defence it would discover that it con¬ tained statements not brought out by the State’s testimony, and such as had never been brought to the attention of Drs. Williams, Chew, Miles, or any of the medical witnesses for the State. Mr. Revell next read the hypo¬ thetical statement of the defence as published iu the Gazette, and called the attention of the Court, as he proceeded, to what he con¬ sidered “new matter.” The witnesses for the defence had predicated their opinions upon the array of new facts found iu the hypotheti¬ cal statement. The State was testing the accuracy of those witnesses, one of whom (Dr. McClurg) bad gone so far as to say that even if tartar emetic had been fouud in Gen¬ eral Ketcbum’s stomach be would attribute bis death to apopiex.y from congestion. When new facts were brought into the case, the gen¬ eral rule of law did not bigd the State. Who had brought out the statement that hyperesthesia existed? Dr. Warren had lirst brought for¬ ward such a theory, based upon the single fact that a shiver passed over General Ketchum when he was touched. The defence had been jumping and leaping from inferences i-o theories, and it was the undoubted right of the State to rebut such false data as had been placed before the jury. Mr. Revell further argued the question earnestly and ably, and said he believed authority, reason and right supported the offer and purpose of the State. Mr. Syester said he admitted that the State was bound to exhaust all its affirmative evi¬ dence, and he did not think the State was now trespassing upon any rule of law binding the State in that particular. The defence had dis¬ tinctly evolved new matter, and that not iu the way of general or special denial. Mr. Syester then read from the 469th seotiou of 1st Greenleaf, touching the question before the Court. The State had not, he said, called Dr. Smith tomake good what the State hadoffered, but to rebut the new matter brought out by 136 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. the defence. In this case there were no plead¬ ings,and it would have been just as competent for Mrs. Wharton to have proved that she was not in Baltimore on the days of General Ketchum’s sickness as to have proved that General Ketchuin died from natural causes. The plea of insanity could have been brought in, so great was the latitude allowed to the defence, but it could not be said that if such had been the plea the State was bound to have anticipated it, and could not have gone into an investigation. The State had not, in its testimony, attempted to exclude a natural cause, but the defence had not contented it¬ self with meeting the State upon its own grounds, but had brought forward new facts and made a new record to go to the jury. Were the hands and lips of the State of Mary¬ land to be closed under such circumstances! The State desired to respond to the new matter brought out by the witness Susan, and such as the State could 1 not have anticipated. Mr. Svester then read from 1st Starkie, page 423, in support of his views at this point. Could it be possible, he inquired, that the State was to be concluded because Prof. Donaldson had said cerebro spinal ; meningitis might have had “a local liabita-I tion and a name” in General Ketchum’s case? Mr. Syester next referred to the case of Rex vs. Simpson, 2 Carrington and Paine; also to 5th Carrington and Paine, Rex vs. Hildredge, page 209. Mr. Syester further said cerebro spinal meningitis was a disease which he had never heard of before he came into this court room,and to say that the State should have an¬ ticipated it would have been to attribute to its officers a degree of prescience and omniscience j which he could not claim. Mr. Syester next re¬ ferred to the case of Regnia vs.Powell,l Carring- i ton and Marshman, page 500, and closed his re¬ marks by saying that he submitted the ques¬ tion to the Court with perfect confidence. Mr. Steele said he had been struck with the fact that the State’s Attorney had not cited a single ease bearing upon the question before the Court. He believed it to be an effort to lead the Court astri#’ from the ancient paths which the Courts of Maryland had so loug trodden. The Atttorney General had referred to two points which he considered supported his view, and had named, first—that of an alibi. The object of the testimony was to holster up what the State was bound to prove originally, namely, that General K. did not die from natural causes. The plea o f insanity was an independent plea, and the State was not hound to anticipate it. Mr. Steele next read from Sd Greeuleaf. section 134, to show what was incumbent upon the State to prove. The State had no right under the guise of cross- examination* to offer cumulative evidence, hut was bound to exhaust its testimony, and he begged the Court to pause ere they ad¬ mitted such evidence as was now. offered. It was the entering wedge, and the reputation of this Court was enough to make it a prece¬ dent, aDd no man could tell wheie it would lead. The State had gone so far as to call ex¬ perts to prove that General K. did not die from natural causes, and had called a number of witnesses to negative the idea that he died from natural causes. Prof. Donaldson was one of the most learned gentlemen the State had called, and he had negatived specially and particularly cerebro spinal meningitis. The State had assumed to negative the idea of death from natural causes, and he submitted that the rules of rebuttal evidence did not countenance the evidence offered. Mr. Steele then said: I beseech your Honors to pause and look well at the English au¬ thorities! Say if it has ever been done iu this State before! say if it has ever before in this State been offered to be done ! Mr. Steele, iu further arguing the question referred to Rex vs. Hildredge, 5th Carrington, page 299, also to Phillips, as to the strict observance of the rule of law involved, in his view of the question. The arguments of Messrs. Thomas, Revell, Syester and Steele were heard with great at¬ tention by the Court, and evidently with much interest by the spectators. The jury seemed to anticipate the decision of the Court with much anxiety, and Mrs. Wharton appeared more disturbed than at any previous time. Miss Nellie Wharton was absent during the arguments. After a considerable time had been occupied in consultation, and reference made to Greenleaf, section 469 A., the Chief Judge announced the decision of the Court substantially as follows. I suppose there is no Court in the State in which the rules of rebuttal evidence have been more strictly enforced than in this Court, and we will not tow depart a hair’s breadth from that course. The Court has always observed the rules of the common law. The Chief Judge then, at some length, reviewed the testimony bearing upon the question before the Court. A new hypo¬ thetical statement had, he said, been pre¬ sented,and was a new point opened by the de¬ fence. The Court was clearly of the opinion that the State could reply to it The Court was of the opinion that the witness could be asked his opinion on the hypothetical statement, but the question of death from poison was closed. Prof. Smith then testified in answer to Mr. Revell—-I have read the hypothetical statement of the defence; according to the best of my judg¬ ment the party therein described died from non-natural causes; lam not acquainted by personal observation with the epidemic form of cerebro spinal meniugilis; it has not been epidemic iu Baltimore since I have lived there; by epidemic 1 mean widespread among the people, and by endemic, 9011 fined to jails, hospitals, alleys and the low places of a city; I remember that when I was a student of medicine it was called spotted-fever in New England; I think the patient described in the hypothetical statement did not die from cerebro spinal meningitis. To Mr. Steele—I have seen cases of cerebro spinal meningitis in Baltimore within the past year, but not of the epi- demic'form; it. is not uncommon, but always prevails, to a certain exteut, that is, I meet with four or five cases during a year, but gen¬ erally among children. I never heard a word of cerebro spinal meningitis existing in Bal¬ timore, even in the endemic form, until this trial commenced; it may be endemic in dif- THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 137 ferent parts of a city, bat I call it epidemic only -when it spreads among the people;if fifty cases occurred and were scattered over differ¬ ent parts of Baltimore. I should regard it as I an epidemic to a certain extent; I do not think it prevailed in Baltimore in 1SG4 to such an extent as to be considered an epidemic; Ido not know of what'disease Mr. Fred¬ erick Sangston died last summer in Balti¬ more; I read the hypothetical state¬ ment on last Monday evening: it was handed to me by Mr. Knott, and Dr. Williams was present; I had read it before in a newspaper; the yellow jessamine, chloral and chloroform were not such agents as I should have pre¬ scribed; they were depressing agents, and in¬ appropriate, hut I do not think they had any effect in determining the result, for the patient seems to have been in a dying condition when he took them; I think chloral is a very dangerous remedy to employ, and I have seen very disastrous results from its administra¬ tion. To Mr. Syester—According to my recollection of the wording of the hypothetical statement, I consider that the party described was dying at. 11 A. M on Wednesday. Dr. George W. Benson next testified—I re¬ side at 144 Hanover street, Baltimore; I grad¬ uated in medicine in 1852; my friends say my practice is a large one, and it yields me a very comfortable living; I have never known cerebro spinal meningitis to he epidemic in Baltimore in the last twenty years; I had two cases on Henrietta street, near Dr. Baltzeli’s case; I have read the hypothetical statement, and I do not think the party therein described died from cerebro spinal meningitis; it is my opinion that he died from nou-natural causes. To Mr. Steele—I generally have one or two cases of cerebro spinal meningitis every year; there was a case about four doors from Dr. Baltzell’s case: Dr. Warren told me about two days ago that Mr. Frank Sangston haft died from cerebro spinal meningitis; I was teasing him about the length of his testimony here; I am generally occupied so much in my prac¬ tice that I don’t hear much outside of it. The Court here adjourned until 10 A. M. Monday, when the testimony for the State will he resumed and probably continued dur¬ ing the session of the Court on that day. Dr. Genth and Professor McCulloch were present to-day. TMUS.TY-JFSFT2H ©AY. Annapolis, January 15,1871. A calmer or more impressive scene was never witnessed in a court house in Mary¬ land than that which occurred on Saturday at tue close of Mrs. Wharton’s defence. After weeks of hard awl anxious struggles and the delivery of all the testimony that the rules of law would allow to be given in behalf of the accused lady, the time had at last come when legal proof of her innocence was to cease. Mr. Thomas E. Coale was the last witness called to testify to her good name and high reputation for the possession of those quali¬ ties which contradict the idea of crime, and when he left the witness stand deep feeling seemed to pervade all present. Then followed the reading of the testimony of General Heth and Dr. Finley. Her counsel next engaged fora minute or two in an earnest consultation.and during the time they thus occupied they were closely watched by the anxious spectators. Mrs. Wharton sat quietly in her chair, seemingly the calmest person in the court room, and there was nothing even in the movement of a hand to tell that it was a painful moment to her. Her daughter sat at her left, an eager listener and observer; her steadfast friend, Mrs. Neil- sou, occupied her accustomed seat to the right, quiet and calm in her demeanor, but watchful of all that passed. Mrs. Nugent occupied aseat behind her, and leaning forward, showed the deep concern which she felt. When Mr. Steele, in a calm, but quick tone, announced “Our case is now closed,” there was deep silence for a minute or two, and a feeling of relief seemed to be felt when Attorney Gen¬ eral Syester arose and requested the Court to allow the Style’s officers to retire for consulta¬ tion. The request was at once granted, and the Court took a brief recess. The audience j seemed to feel but little coucern iu the result of a consultation in which only the State’s officers could share, and there soon arose the murmuring of human voices in animated conversation. The jury had duriug these exciting moments observed the most respectful silence, and their faees wore looks which betokened deep reflection. Alter more than a half hour had elapsed, Messrs. Eevell and Syester returned, the Chief Judge rapped to order, and the name of Professor N. K. Smith, of Baltimore,was given as the first witness the State had called for rebuttal. As the venerable and distinguished Professor ascended to the witness stand all eyes were turned upon him. His evidence and oninions, were however, delayed by the objection made by the defence and the earn¬ est arguments which followed. The present week will be full of anxiety and concern to Mrs. Wharton, her daughter and her friends, as in all probability the trial will he brought to an end within the next four or five days. Notwithstanding the severely cold weath¬ er and the chilliness of the court room, a large number of ladies were present to-day a half hour or more iu advance of the opening of the court, and there seems to be a general desire among them to secure eligible positions. His Excel¬ lency Governor Whyte conducted two ladies into the conr troom a few minutes before the court was called to order, hut retired after se¬ curing seats for them. A few minutes before half-past 10 o’clock Mrs. Wharton entered the court room, leauing ou the arm of Mr. J. Crawford Neilson, and followed by her daughter. Miss Nugent, Mrs. Neilson and Miss Kosa Neilson soon after joined her. Dr. Genth in a moment more came forward arid took a seat by the side of Miss Wharton. Prof. Aikin soon after ap¬ peared, and after warming himself by the stove, took a seat in full view of the jury. Dr. Girard E. Morgan was first called, and testified—I reside in Baltimore, at No. 31 Courtland street; I have been practicing med- 138 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. icine in Baltimore since the spring of 1851; my own personal knowledge would hardly enable me to say that cerebro spinal meningitis was au epidemic last year in Baltimore; I saw hut one case: that was on Calvert street, near Mul¬ berry; Dr. Warren was not called in consulta¬ tion in that, case or any other with me; I have read the hypothetical statement of tin- defence; this case is very 1 tile like the case of cerebro spinal meningitis which I had, and my knowl¬ edge is confined to one case; I cannot give a direct, answer to rbe iuqniry appended, but I have never seen such au assemblage of symp¬ toms from a natural cause; I saw my patient on Wednesday and he died on Sunday; I thought it was a case of cerebro spinal menin¬ gitis; objection being made, the witness was not asked if it was a case of the fulminant or inflammatory form. To Mr. Steele—I heard of other cases than the one I attended; one I heard of was within a square of mine; 1 heard of two other cases, hut I don’t recollect their localities, but think they were on the line of Jones’ Falls. Dr. Cbas. H. Ohr next testified—I reside in Cumberland, and graduated in the spring of 1884; I have been practicing ever since; I have had experience with cerebro spinal men¬ ingitis; I have studied the disease, and made a post mortem examination in perhaps as marked a case as ever falls under the eye of a physician; I don’t think from the hypothetical statement of the defence that there are any symptoms of cerebrospinal menimntis in the case described;in my opinion he did not die from a natural cause. Mr. Syester next asked the witness to say what lesions, if any, he had discovered in his post mortem, and if, in his opinion, a man could die of cerebro spinal meningitis, and lesions not be discoverable. Mr. Steele objected, as the State had brought out that matter in full. Mr. Syester referred to the testimony, and contended that it was perfectly competent for the State to go into that branch of the case. Mr. Steele said that Dr. Warren had not said that the post mortem indications had aloue given him his conclusions, and at some length explained the object of the testimony on the subject of the absence of lesions which the defence bad given Upon every principle of law the State could not. now introduce cumulative evidence, and the Attorney Gen¬ eral had insisted upon ir as counsel for the defence in the Black-McKaig trial, before he Lad been elevated to his present position and bore the laurels he now wears. Mr. Steele then read from the testimony of Dr.s. Miles and Donaldson to show how the subject bad been brought forward. If the State could do what was now proposed it would be perfectly competent then to call the weakest physician in the State, and when the lips of the defence were sealed to call a dozen others to fortify the opinion of the weak one. The defence had brought out their testimony to meet the case of the State as it had been made out and left. The Court decided that the question did not come within its ruling on Saturday. Dr. Ohr continued—I don’t wish to be under¬ stood as saying that none of the symptoms of cerebro spinal meningitis were present in the hypothetical case; I mean none which them¬ selves distinctly characterize the disease known as cerebro spinal meningitis; there are many diseases which have common symptoms which are not at all distinctive of the disease itself; there are symptoms in that hypotheti¬ cal case which we find in a great many others, and which are entirely distinct from cerebro spiual meningitis; there is no pathoguomonic symptom of cerebro spinal meningitis as I understand the disease, but the symptoms de¬ scribed are common to a variety of other diseases. Dr. Ohr was not cross-examined. Dr. Abram P. Arnold next affirmed and tes¬ tified—I reside at No. 7 South High street, Baltimore: I have been in practice twenty two years, and all the time in Baltimore; I saw- four cases and heard of three other cases of cerebro spinal meningitis early last spring: I am not inclined to call the disease au epi demic, because of the small number of cases I have seen or heard of; I have repeatedly read the hypothetical statement of the de¬ fence; as far as my knowledge goes tho symptoms there stated do not at all correspond with what I know to be those of cerebro spinal meningitis; I am not prepared to give a direct answer to the interrogatory appended; the symptoms do not agree with any set of symptoms which correspond to a w-ell established and well defined disease with which 1 am familiar from my own ex¬ perience or from the hooks: I am, therefore., of tiie opinion that the set of symptoms which preceded the death of the party described were of a very suspicious character. Mr. Hagner objected to this last sentence,, and Dr. .Arnold explained that he thought, it absolutely necessary that the physician should know all the symptoms, the circumstances surrounding the case, and the post mortem revelations, before giving a decided opinion, and he could, therefore, only say that the symptoms described did not correspond to those of any disease with which do was familiar from experience, or knowledge de¬ rived from the books. To Mr. Revell—One of my cases was at the corner of Centre Market place and Hawk street; I saw another case on Calvert street, near Mulberry street, in connection with Dr. Johr Morris; I saw another ease iu Lombard sti'.-et, near Caroline; I saw another case at the corner of Greenruount avenue and Madi¬ son street, with Dr. Baldwin; all those cases were children; two of them died. Dr. Arnold was not c-oss-examined. Dr. Win. T. Howard next testified—I reside in Baltimore; I commenced the practice of medicine in Warren county, N. 0., on the 1st of May, 1844; 1 am a Professor in the Univer¬ sity of Maryland; I never had any other offi¬ cial position; I am now the Professor of the Diseases of Women and Children: I have read the hypothetical statement of the defeuce; I read it when it appeared in the papers, and again this morning in Court: I do not think the party therein described died of cerebro spinal meningitis; taking into con- THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 139 Bideration the clinical history of the case as recorded in that hypotheticaFstatement, and finding no adequate lesion after death to ac¬ count for those symptoms,I know of no natural disease of which he could have died,and do not think he could have died of cerebrospinal nieningtis; I do not -think, with my view of the character of an epidemic, that cerebro spinal meningitis was an epidemic in Baltimore last year; persons may differ very much as to the number of- cases which may constitute an epidemic, but so far as my knowledge of the disease is con¬ cerned I do not th’nk it was an epidemic; I liye at 181 Madison avenue. To Mr. Steele—I had no case of the disease in my practice, but treated a sailor from South America in the Baltimore Infirmary,who was admitted on the 1st of June; there was another case at the Baltimore Infirmary; it was that of a sailor, and was treated by Prof. Miles; I saw Dr. Arnold’s article in the Balti¬ more Medical Journal in May last, in which he said he had treated four cases and heard of three others; I have not heard of any other cases except those which have been spoken of here; if there were fifty cases scattered over Baltimore at the same time I should say it was prevailing epidemically to a slight ex¬ tent; I do not remember how soon after the case occurred that I talked with Dr. Williams about it. Mr. Revell objected to a conversation with Dr. Williams, and Mr. Steele said it was a legitimate matter of cross-examination, and the object of the defence was to show the in¬ fluences under which the witness appeared. Mr. Syester said if the purpose was to show that the witness had had a conversation with Drs. Miles, Chew or Williams, the State did not object; they might go as far as they chose. To Mr. Steele—I had a conversation with Dr. Williams about the case; it was common talk among the physicians of Baltimore; Dr. Chun died on the 34th of February, 1867, of a malignant type of typhus fever, and not of cerebro spinal meningitis; I never heard that Mr. Sangston died of cerebro spinal menin¬ gitis until I saw it announced in the course of this trial; I heard that Dr. Winslow died of typhus fever. To Mr. Syester—I never heard Dr. Warren talking about General Ketchum’s case, hut. everybody was talking about it in and out of Baltimore. Mrs. Julia Van Ness was next called, and testified—I reside in Baltimore at present; I wa9 living last June in Carlisle, Pennsylvania; I was not in Baltimore during last June, until the 26th day, when I was telegraphed for; I reached there on Monday evening; I don’t exactly know the hour; I know Mrs. Wharton; I went first to the house of my daughter, Mrs. Loney, and then to Mrs. Wharton’s; I re¬ mained there until Friday evening; I know usan Jacobs, Mrs. Wharton’s servant. Mr. Syester next asked—Did you have any conversation withSusan Jacobs in the kitchen about General Ketchum or did you have any on the stair steps? Objection was made by Mr. Hagner, and after some consultation Mr. Syester pro¬ ceeded to state that he desired to contra¬ dict the witness, Susan Jacobs. She. had testified that no vomit had been found in General Ketchum’s room on Tuesday after¬ noon, and the State’s officers desired to con¬ tradict that statement. He proposed to show that no conversation occurred between Susan Jacobs and Mrs. Eugene Van Ness, but be¬ tween Mrs. Julia Van Ness, Mrs. Loney and Susan Jacous. Mr. Hagner said he did not see how it impli¬ cated Mrs. Wharton; she could not be held responsible if Susan Jacobs chose to put ou airs and refused to aliowladies to go into General Ketchum’s room. Mr. Revell said the matter before the Court was not a collateral inquiry, but the object was to affect the reliability of the testimony of Susan Jacobs. The State had a perfect right, within the rules of evidence, to contradict her evidence. The Court had allowed her conversation with Mar¬ shal Frey to be given in evidence for the very purpose of laying the foundation for a contra¬ diction, and it was competent for the State to give evidence to aflect the credit of Susan Jacobs. Mr. Syester said it was always competent to show what interest a witness had in a case. Susan Jacobs had contradicted the State’s evidence to the effect that General Ketchum was heard vomiting on Tuesday afternoon, and that vomit was found in his room on that afternoon. She. might not be regarded as standing indifferent between tne State and the accused. Mr. Syester next referred to Roscoe on CrimiualEvidence,section 96. Could it he possible that Susan Jacobs was to bo allowed to make statements upon which the theories of medical experts had been based, and the State be prevented from going behind her testimony and showing its falsity? The State desired to show that Susan Jacobs was engaged in making a state of affairs by which General Ketchum’s condition could not be known. Was the State to be prevented from showing that General Ketchum was in the condition to which its witnesses had tes¬ tified? She had resorted to expediencies and devices to prevent his real condition from being known to those who would contradict her. Mr. Steele said he did not propose to criticise the argument of the Attorney General, but he had charged indirectly that Susan Jacobs had manufactured testi¬ mony, and he would say that wheu it came to be argued before the jury that it might be necessary to say to them that there were wit¬ nesses who had sworn in this case, whose skins were white, but who were no more entitled to credit for veracity than the black woman who had testified. Mr. Steele then read from Greenleaf, 449 sec., touching the question of evidence in¬ volved. He did nor. suppose that the At¬ torney General would say that the paid ser¬ vant of Mrs. Wharton was the only person who might be accused of bias in this case; there were others whose, relations were closer and dearer to those supposed to have been injured by Mrs. Whartou, than were those between Mrs. Wharton and her servant, and would the 140 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. Attorney General say tbat they bad no liias? Mr. Steele then read from Roscoe’s Criminal Evidence, page 139, ^nd said he submitted that there was no possible reason, no plausible reason assigned by the State’s officers, why the rules of evidence should be departed from. The Chief Judge said the Court was of the opin ion that the evidence proposed to be offered was not admissible, as it did not come within the rule of a witness testifying to a material fact upon cross-examination, which may becontra- dieted, but within the rule of cross-examina¬ tion on a collateral matter, by the answer to which the cross-examining counsel must be content. Mrs. Van Ness was then allowed to leave the stand. Deputy Marshal Frey, of Baltimore, next testified—I had one conversation with Susan Jacobs. Mr Syester next asked—Was General Ketchum’s condition the subject of that con¬ versation? Mr. Steele offered some objection, as the case of the defence had been closed, and the Chief Judge said it had been repeatedly done in this Court. Mr. Hagner desired to know if she was to be asked new questions, or was she to be asked only questions bearing upon what she had testified. Mr. Syester said he would waive the ques¬ tion for a time, and put another witness on the stand, that he might in the meantime refer to his notes, which he had left at his hotel. If his notes did not bear him out in his recollection, he would withdraw the ques¬ tion. Marshal Frey said he had had a conversation with Susan Jacobs about General Ketchum’s condition, and continued—I askert her about General Ketchum’s condition at the time he was in Mrs. Wharton’s house, from Saturday afternoon to the hour of his death, on Wednes¬ day. Mr. Syester next asked the witness if Susan Jacobs had told him anything about having visited General Ketchum frequently, and what she had said. Mr. Hagner objected, and after several references to the manuscript and newspaper records of Susan Jacobs’testimony and some desultory discussion, the Chief Judge said there was no doubt about the rule of law, but the Court’s recollection of the testimony was, that the State had laid a sufficient foundation for the question to be asked, but if the Court was not right it was willing that the witness, Susan -Jacobs, should be recalled. Judge Hammond said he had no recollec¬ tion ot the specific questions which were asked. Judge Hayden said his recollection was that th6 Attorney General had asked a great many questions to which the answers did not appear in the reports which had been read; he could not recall the partic¬ ular questions, but he was under the impres¬ sion that a sufficient foundation bad been laid for contradicting the witness. Messrs. Hagner. Revell and Steele, ex¬ plained their recollection of the cross-exami- tion, and the Court said that it was willing that the witness should be recalled. Mr. Steele said the counsel lor the defence had given their understanding, and would of course submit to the decision of tin} Court without questioning it. Marshal Frey continued—She told me in the presence of Marshal Grey, who assisted in the investigation, that she, had seldom visited General Ketchum during his sickness; I asked her who prepared his meals. Objection was made by the defence, and the Court said the witness. Susan Jacobs, was in Court, and she must be called to testify on the controverted points. Marshal Frey was then allowed to leave the stand. Prof. Wm.E. Aikin was next recalled. Mr. Syester said Prof. Aikin had some vials in a basket, which he desired to briug into Court, and the venerable Professor was allowed to re'ire to secure the desired trophies. The Court, jury, eouusel and spectators were kept a few moments on the tip-toe of expectation, but Prof. Aikin finally reap¬ peared bearing a basket. He took the witness stand, and in answer to Mr. Syester, said, I heard Professor McCulloch’s testimony in part and read it. Mr. Syester then said to Professor Aikin— You have heard the testimony of McCulloch, in which he stated that, he had conducted an analysis on chloral and yellow jessamine, and had employed in that analysis the same tests and reagents employed by you in your analysis of Gen. K’s. stomach, and obtained results which a chemist might mistake; we desire to know whether,since then,you have experi¬ mented on these substances in the same way and obtained any results resembling yours or calculated to mislead a chemist. Mr. Hagner quickly objected, and said Prof. Aikin had sworn that only antimony could have eiven him his results, aud con¬ tended that would it be reopening the matter upon which he had given his testimony at great length. He earnestly auked that the Court would rule it out. Mr. Steels read from the official report of Professor Aikin’s testimony that he had de¬ clared that the results were characteristic of antimony, and could not have been given by. anything else. The State had now no object but to cumulate evidence, aud Dr. Craig had already said that he was satisfied with two of the tests Professor Aikin had employed. The State could not, he said, under the guise of cross-examination, introduce new proof to sus¬ tain their theory that'antimony alone could have given Professor Aikin his results. Mr. Steele further argued the question earnestly. Mr. Revell said the question propounded by the Attorney General was in strict re¬ buttal. Prof. Aikiu had only negatived the idea that any substauce known to him would, under the same circumstances, give the same results. Prof. McCulloch had said his results had opened a new field of investigation, and was it possible that the State was not to be allowed to show the inaccuracies of this science, so abstruse, so deep, so hidden, and so uncertain? He submitted that it was in strict rebuttal. THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 141 Mr. Syester said the defence, in answering he evidence of the State as to the analysis of An. K.’s stomach, had not confined them- 3lves to the tests followed by Prof. Aikin, ut had made every effort to impair the force Dd invalidate the evidence of the witness now in the stand. They had called experts to bow that the same results had been obtained bom chloral and yellow jessamine. It was in very view of it new matter, and Dr. Reese ad gone into exstacies over it, and on his ilemn oath declared that it opened up a new eld to science. Professor McCulloch, Drs. ieese and Genth had forme d themselves into mutual admiration society, and had held ibemselves up to the public, the Court and ie jury, which was to be the final arbiters f this cause, as showing that Professor ikin’s tests were all fallacious. I was ntrorjjiced to show that Professor ikin had made false conclusions. The State iroposed to show now the monstrous fallacy p which the defence hai 1 resorted. Was Prof. IcCulloch to be allowed to come into court, I old up a vial and say to the jury, there is the same that Prof. Aikin ob- lined?” The defence had not been Rat¬ ified to put opinion against opinion, but iad gons further, and had attempted to how the jury that the State’s evidence uas all afallacy. Did not the State have a ght, and did not public justice have the right, ) demand that this new matter should be in- uired into, and the truth reached at last? he State was ready to show that it was a ■aud, or the result of the grossest ignorance, rofessor McCulloch had come into court with ials and acids in his pockets, and had ex- erimeuted, and then sworn that the results rofessor Aikin had not obtained were not lone compatible with the presence of anti- lony, but that other substances would give aem. The offer was now, on the part of the tate, to rebut new evidence brought to assail re evidence of the State. The State was prepared to follow Professor IcCulloch step by step, and show how fal- icious his results had been. If Professor IcCulloch said he had obtained from his kite cloud with the sulphide of ammonium :sults characteristic alone of antimony, the tate was prepared to meet him, aud show lat it was all false. The State was prepared, io, to show that the laws of chemistry for- rde such results as he had sworn his processes id yielded. He, too, should be subjected to io experimental crucible, and his accuracy dly tested. Professor Aikin had been fully sted, and they had declared that he was ig- irant and unfit to he heard in a Court of istice. The State was now prepared to show iat Professor McCulloch’s experiments would ■oduce no such results as he had sworn to jfore the jury. Mr. Thomas said he would not follow ie example of the Attorney General, ho, in addressing the Court on a ques- on of law, had addressed the jury, but > would address the Court on the plain inciples of law, which he considered bplicable to the question before the Court. !tie State had chosen to go into the negative 'idences of the presence of antimony, and had excluded itself from contradicting any of the evidences offered by the defence in opposition to the negative evidence of the presence of antimony in General K.’s stomach. The State’s officers had undertaken to meet in advance the negative evidences of the presence of antimony, aud Dr. Aikin had used the words, “such substances must contain anti¬ mony.” The witness had no right to assert that noother matter would give such results, unless he knew that they would not, and the defence had really rebutted the State’s evidence. Again, Professor Aikin had said “ There is no one thing but antimony which would give those results,” and the evidence of the defence had been to rebut, that testimony. The at¬ tempt on the part of the State was to add cu¬ mulative evidence on points which they had brought out on examination in chief. He was sorry to have to say that the Attor¬ ney General had used language which was unbecoming a gentleman holding his high position. The gentlemen of whom ho had spoken were as high in character as any in this community or any other, but the Attor¬ ney General of Maryland had chosen to say that they had practiced “a fraud,” and had held themselves up as a mutual admiration society. He could inform the Attorney Gen¬ eral that if he admired the witness on the stand he was alone in his admiration of him. The Chief Judge said the Court was of opinion that, the testimony now offered came directly within the rule laid down in the de¬ cision of the Court on Saturday, and was ad¬ missible. The defence had experimented on particular substances, and if the same sub¬ stances had been experimented on by the State, and produced different results, it was only replying to the defence on the new point raised by them. The Court here adjourned until 10 A. M. to¬ morrow. Great interest was manifested to day, and the attendance was very large. The jury does not seem to relish the idea of hearing more chemical testimony, and the foreman was heard to express the hope that Professor Aikin would break his bottles before the Court met again. Professor Aikin was ob¬ served to handle his basket very tenderly, and to watch it closely. At times to-day Mrs. Wharton appeared anxious, but is still calm. Since the last decision of the Court it is an¬ ticipated that the trial will now be'considera- bly protracted, and it is understood that the State has chemical testimony additional to that now in the possession of Professor Aikin. TIIIKTY-SaXTTaa O’&'W. Annapolis, January 16, 1872. The proceedings on yesterday in Mrs. Whar¬ ton’s trial were exciting and important. At no other previous stage of' the trial had the opposing counsel exhibited so much determi¬ nation to urge their views upon the Court, and the arguments partook more than on any preceding occasion of the spirit and temper of recrimination. The spectators seemed to enjoy the excitement and to share in the feel 142 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. ings of the legal combatants. The jury, too, appeared not averse to witnessing a contest of such a character and to forget, for a time, the tedium of their position. An unusually large number of ladies were present, and they paid great attention to all that occurred. The interest exhibited by the ladies is re¬ markable for its constancy, and they appear to have formed themselves into a court for the hearing of ail the testimony, arguments and decisions, aud doubtless for the forma¬ tion aud expression of opinions. A fair repre¬ sentative of the sex, who attends the trial only eemi-occasionally, has declared that she “got mad” a day or two since “because she could not say anything herself.” A trial of female wits would doubtless be an instruc¬ tive commentary upon legal proceedings. Notwithstanding the beating snow storm of last night a large number of ladies were present this morning in advance of the open¬ ing of the court, and there is something of a contest among them for the best seats. Mrs. Wharton and her daughter, accompanied by Mr. J. Crawford Ne.ilson, entered the court room shortly before 10 o’clock this morning, aud took their accustomed seats. Mrs. Whar¬ ton appeared as calm as on the first day of her trial, and enteted with as firm a step. Upon the opening of the Court to-day Pro¬ fessor Wm.E. Aikin was recalled, and in an¬ swer to Mr. Syester, testified—On Monday of last week I was instructed by the Attorney General to proceed to investigate this new dis¬ covery of Professor McCulloch; I provided myself with yellow jessamine and chloral from Mr. Gosman’s drug store, and then, tak¬ ing Professor McCulloch’s statement as I read it in a newspaper, I provided myself with all the materials he used; the portion represent¬ ing the contents of the stomach was repre¬ sented by a solution of albumen and otLer things. Here he referred to hisnote, and con¬ tinued. To Mr. Steele—I did not make this memo¬ randum at the time, but made it from the one which I made at. the time I made the experi¬ ment; taking Professor McCulloch’s state¬ ments that lie took the same materials which I did and applied the same tests, I failed utterly In getting the results which he ob¬ tained; I can show exactly what I did not g£t and what I did get, as I brought the liquids down with me; here my first experiment was with what represented the contents of the stomach; with that.liquid I used sulphurretted hydrogen; I got this turbid liquid [here he held up a vial containing a turbid whitish fluid]; it is marked with the letter V. and is marked, also, “food” and “chemicals;” it has not the most remote resemblance to .vhat I got in my analysis of General K.’s stomach: I next proceeded to ascertain if chloral by itself, or with yellow jessamine, would give the same results: I first passed sulphurretted hydrogen through the yellow jessamine, and got this [here he gelseminum and organic matters, and on tl other side of the label is sulphide of a nun nia; this I believe is the experiment Profess. McCulloch made in the court room; 1 a afraid all the gelseminum 1 used was in co nectiou with chloral: I have here what repr I sents that tincture of yellow jessamine ust with sulphide of ammonia: the coloring nia ter remained in the liquid, aud a white sed ment was in the bottom: I took the precipita which resulted from the sulphide of ammoniu used with yellow jessamine and chloral ando gauic matters, and another which I obtaiue i by using a solution representing the con ten I oi' the stomach of Gen Iv., and compared thei , the chloral precipitate I tried to dissolve strong boiling hydrochloric acid, and it w: rvefy sparingly soluble; I examined the pr j cipitato which was thrown down from tl other solution, and fouud that wholly di solved; the precipitate I got from the soluti( which represented the contents of Gener Ketchum’s stomach ..as soluble in boilii hydrochloric acid, but the precipitate I g from the chloral and yellow jessamine au organic matters was only sparingly soluble hydrochloric acid; I got the white cloud fro my work on General K.’s stomach; it dii solved in tartaric acid, but in the whi J cloud I got by following Prof. McCulloc : would not dissolve iu tartaric acid; th j which represented the contents of the stomai ; gave me this clear liquid, aud the one o tained from the chloral deposit did not di | solve; the acid liquid remains turbid iuste: : of being limpid; the white cloud formed l j the antimonial compound gave me, win THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 143 •eated with, tartaric acid, this (here b held up a clear liquid)—but Mr. teele promptly objected, and it was put tck in the paper collar box with the others; j le white cloud, which was supplied by the cecipitate I got from General K.’s stomach, hen treated with sulphide of ammonium, avo me an orange red precipitate, but when treated similarly the chloral precipitate I ot this whitish precipitate; I have noted the me in which th results showed themselves; r hen sulphuretted hydrogen was passing for ne hour through the mixture used by Prof. IcCulloch I found it was slow in its action; 'hen chloral and tinct. gelseminum was reated with sulphuretted hydrogen for half ii hour I got a similar action; in my experi- lents upon what represented the contents f the stomach of General Ketchum got results in about two seconds; he one fundamental error made by Professor IcCulloch was in overlooking the character f the solution he used; it is inadmissible, in xamining for antimony, to use an alkaline olution, as Professor McCulloch must have one. Professor Aikin now took out a precipi- ate dried on a piece of filtering paper, and ontinued—I took the colored liquid which ’rofessor McCulloch obtained; it is very im¬ portant to determine the color of the precipi- ate by separation; the precipitate is a dingy * T hite. [Here Professor Aikin showed it to the ary.] He continued—Nobody but a blind man ould mistake it. [The piece of paper was ow passed to the jury and examined by hem.] Professor Aikin then passed to the iry the vial of dark liquid from which he had btained the precipitate exhibited on the ltering paper. He continued—It does not ear the slightest resemblance to the preci- it-ate I obtained from General K.’s stomach; have here an antimonial precipitate. Mr. Hagner objected to the introduction of his testimony, and the Court said it would ear the question argued. Mr. Hagner said he had understood that 'rofessor Aikin had said he had experimented .nth the supposed contents of General K’s tomach and gotten results differ-nt from lose obtained by Professor McCulloch, and e further argued that the subsequent results •ere not so simulated as to be admissible as vidence to the jury, Mr. Revell reblied and said he thought it as admissible 'to let the jury know the re- pts. Mr. Syester said Professor McCulloch had vorn that his results were similar to lose which an autimouial compound ould yield, and he did not suppose it onld be wrong to show that he mid not have gotten a result which wou d ive deceived any one. Professor Aikin had cperimeuted with an antimonial compound, id the State desired to show the two precipi¬ ces to the jury and let them decide if it mid have been mistaken. Mr. Steele said he thought his brothers had > r erlookcd the fact that they were now xeiing rebutting testimonv. Professor Aikin id given his testunony-in-chief as to specific dors and results, and without showing re- ilts. He was proceeding to address the Court when Judge Hayden interrupted and said he understood that the offer was now to show what were the results obtained by using anti¬ mony in contradistinction to the absence'of antimony. Mr. Steele said the defence were not object¬ ing to the right of the State to offer such tes¬ timony, but to the time at which it was being offered. The defence had closed its case, and now after the same question had been brought forward by the State in its testimony, the at¬ tempt was made to confirm their testimony in chief that antimony, and antimouy alone, would give the results Professor Aikin ob¬ tained. It would work a great wrong and in¬ justice to the prisoner, and he submitted that by all the rules of evidence it was not admis¬ sible. The Chief Judge said the Court would con¬ fine the witness to his testimony, and not al¬ low him to exhibit an antimonial compound to the jury. He could swear to the results from the two precipitates in question. Judge Hayden said lie differed with great reluctance from the balance of the Court. It was his opinion that the two experiments (with and without antimony) could be shown the jury, and they allowed to judge. Professor Aikin continued—The two pre¬ cipitates were obtained from precisely the same liquids and by the same reagents,except that antimony was present in one and not in the other; one precipitate was turbid white and the other an orange red; to one afflicted with color blindness, which is a disease—here the Court interrupted the witness. He con¬ tinued—I cannot see how it is possible that anybody in the possession of his senses could, mistake one result for the other. Professor Aikin was now turned over to the defence, but Mr. Steele said he did not desire to ask him any questions. He was recalled for a moment and said, in answer to Mr. Steele, whether Berzilhus was an authority in chemical matters, that in his opinion Berzillius was undoubted authority. Dr. Christopher Johusfou next testified—1 reside in Baltimore, at S2 Franklin stieetrl practice medicine and surgery; I am at pres¬ ent Professor of Surgery iu Che University of Maryland; I have been Professor there for seven years: before occupying my present chair I was Professor of the Principles and Practices of Surgery; I have been practicing medicine about, twenty-five years; my practice extends through fill sections of Baltimore; cerebrospinal meningitis was not an epidemic in Baltimore last year. Mr. Kevell now read to the witness the hypothetical statement of the defence, which was published in the Gazette. Professor Johnston answered—In my opin¬ ion the party therein described did ' not die from cerebro spinal meningitis; as that pic¬ ture presents no symptoms with which I am acquainted, I should infer that he died from non-natural cause; I am acquainted with cer¬ ebro spinal meningitis. To Mr. Steele—I saw last year two cases, both children, one in consultation with Dr. Kirby, and the other with Dr. Bull, which were referred to cerebro spinal meningitis; casually, I may have heard of other cases, 144 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. but I do not remember bearing of any specific cases; to the best of my recollection I did not hear the profession speak of any other cases; I attended Mr. Edward Sangstou, who lived in Monument street, and I certified to the insur¬ ance company that he died of meningitis; I found him in a convulsion in the morning, he rallied a little and then died: he lived at the northwest corner of Monument and Calvert streets; I did not observe opisthatonas; he was out walking with his wife the evening be¬ fore: I should call his convulsion of an epileptic form; I found him in a dying state and 1 did not investigate the condition of his urine; as soon as he was taken his father came for me; I dressed quickly, went with him, and stayed with him until he died; Mrs. Chesborougli died recently in Baltimore of cerebro spinal meningitis. Mr. Syester objected, as the case had oc¬ curred s ; nce the trial had been in progress. He would waive his objection if the defence would allow the State to investigate into the new matter. Mr. Steele did not insist, and Pro¬ fessor Johnston continued—I have no recollection of having heard cerebro spinal meningitis spoken of either as epidemic or endemic in Baltimore during the last year. To Mr. Revell—Mr. Sangston’s disease was positively not cerebro spinal meningitis. Dr. P. C. Williams was again recalled, aud testified— I have read the hypothetical state¬ ment of the defence. The Court said Dr. Williams must now di¬ vest himself of all knowledge of the case as he had seen it, aud confine himself to the hy¬ pothetical statement. Mr. Hagner objected, and said Dr. Williams was called upon in reality to pass upon his own testimony. The Court said Dr. Williams had given his opinion of the case simply as it came under liis observation, but it bad been since modi¬ fied bv Susan Jacobs’ testimony. Dr. Williams continued—I am familiar with cerebro spinal meningitis; it was not epidemic in Baltimore during last year, or in any preceding year, that I know of; 1 " live about a square from Mrs. Wharton’s, and I heard of no cases of cerebro spinal meningitis in the northwestern section of Baltimore; I do not think the pa¬ tient described in the hypothetical statement died of cerebro spiual meningitis, or of a natural cause. Mr. Syester next asked the witness if hype¬ resthesia was present in General K.’s case, but objection was made by Mr. Steele, apd the Court ruled it out. Mr. Syester next asked the witness if there was suppression of urine, but objection was made aud sustained by the Court. To Mr. Steele —I attended one. case of cere¬ bro spinal meningitis, but by general conver¬ sation know of others: I learned from the reading in our Medical Association of Dr. Arnold’s article there were other cases; those were all I heard. Mr. Syester now said the State had ad¬ ditional' testimony to otter, and suggested that the jury be retired. The jury was accord¬ ingly retired. Mr. Syester fsaid the offer the State pr& posed to make was a simple one. The ex¬ perts for the defence had assailed the analyse. 1 of Professor Tonry, and said his results wer< insufficient. Professor Tonry had mad< further tests, and had now the metallic anti mony in the Court which, he was willing t< submit to the Court and jury, and to the testt of tbe experts of the defence. The State’f officers considered it admissible or two grounds, first, that it was new mattei discovered since the commencement of the trial, and second, that it was strictly in re¬ buttal; Professors McCulloch, Genth, Reese and White had declared on their oaths that the results obtained by Professor Tonry were insufficient, and that the spots which he de¬ clared were antimonial, were not antimouial, and that there was no antimony in General K.’s liver or kidneys; the State’s chemist had now pursued the same tests as he first used on the first portion of the liver, and he now had the metal in Court, to be subjected to the tests of the experts of the defence, and to make certaiu that which they had declared uncertain. The State had pro¬ duced the metal, and he considered that it would put to flight the theories of the experts for the defence. The testimony was clearly admissible also on the ground that it had been discovered since the State had closed its case. Dr. Warren, the chief medical witness for the defence, had confessed that if antimony had been discovered in General K.’s stomach it would put to flight his belief as to the cause of General K.’s death. The State could not have possessed itself sooner of this testimony, and it was due to the State that all the facts should be eliminated and brought forward. Even though the trial had closed and the jury had returned a verdict of guilty against the greatest crimiual in the annals of time, the discovery of new evidence would be sufficient grounds upon which to move for a new trial. The Chief Judge said it could be done if due diligence had been used in discovering the new evidence. Mr. Syester continued to argue that the tes¬ timony was admissible on the second ground he had named. It might be contended that the State could have come before armed with this testimony, but no one could have dreamed that it would be contended by the defence that the metal should be produced; the books did not so lay it down. The Chief Judge said that question could be argued before the jury. Mr. Syester replied that he would argue it before the jury. The Chief Judge said it had allowed an op¬ portunity before the State had closed its case for Professor Tonry to make a complete analy¬ sis, because the Court thought the ends of justice demanded it. The Court was now dealing with a question of rebuttal evidence, and must view it alone iu that connection. The testimony prepared to be offered went to the very heart of the case.and was not strictly in rebuttal. The death had occurred in June, aud a plenty of time had been allowed for the investigations. If the Court admitted Prof. Tonry’s testimony it would entirely reopen THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 145 ;he case. The Court had considered the ques- ;ion and thought that it could not admit. Mr. Revell said the State here closed its !ase, as Marshal Frey was not present. Mr. Steele said, as he observed that the re- lorters were reporting Mr. Syester’s remarks, le wished to say that the counsel for the de- ienee desired to say that they positively and smphatically denied that there had been any irodaction of the metal, and to assert that it lad not been shown by tbe first tests, and ;hat they did not believe the subsequent tests lad discovered it. The defence then, at 12:45, announced that ;hey had closed their case. At this announcement there was a stir in :he court room, succeeded by a moment of in- ;ense excitement. The Chief Judge next or- lered a change to be made in the arrange- nents of the seats of the counsel and report- :rs, which created considerable moving. The Court remarked that there must not be luring the argument by any one a motion of issent or dissent, and that any offender would >e removed. By consent of the counsel for .he State, Mr. Hagner next read from Berzil- ius, page 451, a passage touching the irnpor- iance of the production of the metal. Mr, Revell then, at 1:10 P. M., amid perfect lilence, arose to address the jury, and, after a 'racefnl introduction, said he came as a min¬ ster of justice, who had no resentments to 'ratify. It was no unusual thing in the his- ory of medical jurisprudence that a woman iccupying high social position should be ac¬ cused of tbe crime of murder by poisoning, liven as far back as the days of Rome t was known, and in more recent lays Madame Brinvilliers was known n France. He mentioned these in- tances to show that the crime of murder iy poisoning was not unusual Six weeks ago he accused had entered this Court clad in the r estments of innocence. Now the scene was hanged, and Mrs. Wharton now stood before he world with her hands stained with the dood of murdered Ketchum. All that Ltirnan skill and foresight could do had ieen done for her, and her counsel were mexcelled. Poor Ketchum sleeps in his ;rave, with none to plead for him, unless it vere his virtues, which, trumpet-tongued, ileaded against the deep damnation of his aking off. Mr. Revell then earnestly ex- lorted the jury to exclude from their minds ,11 extraneous matter, and to discharge the luty which they owed alike to God, them- elves and their couutry. They were to give , Verdict in accordance with the facts in the ase, and with them alone. Mr. Revell next referred to the legal defin tion of murder and the investigation the ury was to make in determining the question f malice. The case was ever one of murder n the first degree, or else Mrs. Wharton was ntitled to go free. The Court had ruled out one of the matters which he had mentioned n his opening statement, and the ary was to discard them from their onsideration. The indictment contained our counts, and Mr. Revell briefly reviewed he final count, which charged the ad¬ ministration of an. unknown poison on the day of Gen. Ivetchum’s death. The jury then would not be required to determine the char¬ acter of that poison, but only if a poison had been administered. Mr. Revell next read from the testimony in reference to Gen. Ketchum’s character, and said here is the victim whose life we say has been taken, and who the defence contended had died from cerebro spinal meningitis. He would beg the jury to bear in mind the character and physical strength of the man who had been presented to them by the testi¬ mony. At 7 A.M., June 24, he was seen by Judge Sherman, in Washington, in perfect health, and he had seen him take from his pocket a memorandum book, made notes iu it and returned it to his pocket. He begged the jury to bear this fact in mind. Mr. Revell then followed General Ketchum as his movements had been testified to by the State’s witnessess. When he reached Mrs. Wharton’s house he was not debilitated or fatigued from his travels, and he had come from a city which the State had a right to assume was per¬ fectly healthy, and certainly with no cerebro spinal meningitis in its limits. At Mrs. Wharton’s he had showed his humor by rally¬ ing Mrs. Hutton as a poor nervous creature. Well might she be nervous within Mrs. Whar¬ ton’s doors. General Ketchum had been at¬ tacked the night of his arrival with cholera morbus, and the testimony had shown that the symptoms of that disease were simi¬ lar to those of tartar emetic poisoning. Mr. Revell then reviewed the statements made by the State’s witness as to the symptoms and sickness of General Ketchum before Dr. Wil¬ liams was sent for. He was found sufferiug with nausea and holding a slop-jar between his knees, not holding it between his knees, but having it between his knees. He contin¬ ued to improve. Mrs. Wharton had been seen by Mr. McAvoy looking for brandy and peppermint, and he wished the jury to bear in mind that Mrs. Wharton had not gone to bed regularly any night, aud the State’s testi¬ mony showed that she was not in Mr. Eugene Van Ness’room. He desired the jury to bear in mind his symptoms as they occurred, for they all bore upon the theory set up by the defence that he died from cerebro spinal meningitis. Dr. McClurg had come as a wonderful apostle of medicine; had come to base an opinion upon ex parte statements of the defence, and to say that Dr. Williams, who stood as high as any medical gentleman in Baltimore, had made a mistake. He had said that Dr. Williams did not know what he was talking about, and that if he, the em¬ bodiment of all medical wisdom, had seen the symptoms, he could have told what was Gen. K.’s disease. Mr. Revell theD referred to the official report of Dr. Williams’ testimony, and remarked, as he proceeded, upon the character aud succession of General K.’s symptoms. Gen K. had shown, even from the beginning of his sickness, mind and intellect.and that ruling passion, stiong in death, which had prompted him to note down all his expenditures, and those exact habits which distinguished him If the jury believed Susan Jacobs told the truth when she said that General K. had on Tuesday had the conversation with her about 146 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. bis taking medicines, they must believe that! General K. falsified. He (Mr. Revell) would show to the jury, in the course of his argu¬ ment, that Susan Jacobs was entitled to no credit. If she had told the truth, then Mrs. Wharton bad falsified, and if Mrs. Wharton falsified the witnesses who had sworn here had sworn falsely. Mr. Revell here alluded at some length to the scene in General K.’s room when the vial was discovered, and commented in earnest terms upon the testimony of Susan Jacobs, as to the occurrences at that time. In less than fifteen minutes after Mrs. Wharton had left, withtColonel Louey, on Tuesday afternoon. General Ivetchum had been heard vomiting violently, as Mrs. Louey testified, and when she went to Susan Jacobs and asked that some one be allowed to go to him,she had said no, he is a queer old man and would not like to find a lady in his room. So General Ketehum was left alone with no one to min¬ ister to him or inquire iuto his wants. Mr. Revell then read at length from the offi¬ cial report of Dr. Williams’ testimony as to his efforts in rousing General K., and his apearance at the time ho and Mr. Hutton had assisted him from the lounge to his bed. He then followed closely the testimony as to the symptoms and death of General K., and in conclusion, Mrs. Wharton, the only friend of Gen. K., had turned first from his death¬ bed. and never saw him alive again. He now turned his attent ion to the medical theories of the defence, and said the State had been drifted about from theory to theory. The theo¬ ries of permanent injury from his fall from his horse in 1S58, of death from laudanum, or cholera morbus, or tetanus, had been aban¬ doned, and the defence had, at last, fastened upon cerebro spinal meningitis. He would say that it was an insult to science, and to the high professional attainments of Dr. Wil¬ liams, to say that he alone would least know whether or not General Ketehum was suffer¬ in' from cerebro spinal meningitis. Mr. Revell then referred to the hypothetical statement of the defence, and desired to see what value was to be attached to the testi¬ mony of Drs. Warren and all who bad come after him. He inquired of the jury if they could say that such a statement as the defence had offered contained the appropriate facts of General Iv.’s sickness. lie then noted briefly the omissions. He asked the jury to consider if the shiver which passed over General K. could warrant the far-fetched idea that he died from cerebro spinal meningitis. Mrs. Hutton had been by him as a ministering angel, and had not, as she kept rubbing his hands, observed any shiver. It was a house of sand built by the defence, and no wonder that all the witnesses for the State, from Dr. Smith down, had scouted the idea. When General K. was suffering the agonies of death he had, in answer to an inquiry as to where his pain was, replied, "In m.v stomach, sir.” That alone was incompatible with the idea of death from cerebro spinal meningitis. Mr. Revell next came to tko post mortem evidences, reviewing them at some length aud commenting with great particularity upon them, and claiming that they gave no I evidence that General K. had died of cerebro spinal meningitis. He would ask the jury if the opinions of those who had formed their judgments upon such an ex parte statement were worthy of weight. At this time, 2:55 P. M., the Court informed Mr. Revell that he could continue his argu¬ ment to-morrow, and adjourned until 10 A. M. to-morrow. Mrs. Wharton was as calm as she has ever been during the time Mr. Revell was address¬ ing the jury, but listened attentively. Mrs. Nugent was not present, to-day, but Mr. and Mrs. Neilson and Miss Rosa Neilsou occupied their accustomed seats. The court room was not so crowded as had been anticipated, owing, doubtless, to the inclemency of the weather, and the expectation that the arguments would not commence to-day. Mr. Revell was heard with great attention and spoke with his accus¬ tomed fervor and ability. Messrs. Thomas and Haguer will follow to¬ morrow for the defence, upon the conclusion of Mr. Reveil’s arguments. To Messrs. Steele and Syester will be left the final efforts in the great trial. TIIIRTY-SEVESTH DAY. Annapolis, January 17, 1S72. Yesterday was fraught with momentous in¬ terest to Mrs. Wharton, as the beginning of the end of her trial for life, and the scene which that beginning brought, in all its sur roundings and accompaniments, was sufficient to stir the hearts of all present. “The priso¬ ner at the bar,” as she is known in the par lance of lawyers, seemed to appreciate the solemnity of the hours and the gravity they bore, but her remarkable calmness did not more than momentarily forsake her, and save a passing excitement immediately preceding the commencement of the argument of Mr. Revell there was nothing iu her manner to indicate that she was struggling against any troug emotions. Her face was concealed from view by the heavy crape veil which she has so constantly worn, but her erect position and The steadi¬ ness of her figure, showed that whatever of agitation she may have felt was controlled and suppressed. Her daughter sat close to her left, veiled, like her mother, listening and observing with anxious interest, but yetquiot and calm. Mrs. Neilsou still held her seat to Mrs. Wharton’s right, and appeared much con¬ cerned. Miss Rosa Neilsou sat immediately in rear of Miss Wharton, aud looked sad aud thoughtful. The crowd of spectators, although not so great as had been expected, was sufficient to fill the court room, and the positions assigned to ladies were all filled, obliging some of the fair attendants to stand. The jury evidently recognized the solemnity of the duty which devolved upon them, aud Mr. Revell was heard with great attention. The interest of the spectators did not partake of undue ex¬ citement, and at times a deep silence reigned, broken only by the clear, ringing tones of Mr. Revell, as he denounced Mrs. Wharton, pleaded for the murdered Ketehum and the TEE WEARTON-KETCEUM TRIAL. 347 vindication of the laws of Maryland, and etep by step unfolded to the jury what he be¬ lieved to be the shallowness of the theories of the defence. There was one person among the spectators to whom the scenes seemed to be painful in the extreme, namely, Charles L. Ketchum, the eldest son of Mrs. Wharton’s alleged victim. He has been a constant attendant upoD the trial, but has manifested no unbe¬ coming interest in the result,and on yesterday, at the"commeucement of Mr. Revell’s argu¬ ment, occupied a position in an extreme corner of the court room. To him the scene must have been one of painful interest, and it doubtless recalled to him memories which are enough to sadden a lifetime. When "Mr. Revell, in feeling and eloquent terms, painted the death bed scene of his father, and in strong and forcible words de¬ scribed his agonies, and the circumstances which surrounded him during all his sufferings and in his last hours, young Ketchum was ob¬ served to bow his head. To his feelings and memories at that moment belongs the sanctity of a sorrow too deep for any hut his own heart to realize or appreciate. The seats assigned to ladies were occupied to-day considerably in advance of the open¬ ing of the Court, and the choice of seats seems to he as much a matter of interest among them as would be the lead of the German, or the best positions at a marriage. The majority of those who attend are among the most fash ionahle and cultivated in Annapolis Society. At precisely one minute of 10 o’clock to-day T Mrs. Wharton entered the court room, leaning on the arm of Sheriff Chairs, and closely fol¬ lowed by her daughter and Mrs. Nugent, who were under the escort of Mr. Steele. Mrs. Wharton appeared pale to-day, and the pallor of her countenance could he readily remarked through her heavy veil. The Court was called to order promptly at 10 o’clock, and at the bidding of the Chief Judge Mr. Revell resumed his argument be¬ fore the jury He said that when he closed on yesterday he was criticising the hypothetical statement of the defence, and he would now Turn to some Qf the. striking points of the medical testimony for the defence, which did not, in his opinion, sustain the theory that iGeneral Ketchum died from natural causes. He first addressed himself to the testimony of Dr. Reese and, after commenting upon the efforts he had made, said he found that even Dr. Reese had confessed that the cause of General Ketchum’s death was an obscure one. Mr. Revell then read at some length from the testimony of Dr. Reese, and singled out the syinptons which he had declared were char¬ acteristic of cerehro spinal. He then com¬ pared them with those of cerehro spinal men¬ ingitis as given by the authorities. All the au¬ thorities and medical witnesses had said that headache was one of the most constant symp¬ toms of cerehro spinal meningitis, and the de¬ fence had drawn the far-fetched idea that General Ketchum had headache, from the [single fact that he put his hands to the back pf his head. ■ Mr. Revell next reviewed the testimony hearing up the theory that hyperesthesia 10 !j of the skin existed, and claimed that one by one the the baseless inferences of the defence were dissipated by the actual facts of the case. He next referred to the alleged sup¬ pression of the secretions of the kidneys, and declared tfiat there was not a particle'of tes¬ timony to sustain the theories of the defence based upon that supposition. Dr. Reese, though a master of his profession, had claimed, in opposition to all the authorities, that venous congestion was not an evidence of the non¬ existence of cerehro spinal meningitis. Notone of the medical witnesses for the defence had examined the brain with the microscope in a case of cerehro spinal meningitis, and yet they undertook to speak positively and authorita¬ tively of the post mortem revelations. He then claimed that cerehro spinal meningitis always left invariable lesions. The testimony of Dr. Williams and the words of Gen. K. to him, stamped the testimony of Susan Jacobs, in reference to his sufferings and symptoms, as a link in the chain of her flagrant false¬ hoods. Dr. Reese had said that he did not wish to he understood as saying that General K. died of cerehro spinal meningitis, hut only that he “might” have died of that disease; he had thus launched himself out upon a sea of possibilities, when probabilities were the only things that could he considered in this case. Mr. Revell then further read at considerable length from Dr. Reese’s testi¬ mony. commenting on it briefly. He next iurned his attention to the testimony of Dr. iVarren. He had claimed that the identity of General Ketchum’s case with that of Dr. Baltzell’s patient was complete, and yet another medical witness for the defence had said that as no two leaves were alike so no two cases of any disease were exactly alike. Hy¬ peresthesia had been lugged into this case by Dr. Warren, and made the basis of a theory designed to mislead and deceive the jury, and without the slightest warrant. Another symp¬ tom relied upon by Dr. Warren, namely, the condition of the pupils of the eyes,had also been exploded by the testimony of the defence. Dr. Warren had brougnt into the case what was never in it, and had upon groundless in¬ ferences based his plausible theories. The de¬ fence had claimed in support of their theories that there was an improvement at times in General K.’s case, during the last hours of his life, and yet had asserted almost in the same breath that he was in articulo mortis. Dr. Warren had drawn inference after inference in his attempts to account for the disease, and had gone so far as to claim that the alleged fatal malady of cerehro spinal meningitis was epidemic in Baltimore at the time of General Ketchum’s death. It was insult to science and to the intelligence of the j ury to assert the monstrous doctrine that General Ketchum could have been taken with epidemic cerehro spinal meningitis five hours after his arrival in Baltimore. It was necessary for the defence to prove that cerehro spinal meningi¬ tis was epidemic in Baltimore to sustain their theory of the cause of General Ketchum’s death, and in that they had failed. No wit¬ ness had testified that a single case of that diseaso was within a mile of the house in which General Ketchum died. Mr. Revell 148 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. next came to the testimony of Dr. Morris, and claimed that ais testimony had not sustained the theory advanced by Dr. Warren. When he was plied with the ex parte hypothetical statement ho was compelled to say that he could not assign any cause, natural or non- natural. for General Ketchttm's disease. Mr. Revel 1 then noted the distinctions which Dr. Morns had dra -vn, and commented on the fact that the great majority of cases were those of children. Dr. Morris had said he would not like to say that cerehro spinal meningitis was epidemic in Baltimore, and the Court had confined him to the cases which he saw. Mr lievell next reviewed the symptoms of the disease to which Dr. Morris had testified. There was an absence of all hyperesthesia in General Iv.’s case, hut there was anesthesia, one of the symptoms of tartar emetic poison¬ ing. Dr. Byrd’s testimony was next consid¬ ered by Mr. lievell. He had said the disease, as stated in the hypothetical statement of the defence, bore no possible resem¬ blance to any disease with which he was acquainted, aud he had left the matter problematical. Mr. Eevell then spoke curso¬ rily of the testimouy of the other medical witnesses for the defence, and next read from pages 10, 17 and 19 of Dr. Stille’s work as to the nature of the disease of cerehro spinal meningitis, and the varied symptoms, hut the uniformity of the post mortem revelations. He claimed that all who saw General K. had said he died from non-natural causes, and those who had not seen him had yet come for¬ ward and said he died from a natural causp. There could not, he believed, he a rational doubt that General K. died from natural causes. Mr. Revell continued to read from Stille of the symptoms and post mortem reve¬ lations of the fulminant form of cerehro spinal meningitis, and claimed that even admitting that General K. had that disease it could not have been of the fulminant form unless it had been epidemic in Baltimore. Mr. Revell said he thought it had been clearly demonstrated that General K. did not die from natural causes, and he now proposed to speak of the unnatural causes of his death. He then re¬ ferred to the various symptoms of General Iv.’s case, as was testified to by Dr. Wil¬ liams, aud read from page 11 of Dr. Grisole’s work, as to the symptoms of tartar emetic poisoning He next read from page 615 of Beck’s Medical Jurisprudence, citing a case which he believed to he in point, lie next referred to Taylor on Poisonings, pages 476 and 477, aud Scille’s Therapeutics, page 457. Mr. Revell next referred to the purchase of tartar emetic, and claimed that t wo purchases had .been proved. Mrs. Chubb had been unable to say that she saw the tar¬ tar emetic fall on the plaster Mrs. Wharton applied to her breast, hut had only seen her go mg through the motions of sifting it. He contended that the sediment in the tumbler- had the unmistakable taste of tartar emetic, and that the chemical testimouy had not con¬ troverted that fact. Professor McCulloch has volunteered to give him (Mr. Revell) some of the deadly drug, and had claimed that it had no taste to him. But Governor Bowie and Dr. Claude tasted it. and they found out that it was bitter and biting. The authors said it was accurate, and it was not to be supposed that they would make an assertion which they did not know was true. He declared that Professor Aikin had not been successfully contradicted, and referred •to the official report of his testimony. The experts for the defence had harped upon the production of the metal, and yet they could not deny that no organic, matters would have given the results which Dr. Aikin obtained. Dr. Genth had sworn that in a similar ex¬ periment he had gotten at the same stage the characteristic results of antimony or arsenic, and yet the defence contended that when Prof. Aikin got the same results he was to he turned down. The experts for the defence had gone so far as to claim that even Worm- ley was to be turned down, and here Mr. Ee.v- ell compared the processes recommended by Wormley with those used by Prof. Aikin. Ac¬ cording to the defence Wormley, Aikin and Tonry were all to be turned out of Court-, and they only were to be believed. The circum¬ stantial evidence was strong enough to fasten the guilt upon Mrs. Wharton without the production of the metal. Suppose poor Ketchum had lived (and he wished to God he had lived), would the de¬ fence then contend, if on an indictment for attempt to poison, that the metal shohld be produced? The. experts for the defence had made ostentations experiments, but their sub¬ stances were left in Court too long, and on the morrow the jury saw w-hat it all meant. Those experiments wereuDfair and calculated to deceive the jury. If he had time he could demonstrate to the jury that the results of Professors Aikin and Tonry were ' conclusive, and that no man, be he pro¬ fessional or layman, could doubt them, unless he was like the doubting Thomas. Prof. Tonry had obtained results which lie swore to, hut the defence bad opposed to him their opinions alone, aud had not made exneriments sufficient to demonstrate that Prof. Tonry was wrong. He then reviewed at some length the results obtained by Profs. Aikin, Tonry and McCulloch, and claimed that they agreed in establishing the presence of antimony. Mr. Revell next referred to the circum¬ stances of the alleged crime, and claimed that, they pointed unerringly to Mrs. Wharton as the author of the foul crime with which she stood charged. Murders by poisoning, he said, were always of that mysterious charac¬ ter which would deceive any but a profes¬ sional man. The State could show that there .was a motive. First, he would mention the conduct of Mrs. Wharton iu going to Wash¬ ington and making a false claim upon his es¬ tate for $4,000. A note for $9,000 was in exist¬ ence, and though she claimed that she had paid it iu January last, it could be demon- I st-rated, he believed, that it was false. General Iv. was a man- of great particu¬ larity aud exact business habits, and when ' his papers were examined nothing wa-? found to show t hat Mrs. Wharton had ever paid the note, aud the note itself could not be found. No witnesses were present when she paid the money, and the papers of the deceased gave THE WEARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 149 no evidences that it was ever paid. Is it reasonable to suppose that General K. held Mrs. Wharton’s bonds hearing 5 per cent in¬ terest. and that she would be then paying him 10 per cent interest? Mr. Reveil here reviewed much of the testimony of Charles L. Ketchum, arid claimed that his testimony showed how far-fetched was Mrs. Whar¬ ton’s plea that she bad paid her indebted¬ ness to General Ketchum. Mrs. Wharton had claimed that she tore the note up, but the idea was inconsistent and contradicted. The State had a right to argue that General K. never owed Mrs. Wharton $1,000, but on the contrary, Mrs. Wharton’s note was yet unpaid. General Ketchum went to Mrs. Wharton’s a well man, and the State had shown that she had abundant opportunities to give him any drug she might have prepared. She had within her control the instruments of crime, and the opportunities were afforded her for using them. The State’s witnesses showed what oppor- tunies she had, if this woman, whose char¬ acter had been so high for goodness, had such opportunities,it was resonableto suppose that ■she, was ministering to him. She was applying poison during those days—for a smart woman would do it in the most scientific manner—and if she gave it in small doses in the beginning, -she knew that the symptons it would produce could be mistaken for those of cholera morbus. Mr. Revell then referred to the significance of poison having been discovered m the sediment of the tumbler. He theu referred to Mrs. Wharton’s attempt to account for General Retchum’s failure to be accurate in making entries on the hack of the note she owed him, and her contradictions and incon¬ sistences. When she met the sons of the dead man she sympathized with them, she who had turned so recently from his death ago¬ nies and left him to the death she had pre¬ pared for him; again, she had attempted to suborn Mrs. Chubb and to bribe Marshal Frey. When Dr. Williams had advised her to telegraph to General Ketchum’s relatives or friends, she had kept the telegram from 10 o’clock until after 12 o’clock, and she had asked Mrs. Loney to give her opinion ere she telegraphed. This she did, that General K.’s friends might not arrive until late that night. Mr. Revell next referred to the vest and to the testimony of Judge Sherman and Charles L. Ketchum on the subject. It was a promi¬ nent circumstance of the case, undone of the chain which, taken together, fixed the guilt upon Mrs. Wharton. No other person but Mrs. Wharton had a motive to murder General Ketchum, and it had not been traced to any one but her. When Mrs. Wharton was told by Dr. Williams that poison had been found, she had exonerated her- servants; she was found agitated and ner¬ vous, and making the most contradictory and unreasonable statements about the possession of pecuniary means The defence say that because Miss Nellie Wharton bad $15,000 her mother had no need to borrow, hut the de¬ fence might have with equal consistency shown the possession of wealth by Mrs. Wharton’s reputed uncle in Philadelphia. One remarkable feature of the case was that- when Mrs. Hutton returned to General K.’s room she found Mrs. Wharton there with a cup, and that Mrs. Wharton exhibited great anxiety to administer medicine to General Ketchum. Mr. Revell here dwelt upon the testimony of Mrs. Hutton with Mrs. Wharton at that time. Mrs. Wharton exhibited great anxiety to give the medicine, but she showed no anxiety to send the telegram. Her impatience grew thread bare, and at 5 minutes to 1 o’clock, she gave the final dose and stood by until the con¬ vulsions of death Came; then she fled from his room, taking with her the cup and the spoon. Shades oi death then gathered around him, his agonies increased and death at last re¬ lieved him of his sufferings. Carried away suddenly, with none around him to sympathize with him, he was left by her who claimed to he his friend, and that too in his direst ex¬ tremity. Mr. Revell next read from Will’s on Crimi¬ nal Evidence, 152, and said the State was not here to do away with Mrs. Wharton’s char¬ acter, but a striking fact was that the ma¬ jority of those who had testified to her char¬ acter did not come from Baltimore, but from a distance. If the jury was convinced that she committed the deed, then character was out of the question. Mr. Revell here read from the charge of Chief Justice Shaw in the case of Dr. Webster, convicted of the murder of Dr. Parkman. In conclusion, Mr. Revell referred to the circumstances of General Ketchum’s visits to Mrs. Wharton’s house, and claimed that the symptoms of his sickness showed the guilt of the prisoner at the bar. The State had showed the possession of the means and the motive. She bad sent General Ketchum unheralded to his grave; hut, thank God, he had left behind him a record ox which any man might be proud. He then exhorted the jury to discharge their duty with stern impartiality, and to give such a verdict as would bring them no regret in after life. Mrs. Wharton could not claim clemepey because she was a woman, and the jury were to steel their hearts and judge ac¬ cording to the evidence. They hadnothing to do with mercy; that was lodged in another tribunal. If the jury extended mercy to the prisoner they would be doing injustice to the State. Here. Mr. Resell, at three minutes of 1 P. M., closed his argument, havingaddressed the jury for four hours and fifty-eight minutes. Mrs. Wharton was very calm during the de¬ livery of his argument to day, and seemed unmoved by even his most earnest words. After a recess of 10 minutes, Mr. Hagner opened the argument for the defence. He said it was with deep feelings of solicitude that he arose to address the jury, and that he had hut one regret, and that was that he oc- cupied the place of a better man. He would address the jury upon the facts and principles of law applicable to them. The ease was ex¬ traordinary for the length of time it had occupied, the character of the prisoner and the fact that though crimes were committed in secret, this case occurred in open daylight. It was more extraordinary still that on a hypothetical 150 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. statement, which he would show was correct, but one. witness for the State had ventured to say that the symptoms were those of a case of poisoning. Mr. Haguer then referred to the removal of the case from Baltimore, which had been alluded to, and said when a fictitious cry was raised against a prisoner, it was a right, held upon the Constitution to move the case, so that a fair trial might he had. Mr. Hagner then read from Bentbam’s Treaties on Evidence as to the question of character, and said the law presumed the good character of the prisoner. The defence challenged the State to briug hny man, wo¬ man or child who would say ought against Mrs. Wharton's fair name, and none had been produced and could not have been produced Sir. Hagner then commented on the extent, of power confided to the jury, and the fact that the law presumed the inuocence of theprisoner, whieii wg.8 to her au armor of power,and could not be pierced except by arrows of strength. In Maryland there was no appeal in criminal matters; but the smallest Court case could be taken to the Court of Appeals. Mr. Hagner here read from tbe ease of Corner vs. Pendle¬ ton, being the case of suit brought against gamblers, who had seduced into gambling a young man iu the employ of a business firm, and at some length Mr. Hagner re¬ ferred to its hearing upon the case at the bar. There was another fact to which he wouhl refer, and that was, that the jury had seen the daughter of the prisoner clinging to her mother. Poet and painter had vied iu painting the virtues of that Roman maiden vs ho fed her imprisoned father from her own bosom, it was this girl who the jury would bury iu a common grave with her mother, chaining them, as galley slaves, in a common death. Mr. Hagner nextread from 31st Indiana Re¬ ports a ease in point. The jury must require the same proof, as it was in tin- power ot the Judge, after they had returned a verdict of guilty, 10 order one of them to take a deadly weapon ami instantly execute the prisoner, and lie would inquire of them what manner of proof they would require before any one of them could lay his hand on his heart and be prepared to do the deed. The illustration was in point, for the Sherift could not execute uuless the jury agreed. Mr. Hagner next referred to the case of Madeleine Smith, and read at some length as to the necessity for the most positive proof. The jury must have the most convincing proof of the administration of poison, before they could convict, and the evidence must, be satis¬ factory, complete and distinct. The books were filled with instances in which persons were convicted on circumstantiol evidence, and in after years it was proved that the per¬ sons were guiltless. Mr. Hagner cited the case of Jacob when he saw the bloody coat of of Joseph, and also the ease of St. Paul, when he was cast upou a desert island,and a viper, coming from the tire, fastened upon his hand, j as illustrating the error of human infererenees and presumptions of guilt. Mr. Hagner. in lurther illustrating this point, inquired of the jury how many men they would require; to swear that the Grand Duke Alexis, who re- | i cently visited Annapolis, had picked the ; pocket ot one of fheir fellow-citizens, before they would believe him guilty. Mr. Haener read from Wills on Circumstantial Evidence page 184, as to the great necessity for the most convincing proof and the ( Sect of the non- production or suppression of evidence. He then read from Archibald's Criminal Practice, 4th Howard, and other authorities, bearing upon the necessity for absolute proof of the commission of crime. Mr. Hagner in pursuing this branch of his subject quoted from the Bible the requirements of the Mosaic law. From first to last iu this case the prin¬ cipal facts relied upon were each proven by only one witness. General K. died of a sudden and violent disease, but it was alleged that he died by Mrs. Wharton’s hand. The proofs the State relied on were, first, the moral cir- cumstauces. and secondly, on the medical circumstances. He thought he could demon¬ strate to the jury that it would be their duty, as it. would their pleasure, to render a verdict of acquittal. Mr. Hagner here read from Wills on Circumstantial Evidence.page 63. The motive asserted was that Mrs. Wharton wished to cover up her indebtedness to Geu. Ketehum and to secure $4,000 from his estate, but uothing but conversations had been brought to sustain the theory. Mrs. Cottman had come in as unexpectedly as if she had come down from the clouds, and had st own how the matter stood. Young Ketehum had, sworn that his father had told him ou the 23d of June that he wanted the money to pay for his house, and it had beeu shown that he paid -j for the house on the 13th of June. It was a matter of particular importance that Mrs., Wharton took no receipt; sueh thingsi were frequently done, even by men. . Mr. Hagner now quoted from a decision j of the Court of Appeals of Maryland, sustain¬ ing his point that such things were not un¬ usual. General Ketehum had been said to be' very exact in all his business .habits, even set-J ting down a cent given to a blind negro, yet he had paid the money ($11,000; for his house to an unauthorized party, and taken no re-i ceipt. Mr. Hagner here came to the testimony of General Brice, and contended that, his tes timony did not sustain the State’s theory as to motive. Could Mrs. Wharton have been such a fool as to go to Washington and demand $4,000 unless she had a legitimate claimf He would venture to say that it was no unusual thing for intimate friends to confide iu each other as Mrs. Wharton had in this matter confided in General Ketehum. General Ketehum went to Mrs. Wharton’s house to tell her good-bye, aud not to collect her indebtedness. Mr. Hagner next referred to the symptoms, ( f General Ketchnm’s sickness, and contended that there was no proof that Mrs. Wharton had tartar emetic in her house until Monday, Mr. Hagner now read from page 282, of the re¬ port of the trial of Madeline Smith, noting the character of the testimony there referred to. He then dwelt upon the testimony as to the purchases, aud contended that he could demonstrate that but one pur¬ chase of tartar emetic was made for or by Mrs. Wharton. Kleinschmidt was a for- THE WEARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL . 151 igner, and somehowor other people get in the abit of raising their voices in talking to for- igners, and, therefore, Mrs. Chubb had raised er voice—thought Kleinschmidt was deaf. Vhv was not Myer brought? He could have lived the matter. Mr. Hagner now took up lie saies book of Gosman & Co., and confin¬ ed to advance his views on this point of the ise. The Court here adjourned until 10 A. M, to- lorrow. The court room was crowded during it' entire session of the Court, and great in¬ vest was manifested in the arguments, mong those present to-day were Judge Kan • all. Commodore Worden, Commander J. S. herrett, and others of prominence. Mr. Hag¬ er will continue his argument to-morrow ad it is anticipated that Mr. Syester will not sach the jury before late Friday or Saturday oruing. Mr. Charles L. Ketchum was again resent to-day, but General Brice lias been bsent for moie than a week. TMJSSTY-EIGJIITEI DAT. Annapolis, January 18,1872. The expectation that great interest would 3 manifested by the public in the arguments i Mrs. Wharton’s trial, has been proved to ave been well founded, and the patience of le spectators shows with what earnestness le proceedings are regarded. There was Lit little in the well conceived and forcible rguinent of Mr. Eevell of the essential clap- ap of jury appeals, and Mr. Hagner, on yes- rday, showed that he, too, had come to ad- ress himself in the language and manner of le true lawyer to the questions before the rv; but everything is of interest to the at- ndants upon the great trial, and they seemed 1 be determined to hear all that is to be said l either side. For several days past there has been much eculation and discussion as to the probable suit of Mrs Wharton’s trial, and the opinion at the jury will acquit or disagree is gen- ally expressed. Mrs. Wharton was promptly in Court this orning, and her arrival attracted, as usual, uch attention. She was accompanied by r daughter, Mrs. Nugent and Mr. and Mrs. bison. The ladies, who are always first to rive, had already filled the seats assigned to em, and they appear more interested than er in the proceedings. A. few minutes after 10 o’clock Mr. Hagner Burned his argument, and said he was en- avoring on yesterday, when he closed, to ow how groundless was the charge that ere had been more than one purchase of rtar emetic. He was sure that if the jury mid follow him he would convince them at there was but one purchase of tartar letic, and that that was made by Mrs. mbb from Mr. Kleinschmidt. It was not isonable to suppose that anybody but an ot who proposed, committing crime would ve bought the tartar emetic at a store where s was perfectly well known, and had it arged to her on the books. Hr. Hagner then went on, and contended at all that Marshal Frey had said was re¬ concilable with the idea that there had been but one purchase. It was natural that Mrs. Wharton should have offered the small sum of money to Marshal Frey as he testified, for it was only reasonable that she should havebeen anxious that her servants should be relieved from suspicion. Mr. Hagner then con¬ tended that Marshal Frey had had mis¬ understandings, and so had all who had testified in the case, and was it to be said that no charity was to be extended to this poor, nervous woman, who was not allowed to have even her daughter preseut when she was being closely questioned by the astute Marshal Frey? Mr. Hagner then read from appropriate authorities, touching the danger of misunderstandings between even the most particular persons. It was con¬ tended that Mrs. Wharton had induced Mrs. Chubb to purchase tartar emetic as a blind, and Mr. Hagner then addressed himself to the facts of the case bearing on that point, and claimed that there was nothing in Marshal Frey’s testimony to lie relied upon as proving Mrs. Wharton’s purchases. Mr. Hagner next spoke of the purchase ot porter, and said that Mrs. Wharton had, in that matter, as in all others, acted openly and without endeavoring to conceal anything. The States’s officers contended that in fifteen minutes after,Gen. K. was heard vomiting, but the testimony did not sustain them. Mr. Hag¬ ner next read from Mrs. Loney’s testimony, to show that such had not been the fact. Susan Jacobs had testified that there was nothing to show that he had been vomiting, and even if he had been vomiting, might not the porter, which Col. Loney had said was not the thing for him, have disagreed with him and caused the vomiting? Mr. Hagner then spoke of the different counts in the indictment, and con¬ tended that neither count of the indictment could be sustained by the proof of the admin¬ istration of poison in porter. He then spoke of the testimony as to the vial, and contended that the fact that there was no label on it signified nothing, for Gen¬ eral Ketchum might have himself torn off'the label. Mr. Hagner next came to the testimony of Drs. Williams and McSkerry in reference to the interview with Mrs. Wharton at Dr. Williams’ office, and claimed that if Mrs. Wharton had been the artful woman she had been represented, she would have laid the blame on Susan Jacobs, and at once relieved herself. In reference to the sediment found in the tumbler, Mr. Hagner claimed that it had been proved that only Mrs. Wharton’s servant was in the room in which it was found, and that Mrs. Wharton was in another part of the house- At this point of Mr. Hagner’s argument a large number of ladies, who had come from Baltimore on the half-past Id o’clock train, ar¬ rived, and the disturbance of seating them was so great that Mr. Hagner was obliged to suspend for five minutes or more. Mr. Hagner resumed, and contended that there was not the slightest motive for Mrs. Wharton to have put poison in the tumbler; it had not been proved, and the jury could not consider it in the case. Even if a servant had put the poison in the tumbler it might have 152 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. been with no intention to even trick anybody; it might have been iu the yeast powders used in the kitchen. Suppose one ot the servauts had been tempted to drink of the liquor and then replenish the glass, could Mrs. Wharton be held responsible? Mr. Hagner here read from au authority a case illustrating the danger of holding an owner of a house responsible for all that was committed within its walls. The sous of Mr. Nathan, who was murdered in New York, might, with as much reason, be held responsible for his death, as that Mrs. Wharton should be held responsible for such matters as the sediment was claimed to sup¬ port. Mrs. Wharton was undoubtedly anxious to . give the last dose, because Dr. Williams had ordered it. She dropped it in Mrs. Hutton’s absence, but how did Mrs. Wharton know that Mrs. Hutton would return? She knew that Mrs. Loney had gone down the street, and how did she know that Mrs. Hutton would not go with her? Much stress had been laid upon the fact that the dose Mrs. Wharton gave General K. was cloudy, but Dr. Aikiu had proved that yellow jessamine would cause a sediment. The jury had doubtless seen signs on the street which, from one point of view, read one way, and from another read au en¬ tirely different way, and so it was with this case, and he begged the jury not to regard everything in au odious light, but to consider all the circumstances surrounding Mrs. Whar¬ ton as calmly and dispassionately as if she was one of their well-known friends. Mr. Hagner next addressed himself to the testimony in reference to the vest, and said it was an absurdity to claim that Mrs. Whar¬ ton would have taken the vest. Even if she had wanted to take the note, would it be sup posed that she would be so idiotic as to take the vest too, and thus make evidence against herself? Mr. Hagner next referred to General Wise’s testimony as to Mrs. Wharton’s anxiety to borrow money, and said none of her state¬ ments had been disproved, and the State had not sustained that point. Next, Mr. Hagner returned to the interview of Mrs. Wharton with Marshal Frey, and the offer of money, and at some length claimed that the wretched, open way iu which Mrs. Wharton had gone about the alleged attempt to bribe disproved the thing on every fair con¬ sideration. It had been also claimed that Mrs. Wharton had attempted to suborn Mrs. Chubb, and Mrs. Wharton had only desired Mrs. Chubb to recall the circumstances and to state them as she (Mrs. Chubb) believed them. The very mention of the name of Mr. Steele by Mrs. Wharton to Mrs. Chubb showed that she wished her to tell her account to a person who was incapable of placing a wrong con¬ struction upon it, or making a wrong use of the information. Mr. Hagner next reviewed the testimony about Mrs. Wharton’s state¬ ments in reference to General K.’s mind being blurred. The great chain of circumstances which had been relied upon to connect, Mrs. Wharton with the murder of General K. was broken in many places, aud though some of its links might be gigantic iu strength, yet, unless they were connected throughout, they were no more than withes would be to a Sampson. Mr. Hagner next read from Taylor on Poisons, page 406, as to the symptoms of tar¬ tar emetic poissning and their uncertainty. It had been alleged that the case of the de¬ fence had been changing, but that was not so, and many of the facts had been introduced only when Mrs. Whartou had been accused of making false statements. There never had been, in this Court, as far as he (Mr. Hagner) remembered, a louger opening statement than the defence had made in this case, and it was sufficient that the prisoner should deny guilt, and say that, she was ready to meet the charges against her. At some length Mr. Hagner re¬ viewed the testimony of several witnesses as to General K.’s symptoms, and claimed that they did not support the assertion that they were those of tartar emetic poisoning, but that they were clearly absent in the case. Here he referred to page 478 of Wharton and Stille’s Medical Jurisprudence, claiming that all exceptional cases were to be considered in favor of the prisoner. Mr. Hagner then noted the exceptional symptoms. It had been over aud over again claimed that Dr. Wil¬ liams, General K.'s attending physician, was the best person to judge of General K.’s symp¬ toms, and yet at the rime he had dis¬ covered no sjmiptoms of tartar ^emetic poisoning. The fact that he looked back : upon the symptoms with suspicions in his mind might partly account for his recollection in this particular, and there is a homely ad¬ age which says that “hind knowledge is often better than foreknowledge.” Neither Drs. i Miles nor Chew, who stood just as high as Dr. Williams deserved to stand, had said that the symptoms were those of tartar emetic poison- | ing. Dr. Williams’ opiuions were inconsist¬ ent with the statements laid down in the books. The State had prepared a hypothetical statement, but they had dropped it aud taken up the hypothetical statement of the defence. At much length Mr. Hagner reviewed the j symptoms of Gen. K.’s sickness and the cir¬ cumstances bearing upon them, in presenting I his view of the case in regard to them. No| part of the opinions of Drs. Doualdsou and i Thompson could be relied upon because the assertions set forth iu the hypothetical state-1 ment of the State were not sustained by tliej testimony in the case. Mr. Hagner next reviewed the opinions ofj i other medical experts for the State.l aud contended that they, iu reality, siij-j 1 fained the plea of the defence. If Gen.I Ketchum was moribund at 11 A. M. on Wed¬ nesday, the last dose did not kill him, and if! lie was not at that time moribund, then Da I Smith had more than intimated „hat thol j chloral might have killed him. He rcspectedj Dr. Smith’s ability and reputation, but oldl J doctors often thought it was presumption for! younger doctors to say that a new disease had! started up, aud it seemed to be so with regard; ' to cerebro spinal meningitis. The State’sl i officers had almost claimed that the defence! | had invented that disease just to apply to this! j case, but the books were full of it. Mr. Haguerl) THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 153 next read from page 243, of Tanner’s Practice of Medicine, and from Reynolds, as to the symp¬ toms of cerebro spinal meningitis, and said it ■was not unreasonable that a man 'who hacl slept all night on a sofa, between two open windows, should haye had a chill as General Ketchum had, and yet the State claimed that the chilliness was one of the principal symp¬ toms. The State’s officers might quarrel about terms, but he (Mr. Hagner) would be sorry to know of more of an epidemic of the disease in Baltimore than the testimony had shown. He (Mr. Hagner) had never heard more intelligent testimony than that given by Dr. Warren; be bad borne liimself like a man, and though great efforts had been made to break him down, he had for¬ tified himself, and stood upon estab¬ lished authorities. Mr. Hagner next referred to the uncertainty of life and the suddenness of death, closing with eloquent remarks upon the subject. He next passed to the subject of the analysis of General K.’s stomach, and said that the hooks laid it down that the use of strong words, such as ‘'unmistakable” and ‘'without a shadow of a doubt,” which Pro¬ fessor Aikin had used,created a doubt that the witness was not sincere. The authorities all insisted that the notes of the analyzing chemist should be produced, but Dr. Aikin had nothing to show, and had showed how unusually forgetful he was even in his last experiments with chloral and yellow jessa¬ mine. Mr. Hagner then insisted upon the production of the metal and quoted from section 503 of Wharton and StilJe’s Medical Jurisprudence. Berzillius and Orfila claimed the same, and so did Dr. Taylor, if his writings were rightly considered. Dr. Aikin had said it was usual to produce the metal in Court in arsenic cases, and Dr. Craig and Professor Tonry had not been questioned on the subject. Even the liquid tests contem¬ plated the production of the metal, and so did the sulphureted hydrogen test. Marsh’s tests coutemplates unquestionably the production of the metal. The metal ought to be pro¬ duced, because it was the best proof. Prof. Aikin had said, over and over again, that anything which would give the three results he obtained, must be antimony, and that he knew of no other sub¬ stances which would give them, but be introduced two other tests in bis further analysis. The experts for the defence had shown that organic matter would give such results as Professor Aikin obtained, and the defence could claim that there was not anti¬ mony in the portions analysed by Professor Aikin. Four of the witnesses for the defence had proved that Dr. Aikin was mistaken in saying that only antimony would have given the results he obtained. Even Tonry was not asked if Aikiu’s testimony was right, and Aikin’s evidence stood in Court like Mel- chisedec, witli a pedigree without begin ning or end. Then Dr. Aikin had come with his lunch basket filled with wretched little vials to prove that he was the Simon Pure in this case. If he could not do better than he did in this case, he (Mr. Hagner) would not buy a jar of pickles or a wheelbarrow of guano upon his analysis. Mr. Hagner next referred to the high reputations and characters of the experts for the defence. In conclusion, he passed a high encomuim upon the youngest expert. Prof. White, for his intelligence, truthful¬ ness and modesty. All of them most unques¬ tionably differed with Prof. Aikin. The Attor¬ ney General had charged that they had prac¬ ticed a fraud, aud the jury could consider how soon the Attorney General could come to a conclusion when they saw with what eager¬ ness he charged fraud upon theso gentlemen. A more unfounded charge was never made in a Court-house, and Prof. Aikin’s best friend could not wish for him a better character than either of those gentlemen possessed. After a recess of 10 minutes. Mr. Hagner re¬ sumed, and said he would first call attention to Prof. McCulloch’s tests on organic matter, irrespective of chloral and yellow jessamine. Mr. Hagner then read at some length from Prof. McCulloch’s testimony, and contended that Prof. Aikin had made but one test which Prof. McCulloch made. Mr. Hagner noted the differences as he proceeded, and called par¬ ticular attention to Prof. Aikin’s testimony that he had made no experiment on yellow jes¬ samine, except in connection with chloral. He had not followed Professor McCulloch, and ho had established nothing. His evidence showed, that he actually did not know what were the experiments Prof. McC ulloch had made,and yet he was hold enough to claim that he had shown a difference. He had omitted yellow jessa¬ mine, aud was not certain that Prof. McCul¬ loch had used it. There was no identity at all in the experiments, except in the action of sulphuretted hydrogen on chloral. He had undertaken to show the same experiment, and yet he had left out the yellow jessamiue, the lactic acid and the soda. That was all the support that Mr. Syester had for his charge that a “fraud” had been practiced. It seemed to him (Mr. Hagner) that the University of Maryland was on trial, and that blood was demanded to support it. Mr. Hagner next came to Professor Tonry’s tests, and said the spots he obtained were so infinitesimal that they could not he looked at with the eyes that God gave us, but had to be looked at with the microscope. His calcu¬ lation, too, was wrong one way or the other; and here Mr. Hagner commented upon and noted the estimates Professor Tonry made. He had not formedlan estimate of the quantity of antimony supposed to have been present in General Keichum’s liver, and his spots did not give it. Mr. Hagner next referred to page 356 of Taylor on Poisonings, touching the inaccu¬ racies of any tests in determining the pres¬ ence of imponderable particles of poison. Dr. Genth had gotten larger spots, and yet they did not show it. It' General Ketchum had taken tartar emetic when a baby, as much as Professor Tonry bad claimed to liave fouud, might have been found, and the little minute particles, no matter what it contained, was not enough to hang a cat. He (Mr. Plagner) thought it would he an insult to the intelli¬ gence of the jury to take such evidences as any proof. 154 THE WHARTON-EETCHUM TRIAL. In conclusion, Mr. Hagner said he trusted the jury with an unshaken confidence, and he would leave them with the prayer that the law put in the mouth of the Clerk of the Court, “May God grant you a good deliver¬ ance.” Mr. Hagner here, at 1:30 closed his argu¬ ment. His eliort was throughout well sus¬ tained, close, thorough and forcible. He was heard by the jury and all present with marked attention. Mr. Thomas followed, and said that the law made it the duty of the jury to consider every prisoner innocent until proved guilty. Here¬ tofore the public press had taken upon it¬ self to favor the prisoners of the law; but in this case a portion of it had played into the hands of her enemies to make malignant prejudice. A portion of the public press, forgetful of its high duty, had fed the very flame it ought to have ex¬ tinguished. It had permitted itself to he duped into poisoning the public mind, and for months the columns of the press were filled with one charge or another, proved to he false and known to be false. He referred to them only to denounce them as base cal¬ umnies, and to say that the same brain which had woven them was still busy in wrapping around her the mantle of prejudice. It was the duty of the jury to break down the wall of public prejudice and to still the clamor which had been raised against her. All the defence asked was simple justice. Mr. Hagner had covered the ground in the case exhaustively, and he (Mr. Thomas) only addressed the jury to prevent his sileuce from being misconstrued and misinterpreted. He would address himself to the intelligence of thejury,and would begin the historyof the case with General Ketchum in Washington, early on the 2fth of last June. Mr.Thomas next re¬ viewed the testimony as to General Ketchum’s movements on that day, and commented on them. He then inquired if there was a plow¬ man upon the farm of any one of the jury who would not have been likely to have had cholera morbus under similar circumstances? If he had been taken ill as soon as lie ate his supper, there would have been nothing suspicious in the ciicumstance. But Mrs. Chubb had eaten of the same things that General Ketchum ate of and she was not made sick. Did any one ever hear of a man taking tartar emetic, sitting up, smoking and talking for two hours and not having during all that time any of the symptoms caused by that medicine? The theory of the State was, that Mrs. Wharton had invited General Ketchum to her house for the pur¬ pose of poisoning him, but if such had been her purpose she would have availed her¬ self of the absence of Mrs. Chubb. While she (Mrs. Chubb) was there, there would have been no risk in poisoning her or anyboby else. Mrs. Chubb was absent the whole of Sunday, and in the evening she found General Ketchum and Mrs. Wharton sitting around the dining-room table and he was better. Why did she wait until Mrs. Chubb returned, if she designed poisoning him ? Her conduct in this particular presented the strongest pos¬ sible proof of her innocence. Thero was no poison, it was reasonable to infer, in the lem¬ onade. Mr. Thomas now came to the fact that brandy, which General K. called “a stick,” was added. Mrs. Wharton had gotten that brandy from Mr. Van Ness’ room, and there was nothing suspicious in her conduct in that connection. For a long time after the taking that lemon¬ ade there was no evidence that poison had been in it. All the witnesses had said that the effects of tartar emetic were speedy, but General K. was not disturbed for three hours. Between 12 and 1 o’clock in the night he was taken sick, and when Mrs. Wharton went to him, every good act, every natural prompting of her heart was perverted and construed into suspicious acts. The waslistand was in her own room, aud when she went to it to get medicine for General K., the theory of the State was that she went, there to get poison. The washstand was never kept locked, and was it reasonable to suppose that she would have put poison in that place ? She told Mrs. Van Ness that she went there to get paregoric, and that was a proper medi¬ cine for General K. She then went down stairs to get brandy and peppermint for him. There was nothing in all these things to create the slightest suspicion against the prisoner. If Mrs. Wharton had designed to let him die, why did she send fora physician? She had secretly urged upon General K. to send for a physician, and but for the fact that Gen. Iv. mentioned it to Mrs. Chubb, that fact would have died with him. Dr. Williams saw no symptoms of poisoning on Monday af¬ ternoon, but gave it as his professional opinion that he was suffering from the irrita¬ tion of the stomach following his attack on Sunday. It was the opinion of the attending physician, aud General Ketchum, too, that he was suffering on Saturday and Sunday from an attack of cholera morbus. Mrs. Wharton knew that General Ketchum would return to Washington on Tuesday: then why did she not poison him before u sue proposed taking his life? Nothing but the accident of his over¬ sleeping himself gave her another oppor¬ tunity. Mr. Thomas then referred to the tes¬ timony of Susan Jacobs. General Ketchum had told her twice that he would “ sleep it off.” What was it that ho meant to " sleep off?” It was some thing that ho knew he must “sleep off.” He (Mr. Thomas) did not charge that General K. contemplated committing suicide, but the circumstances warranted the conclusion that he took something to alleviate his pains. The conclusion from the fact that he said to Susan Jacobs every time she roused him, "Let me alone and I will sleep it oft.” was irre¬ sistible that he had taken something which he knew he would have to “sleep off.” He told Susan Jacobs that he had taken a dose of his own medicine,which he knew was “suffi¬ cient.” Who put the vial of laudanum under his pillow? Suppose he had discovered it, would he not have called the people of the house and complained that, he was being dealt with in a suspicious manner? We find that whenever Mrs. Wharton wanted “poisons,” she went with the prodigal confidence of an innocent woman, to those THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 155 nearest to her and who knew her best. Mr. Kogers looked at her, and said he had never before seen her. The State’s officers had con¬ tended that the presence of the vial of lauda¬ num was merely a stage trick. Oa Tuesday afternoon, he was found to be in the same condition in which Susau Jacobs had described as his condition previously on that day, Why does it happen that the de¬ fence never heard of the brown stout until this trial commenced ? Why was it not men¬ tioned in the indictment ? Is it anythingmore , than an aid introduced by the State to account for what they claim were the symp¬ toms? Why did Mrs. Wharton tell Colonel Loney that she would give it to him ? It was given to him innocently, and for his benefit. If the woman was in her senses it would be impossible that she acted in such a manner if she had designed poisoning him. The jury i could not believe it, unless they were satisfied that she was equally intent upon her own de¬ struction. Mr. Thomas now referred to the testimony of Mrs. Hutton and Mr. Snowden, and in- 1 quired if their statements bore the air of probability. He did not charge either of them with making false statements, but their state¬ ments of what occurred then were, he feared, colored with their present suspicions. In spite of all Mrs. Hutton’s suspicions gained from her sister she was instrumental in administering the poison. If what the State alleged was true, then Mrs. Hutton was equally guilty with Mrs. Wharton; she was a particeps criminis. It was but charitable to Mrs. Hutton to say that what she testified to here was the creation of her imagination, and not the actual facts of the case. What reason had Mr. Snowden to supipose that the medi¬ cine was dark? There was nothing to attract his attention to it. It was remarkable that he should have noticed the color of a drop on a towel around the neck of the dying man whom it took all his strength to support. The story was too incredible. Mr. Thomas next inquired what possible motive Mrs. Wharton, even if she had beeu a fiend incarnate, would have bad in giving General K. poison at that time. The doctor had told her that his friends had better be sent for, and Mrs. Wharton could herself see that he was a dying man. The State’s officers would have the jury believe that though she knew he was a dying man, that still she gave him poison. Mrs. Wharton must have known that he was a dying man, and knowing that, could she have had any motive in admin¬ istering poison to him unless she wished to torture him needlessly in his dying moments ? Here Mr. Thomas referred to the fact that she bought tartar emetic on Monday morning, which the defence relied upon as one of their main pillars. If she had designed poisoning General K. or any body else, would she not have gone to Philadelphia or to some obscure apothecary in Baltimore and bought it? In¬ stead, she went to her own apothecary and the nearest one to her. This was as indubit¬ able proof of her innocence as if her heart was the purest in the world and all its prompt¬ ings were laid bare before the jury. He wished the jury to bear in mind the fact that there was no charge of the tartar emetic which Mrs. Chubb has testified she bought on Monday evening; the charge was no where on Gosman’s books. There was but one charge, and that was for the purchase made by Mrs. Wharton on Monday morning. The recollec¬ tion of Mr. Kleinschmidt had, it was reasona¬ ble to suppose, become confused, and. in fact, the purchase he claimed that Mrs. Wharton had made was made by Mrs. Chubb. It was said that Mrs. Wharton had attempted to suborn Mrs. Chubb, but Mrs. Wharton had told her that she wished her to be particu¬ lar, and wished her to go and look for herself, and see if she had not mistaken the person from whom she had bought the tartar emetic. It had been brought out that Mr. Myer said he was not in town on the day Mrs. Chubb said she had bought tartar emetic from him, and yet the State had not called him. He would have corrected the error, and shown that Mrs. Chubb purchased from Mr. Klein- sehmidt, and not from him. The circumstances surrounding the vest were claimed to be overwhelmingly suspicious. The weather was the hottest iu June, and everybody knows that a gentleman leaves off his vest first when the heat oppresses him. Why could the State suppose that, General K. had that vest on during all the time he was there? No witness had mentioned that he did wear it. At some length Mr. Thomas went over the facts about the vest, and contended that every hypothesis that the State had about the matter was based upon the supposi¬ tion that she was either an idiot or insane. Mr. Thomas then contended that the pocket- book which the State had claimed General K. had put in the inside pocket of his vest, in Judge Sherman’s presence, was never taken from Washington, but had been produced in Court by Chas. L. Ketchum. Next Mr. Thomas addressed himself to the theory that Mrs. Wharton had a pecuniary motive, and said no sufficient motive had been proved. There was no imprisonment in Maryland for debt, and Mrs. Wharton could have gone to Europe or made oyer her prop¬ erty to a relative. The Court here adjourned until 10 A. M. to¬ morrow. The attendance to-day was greater than on any previous day of the trial, and intense in¬ terest was manifested. r !'!E£zsTrs'-mre , rja: may. Annapolis, January 19,1873. As the day draws near when the momentous question, “guilty or not guilty,” is to be de¬ cided in the great cause which has so long en¬ gaged the attention of the Circuit Couit for Anne Arundel County, and to an unprece¬ dented degree the interest of the people of Maryland and elsewhere, there gathers around Mrs. Wharton an intense and absorbing feel¬ ing. Nothing could more strikingly testify the earnestness of public sentiment than the crowded attendance daily upon the trial, and the patience and eagerness of the spectators. 156 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. Since the commencement of the arguments, there has been every manifestation of popular interest, and the dosing hours promise to be distinguished by that thrilling sympathy wit h the gravity of the issue of life and death which especially attaches itself to the trial of a woman. During all the trying hours of the last two days, Mrs. Wharton has maintained, with stoical fortitude, the wonderful calmness which has made her an object of peculiar re¬ gard, and she appears equally unmoved by tierce invectives or eloquent appeals. Calm, patient and resigned in manner, though pale in countenance and sad in her expression, she has sat. almost like a statue, in the midst of the surging feelings which have surrounded her, anil there gathers around the veiled pris¬ oner a feeling which she, by her own un¬ wearied composure, calms and subdues. At lengthy intervals the Movement of a hand, or oftener, the compression of the lips and the slow movement of the eyes, show that to her the scene is one of anxiety and weariness, and that beneath the heavy drapery which conceals her emotions from public gaze lies a deeper mystery of character than the unthinking can rightly estimate. Her figure is slender, and it requires but a glance to tell that her physical powers have been well nigh wasted in the fifty-live y'ears wdrich have left her w’an and broken. It is well known that since her imprison¬ ment her health has required constant medi¬ cal attention, and whatever may be the result of this trial, or of the one yet in store for her, there can be but little doubt that the evening of her life has already reached the shadows of its ending. Her devoted daughter is each day at her side, and her presence adds to the dramatic interest which centre’s now in her mother’s trial. The eloquent tribute paid by Mr. Hagner to her unflinching devotion found a response which the deep silence with which it was heard rendered impressive in the ex¬ treme. Mrs. Wharton and her daughter entered the Court room to-day at five minutes after 10 o’clock and were accompanied by Mrs. Nugent, Mr. and Mrs. J. Crawford Neilson. Miss Rosa Neilson and Mr. Feudal!, of Washington. They were soon joined by Mr. John B. Murray, of New York, who occupied a seat by the side of Miss Nellie Wharton. The court room was crowded in advance of her arrival and all the seats assigned to ladies were filled. Many of the ladies arrive an hour in advance that they may secure choice seats. Each day as Mrs. Wharton enters the court room all eyes are turned upon her, and her every movement is closely watched. Mr. Thomas resumed his argument, and in dwelling upon the presumption of the prison¬ er’s innocence, quoted appropriately from the first volume of Greenleaf; he further quoted from the same autho: as to the amount and character of proof necessary before con¬ viction. On yesterday he had shown the jury that there was no adequate motive shown by the State’s testimony, and even upon the sup¬ position that Mrs. Wharton owed General ivetchum $2,600, she had no obstacle to pre¬ vent her from going to Europe and leaving her debt unpaid, if shehad so designed. There was no evidence to show that Mrs. Wharton owed General Ivetchum. The Court had instructed the jury that the declarations of General K’s son to Mrs. Whar¬ ton were not to be taken, except so far as she assented to them, and Mr. Thomas then, at some length, contended that there was no evi¬ dence that she had not paid her indebtedness to General K. Mrs. Cottmau had come al¬ most as if from heaven, and she had lixed, with absolute certainty, the date of Mrs. Wharton’s visit to Washington. That was on the very day upon which Mts. Wharton had told Charles L. Ivetchum and General Brice she had paid the note. If the scraps of paper ■which were found on the hearth were not those of the note which Mrs. Wharton said had been torn up, what were they? Mr. Thomas hear explained Mrs. Cottman’s testimony. He next referred to the testimony in reference to tile claim for $1,000. made by- Mrs. Wharton against Gen. Ketchum’s estate, and contended that there was no improba¬ bility that she should have entrusted her bonds to him. She could have left them with either Mr. Van Ness or Gen. Ivetchum, and there was no risk in leaving them with either. It was easier for Gen. Ivetchum to collect the coupons at the Treasury in Washington, and it was only natural, considering the relations •between them, that she should have entrusted t hem to him without taking a receipt. Mr. Thomas reviewed much of the testimony of Gen. Brice and Chas. L. lvetcRum in further explanation. He then^ addressed himself to the conduct of Mrs. Wharton in exonerating her servants, and commented at length upon the testimony' , relating to it. Mr. Thomas next addressed himself to the testimony of General Wise, and claimed that it had no bearing upon the question of Mrs. Wharton’s guilt. He then came to the scien¬ tific testimony', and said the course pursued in the obteutiou of both the chemical and medi¬ cal testimony was unprecedented in the his¬ tory of criminal prosecutions. Dr. Williams went to hii$ personal friends, and the jury was ; asked to attach as much importance to their testimony as if there had been assistants and other eye witnesses. Ho did not mean to \ say that those gentlemen were capable of doing what was wrong in The matter, but they made their observations with their own prepossessions foremost,and theyinterested the whole University of Marylaud in sustaining their theory. Every' member of the faculty of that University has been called upon to sustain it, and after the chemical testimony for the State was broken down, they went to Washington and dug up the dead man. Why did not they give the defence the opportunity to co-operate with them . Were not the ex¬ perts for the defence as honest and as able as their experts ? The precedent was a danger¬ ous one, and if physicians, no math r how high they might be. were to be allowed to be independent of the coroner, there was no se¬ curity for the life and liberties of any one. Mr. Thomas uext spoke of the chemical tes¬ timony, and commented upon it. Professor THE WHARTON-KETCHUH TRIAL. 157 Aikin bad come into Court; without even a memorandum, and he could not remember whether or not he made his report to the State’s Attorney of Baltimore from such mem¬ oranda as he may have taken. He had con¬ tradicted, in his testimony, his reports to Mr. Knott. Mr. Thomas here handed the two re¬ ports of Prof. Aikin to the jury, and called their attention to his writing of the word “brownish.” In October he wrote that the color of the contents of General Ketcbum’s stomach was “greenish,” and in December he swore that it was “brownish.” He had then tried to make the jury behove that it was a chemical error. He wrote that a precipitate he had obtained was “yellowish,” and then Ire swore that it was “brownish. Every time Mr. Steele, in his ingenious cross- examination, asked him about colors, he each time gave a different one, and finally confessed that all he knew about it was that it was not “black.” Mr. Thomas then reviewed much of Professor Aik in’s tes¬ timony, claimed that it was all involved in contradictions, and that no possible impor¬ tance could be attached to his analysis. His test was faulty inthe very beginning, because he had not gotten rid of the orgauic matter, and he could not himself attach any importance to the color ot the first precipitate he obtained. He did not get any of the characteristic re suits of antimony. If antimony had been present, he ought to have obtained all the characteristic results. He never got any¬ thing more than a white cloud from his first test, and that white cloud was never allowed to settle. In his report to Mr. Knott he stated that he had obtained a result which was a chemical 'impossibility. Mr. Thomas here read from Professor Aikin’s report to Mr. Knott, and called the attention of the jury to the errors. Mr. Thomas, in commenting upon Professor Aikin’s testimony, said the Attorney General must have felt sorely the desperate exigencies of the case to have aspersed the character of such a gentleman as he knew the experts for the defence to be. If Prof. McCul¬ loch had wished to mislead the jury he would nothavemade any experiment before the jury; the facts of the experiments sustained him. Without meaning to say anything unkind of Professor Tonry, he would say that the temp¬ tation offered him was too great to be offered to any man who was believed to be above suspicion. He had been afforded an opportu¬ nity of making a world-wide reputation by discovering antimony in General K.’s remains The prayer, “Lead us not in temptatiop,” which the Saviour of the world taught us, was a wise one, for but few of us can resist temptation. The temptation offered Professor Tonry was too great for him, and that fact alone should make the jury regard his testi¬ mony with extreme caution. Mr. Thomas then reviewed much of Prof. Tonry’s testimony, and quoted from Orfila and Berzillins, as to the importance of the produc¬ tion of the metal. The master rule of legal evidence was, that the best evidence must be always produced, and this rule was particu¬ larly applicable to a case of circumstantial evidence. When a thing could' have been done, and was not done, it justified the jury in believing that nothing could have been gained by the attempt. Mr. Thomas said he proposed to refer to the medical proof in deter¬ mining whether or not the corpus delicti ex¬ isted. He then read from Wilis on Circum¬ stantial Evidence, marginal page 200, as to the necessity for proof of the corpus delicti. First, there should be proof of the fact of death and, secondly, of the specific cause of death. The law imposed no obligation to explain sus¬ picious circumstances until these facts were proved beyond a reasonable doubt. Mr. Thomas here read from 39 California Keports, People vs. Phips, as to the necessity for proof of every material fact. The defence might exclude all their medical testimony, and, re¬ lying upon the medical testimony for the State, yet say to the jury that General K. did not die from tartar emetic poisoning, for not one of the medical witnesses for the State had ventured the opinion that he died from that medicine. The jury was justified in be¬ lieving that if he did not die from tartar emetic he died from strychnine,and if he died from strychnine then .there had been no more proof that Mrs. Wharton administered ir than that any lady in the Court House administered it. No witness for the State had said that General K. died from poisoning, and the State had failed to come up to that requirement of law which demanded proof of the specific cause of death. The defence had produced nine witnesses who said he had died from natural causes, and the State had produced only eleven who said he died from unna¬ tural causes. The defence might rest the case there and rely upon the rules of law, and it did not matter whether he died from cerebro spinal meningitis or not, for the State must show that he died from tartar emetic poison¬ ing. Mr. Thomas then commented on the symptoms in General Ketchum’s case, and called attention particularly to the fact that instead of the muscles being relaxed as in tar¬ tar emetic poisoniug, they were rigid. Dr. Warren had ably described the prominent features of cerebro spinal meningitis, and here Mr. Thomas called the attention of the jury to the opisthotanus and pleurosthotonos in General Ketchum’s case. Another charac¬ teristic symptom was hyperesthesia, and what was the shiver which passed over General Ketclium from head to foot when Dr. Wil¬ liams touched him but an evidence of the presence of hyperesthesia? Mr. Thomas then remarked upon other prom¬ inent symptoms in General Ketchnm’s case, and commented on them and read from sev¬ eral medical authorities in support of his views. The State, he said, had tried to prove that cerebro spinal meningitis was not an epi¬ demic in Baltimore last year when the defence had never alleged it. Dr. Warren had only testified that there was only an epidemic ten¬ dency, and the State’s witnesses in part and the witnesses for the defence had sus¬ tained him. Here Mr. Thomas referred, at some length, to the testimony on that sub¬ ject, and claimed that eight physicians had seen twenty-eight cases, and there were yet three hundred and fifty physicians in Balti¬ more who had not testified. The defence had traced the disease to nearly every part of Bal- 158 THE WHARTON-KETCIIUM TRIAL. timore, and yet the State claimed that it was only endemic. The evidence in this case would not justify the jury in convicting Mrs. Wharton, even if she had come into Court stained with the blood of previous crimes, and much less could the jury convict her when she came clothed with the high character which had been proved by witnesses who could not be doubted. The laws of the moral world were as invariable as those of the physical world. Mr. Thomas then commented upon its importance, in estimat¬ ing the weight of circumstantial evidence. The jury did not know personally the priso¬ ner at the bar. but it was their duty to familiarize themselves with her charac¬ ter as it had been shown to them. It was tri e, in reference to a certain class of crimes, that they were often perpetrated by persons who before had never been suspected, but such was not the case before the jury The story of the crime of Maj. Hodge was but the story of those who God had designed for better things, and it would be traced step by step. Such was not the case at the bar. If the State was right, the crime was a cold-blooded murder of a friend who had come to bid her God speed upon her voyage to Europe. Her high character had been testified to by wit¬ nesses from Maine to California, Men who have left their names imperishably in history had come to meet here and join in one testi¬ mony to her record. Mr. Thomas, in conclusion, made an elo- j quent appeal to the jury in behalf of the ac¬ cused. Death had thrice invaded their homes since they had been called to this duty by the State, and the lesson had come to teach them not to forsake the widow. During the delivery of his earnest conclud¬ ing remarks deep silence reigned throughout the court room, and many of the ladies were j observed to weep. When he ended there was | a slight applause, which was promptly checked. Mr. Thomas, in his effort in this cause, | showed that, the prominent position he has so ! long held at the bar of Baltimore is well j deserved, and that the high reputation he bears is truly due to his professional attain-I ments. His able argument occupied over five j hours. Mr. Steele followed, and, in eloquent lan- i guage. introduced himself as the advocate of | the prisoner. He alluded in feeling terms to j her loDg imprisonment and her daughter’s devotion. The law was, that when there was a doubt of her guilt, she was entitled to go free; but she would not stand upon that ground alone, but he was here to show the jury that the State’s evidence, showed,in a large measure, that she was vindicated before the world. I he defence had not set up in the begin¬ ning a special plea, because it was not neces¬ sary; they had not set uij a plea of alibi or in¬ sanity, as they might have done. Mr. Steele then referred to the circumstances surrouud- ingMrs- Wharton, audsaid thecharges against her had beeu pressed with an unflagging per tinacity and a heated zeal whichwould have i been worthier of a better cause than that! which had for its object the taking of the life I of a lone woman. Every witness who had ! appeared in the case had some feeling. Mr. Steele first referred to the case of Dr. Wil¬ liams, the witness noon whom the State most relied, and said Dr. Williams had shown from tho beginning of this case that he thought his professional reputation was embarked in it. Dr. Williams was a gentleman of high charac¬ ter and professional attainments, but he would inquire if he was, considering his position in this case, to be unimpeached. Then came Marshal Frey, the detective, who, like all of his class, was eager to bag his game. He would not say an unkind word of the ladies or gentlemen who had testified, but he called attention to the character of the testimony to show that, they testified more or less under those feelin gs which govern human actions. He referred to them to show the un¬ usual zeal with which the charges against Mrs. Wharton had beeu sustained aud urged. The wish is father to the thought, and the memory can be moulded like wax. Here Mr. Steele commented on the distortions which suspicion and prejudice so often ga^e. The cases in which conviction was justifiable on circumstantial evidence were rare, and he begged the jury to remem¬ ber the distinctions which the law drew be¬ tween the circumstantial and positive evi¬ dence. In circumstantial evidence there was all the difficulty of drawing correct inferences —difficult even to trained minds. Mr. Steele then cited the numberless executions for witchcraft, and the lesson such exe¬ cutions bore He then read Wills on Circumstantial Evidence, page 49, enjoin ing great caution in considering circum¬ stantial evidence. Mr. Steele then referred to the proneness of fallen human in¬ telligence to believe slanders and calumnies. The forked tongue of popular feeling licks up all that is against fair names and virtues, and refuses to believe the good. But when a jury was sworn to well and truly try the case^ the jackal of rumor slinks back into his den. Mr. Steele then begged the jury to take home to themselves the case, and think if a wife, daughter or .sister oi one of them was to bo accused of such a crime and surrounded by such circumstances, what would be their un¬ willingness to listen to a suspicion? He next referred, in eloquent terms, to Mrs. Wharton’s character, and said it might as well be expected that a stream would flow up a hill as that a woman of such character would commit crime. Ho then addressed himself to the facts of the case, and first called attention to the testi¬ mony of Mrs. Chubb. She had said that both she and Mrs Wharton were sure that but, one purchase of tartar emetic had beeu made on Monday. At much length Mr. Steele dwelt upon the testimony iu reference to the al¬ leged purchases of tartar emetic, and claimed that the State’s evidence, instead of proving them, really disproved them. The testimony proved that but one purchase of tartar emetic was made,and now what became of it ? And just here the jury could not, allow a suspicion of intent of simulation to lurk in their minds. The State, by its own testimony, has shown that Mrs. Wharton had used it on a plaster, and thrown the paper away, and yet such was THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 159 the exigencv of its case that it asked the jury to believe that she was simulating. Mr. Steele then referred to the testimony as to General Iv.’s physical strength, and con¬ tended that the fact that he was found in Secretary Stanton’s office, looking over mis¬ cellaneous papers, during the late war, when the Government needed every man in the held, showed that something was the matter with his health. At the conclusion of his remarks upon this point (it being twenty minutes past 2 o’clock), Mr. Steele asked the Court to adjourn until to-morrow, as he felt his strength failing him. The Court at ouce acceded to the request of Mr. Steele, and adjourned until 10 A. M. to¬ morrow. The attendance to-day was large, and una¬ bated interest was manifested throughout the proceedings. A large number of ladies ar¬ rived bv the train from Baltimore. Mrs. Wharton left the court room soon after the adjournment, leaning on the arm of Sheriff Chairs, and followed closely by her daughter and Mrs. Nugent, who were under the escort of Mr. Murray. Each day for the last week the crowd, im¬ mediately upon thi* adjournment of the Court, has ranged itself in double columns, often three deep, from the door of the court room to the carriage of Mrs. Wharton, and she and those with her are eyed closely. So great is the eagerness to obtain a view of the famous prisoner that many gather around her car¬ riage each day and watch her every move¬ ment. Ladies "are found standing in the ranks by the side of jostling men, and they are among the most eager in their observa¬ tions. Among those present to-day were Com¬ mander J. S. Skerrett, of the Navy; Win. H. S. Burgywn, J. A. L. McClure, T. Wallis Blackistone, Upshur Dennis, Wm. Fell Giles, Jr., of Baltimore; Rev. C. K. Nelson, of St. John’s College; John Scott, of Baltimore; Drs. Williams and Chew, Wm. Mackall and Tkos. S. Baer, of Baltimore; Judge Randall, of Annapolis; and General Shriver, of Frederick City. Mr. Steele will close to-morrow, and he will be followed by Mr. Syester. It is reported that Hon. Daniel W. Voorhees, of Indiana, who was associated with Mr. Syester in the great Black-McKaig trial, will arrive to-night that he may hear to-morrow the argument of the Attorney General. FOUITIETM Bt 1 AY. Annapolis, January 20, 1873. The proceedings on yesterday in Mrs. Whar¬ ton’s trial were marked by increased interest and feeling, and the eloquent appeals of her counsel were heard with that impressive si¬ lence which manifests popular concern. When¬ ever Messrs. Thomas or Steele alluded to the character of the prisoner and the circum¬ stances which surrounded her, or to her daughter’s claim for sympathy, the specta¬ tors appeared anxious to catch each word as it fell from the lips of the advocates, and the conclusion of Mr. Thomas’ fervent appeal was signalized by a slight applause, which seemed to be the outburst of a feeling suppressed only by the stern formalities of the Court The tribute to Mr- Thomas, and to the cause which ho had so ably and earnestly pleaded, was promptly checked by the quick cries of the bailiffs, but the tearful eyes of the ladies, who, during all these exciting moments, seemed almost spell-bound by the tones and words of the friend Mrs. Wharton had called first to her side, showed the tenderness of the response which their hearts had prompted. The jury, too, were evidently moved by Mr. Thomas’ language and manner, and when, in subdued, sad tones, he recalled to them the lessou which death had so recently impressed upon them, and begged them not to forsake the widowed woman whose life was in their hands, from more than the two sorrowing hearts among them came the silent answer of , manly tears. Mr. Thomas took his seat amid the most im¬ pressive silence, and for a minute or two a solemn stillness brooded over the crowded au¬ dience. Then Mr. Steele arose and advanced to the front of the jury. All eyes were turned upon the great lawyer of Maryland as he took his position, and he too seemed to feel that the closing argument for his client had brought to him a measure of duty which it was expected he would discharge with all his ability. In the earnest, nervous tones, which are so peculiarly his own, and in the chaste and eloquent sentences which distinguish all his efforts alike before a Court or jury, he dwelt upon the feelings which Mr. Thomas had stirred to their depths, and in the manner of a master of his profession,drew the interest of all who heard him around the prisoner he had come to vindicate. Almost his first words bore the piayer of the girl who, he said, had never doubted tho purity and goodness of her mother, and, shar¬ ing her prison life, with all her heart still bound to her, had refused to leave her prison walls until both were free alike. Then ho drew a glowing pictnro of the mother’s life and character, as it had been shown to the jury, from the days when she was the pride of her native town to the hour when the dark¬ ness of suspicion and prejudice surrounded her. Next he denounced in withering, burning words the clamor which had been raised against her, and depre cated the feelings which had prompted cries which drowned the voice of her virtues as they pleaded for her against the injustice of the charges against her, and, turning from the world’s suspicious, prejudices and false¬ hoods, he confided to the jury the cause of the woman who did not believe that a breath of suspicion or a murmur of prejudice could sway their minds, but that at their hands she would receive the justice which had been so long denied her. While the counsel for Mrs. Wharton were thus engaged in urging their case, near them sat two calm aud thoughtful men, whose faces told that they did not shrink from the support of the cause which the State of Maryland had entrusted to them, and that they knew well how to count all these efforts of their opponents. They were the State’s 160 THE WHARTON-KETCHUM TRIAL. trusted officers, Jas. Revel], Esq., State’s At¬ torney for Anne Arundel county, and Hon. Andrew K. Syester, the newly elected At¬ torney General of Maryland. The lirst. named had already ably presented his view of the case, but was still at his post of duty to see that those who had been j brought against him did not, in their zeal, overstep legal bounds; the second was there to hear and to note all the points which those who he would succeed would endeavor to make against him. Upon his handsome face | there appeared the look of a man who was con¬ tent to listen, but determined to reply. Occa¬ sionally lie would remind his opponents to give him the page of an authority, and at other times he was observed to write a few hurried ) words upon the note sheets before him. He listened quietly to all that was said, and showed that his thoughts were centered in ! those views which he believed to be the right I ones. Mrs. Wharton was calm during all this time, but her daughter several times shed tears. The friends who sat with them seemed to appreciate deeply all that w 8 said in her behalf. The court room was crowded to-day long in I advance of the opening of the court, and the | ladies composed at least half of the audience. 1 The crowd exhibited much impatience for the arrival of Mrs. Wharton and her party. At five minutes of 10 o’clock Mrs. Wharton entered the court room, leaning on the arm of Deputy Sheriff Bryan, and followed by her daughter, Mrs. Nugent, Mr. and Mrs. J. Craw¬ ford Neilson, Miss Rosa Neilson, Mr. Murray, 1 of New York. Mr. Chas. Neilson and Mr. Fen- | dall, of Washington. The arrival of the party | created a general stir, and there was the noise j of many voices in subdued conversation. A i few minutes after the jury entered, and quiet soou reigned. Mr. Steele promptly resumed his argument, and begged the indulgence of the jury while he read to them from Taylor on Circumstan¬ tial Evidence, touching the credit to be given to the evidence of interested witnesses. Mr. Steele, before proceeding further, referred to the testimony of Dr. Williams, and said it was not, in the nature of things that his recollections of General K.’s symptoms should not have been warped by his subsequent suspicions. Ho did not believe that; any man could but doubt the evidence, when it was considered from what streams of feeling it had come. Mr. Steele then read the passage from Taylor. He next spoke of the part Marshal Frey had ; played. He was as respectable a man as could be found in the vocation of the detective, but he had admitted that he practiced a deception j and a fraud, and he went to Mrs Wharton with j a lie in his mouth. We must have detectives, j but we must not convict on the evidence of , detectives. I Mr. Steele then asked the jury not to attach too much importance to the testimony of a man who had confessed that he obtained his information by means of a lie. Mr. Steele then desired to goon with the ex¬ amination of the testimony, and referred again to the inferences to be drawn from the testimony that General K. was not the physi¬ cal giant which the State had represented him to be. Major Bradley had observed a dullness about him which was doubtless due to the concussion of the brain, which such a fall as Gen. K. hadinlSSS would occasion. Mr. Steele then reviewed several of the circumstances of the purchase of a house, made by General Ketchum, which showed, in his opinion, that he was not a man competent to engage in busines matters. His mind had not the same activity it had formerly had, but there was such a lethargy as would be caused by the long r, fter effects of such a fall and injury as lie had received. Mr. Steele then spoke of the uncertainty of life, and said he did uot sup¬ pose the State’s officers would contend that as Achilles was vulnerable only in the heel, so General Ketchum was vulnerable only by tartar emetic. He was arguing the case, not to show the want of evidence, hut he sought to show that the State’s own evi¬ dence showed that she was innocent, and that there could not he a doubt about it. At this time the crowd which had arrived by the train from Baltimore reached the court room, aud so great was the confusion, hustle and jam caused by the rush that Mr. Steele was obliged to suspend his argument. Mr. Steele resumed and addressed himself to the consideration of the circumstances claimed by the State to support the theory that General Ketchum was poisoned before Tuesday, aud said it was an absnrbity and a libel upon justice to say that poison was administered to General Ketchum during Saturday,Sunday or Monday. Ho reviewed the circumstances of those days, and said the evidence not only did not prove her guilt, hut it established her innocence. Hermann, the great presdigitateur, could not have given poison at the tirues during those days at which the State bad claimed it was given by Mrs. Wharton. There was no medicine so certain and so speedy in its effects as tartar emetic, and when it was swallowed it was bound to come up, and that speedily. Mr. Steele then spoke of the symptoms which disproved the State’s theory cf its administration, and proved, besides, that it could not have been done. If it had been administered the symp¬ toms of tartar e.motic poisoning would have inevitably followed. If no poison was given on Saturday, Sunday or Monday, in God’s name how could it he said that she gave him poisou afterwards? Mr. Steele then cited, appropri¬ ately, from the trial of Madeleine Smith, and said that as the charges of the administration of poison by Mrs. Wharton on Saturday,Sunday or Monday had crumbled to the ground, so the charges of the administration of poison on Tuesday or Wednesday fell with them. At 3 o’clock A. M., Tuesday, Mr. Hutton had seen General Ketchum sit ling on the side of his lied, looking at his watch, and lie ( ‘ r. Hutton) had said he was “well.” / How did Mr. Hutton know that he was ‘‘well?” If General K. had been well he would have been asleep at that hour. Dr. Williams bad said that when he saw Gen. K. on Tuesday morning that he was “well.” but he had not examined him, and General K., being a man who looked to small THE TV HA R TON-KETCHUM TRIAL. 161 savings, abruptly discharged him. Dr. Wil¬ liams had no chance to tind out whether or not he was “well,” aud if the seeds of any disease, cerebro spinal meningitis, or any other, had planted themselves in him. Dr. Williams could not have then known it- It might have been that the seeds of his fatal malady, no matter what it was, had even then shown themselves, butDr. Williams did not examine him and could not know. Mr. Steele then came to the testimony of Susan Jacobs, who he characterized as a brave, honest woman. The State’s officers had sum¬ moned both Ellen Deddrick and Susan Jacobs, nut at the last had refused to call them. Dr. Williams had said here, in the hearing of Susau Jacobs, that he had told Mrs. Wharton be had suspected her, and yet she came on the stand and told the truth- Ellen Deddrick, too, had clung to Mrs. Wharton, and the eouduct of her servants was the best proof of how this reputed murderess and poisoner gained and re- tains the love of those who knew her. Susan Jacobs had had the strongest motives known to a human being to testify against Mrs. Wharton, for she had heard herself openly charged, in this Court, as the suspected party, but she came forward and told the truth. Mr. Steele then reviewed, at some length, the tes¬ timony of Susan Jacobs about her attentions to General K., and the circumstances which occurred while Mrs. Wharton and Susan Jacobs were present together in his room. Mrs. Wharton showed the vial to Mr. Hutton. Would she have done that if she purposed,as the State charged, to si mil ate? Why did not she leave the vial in his bed, and let it he found there when he died? He (Mr. Steele) had no more doubt that General K. had taken laudanum than that the jury was occcupying their seats, and tbe suspicion against Mrs. Wharton about this vial was unjust aud ungenerous. Mr. Steele then refered to the _ circum¬ stances in reference to the vomiting, and claimed that Mrs. Loney was mistaken when she thought she heard him vomiting He (Mr. Steele) believed that he was only breathing stertorousJy. If he had been com¬ pelled to vomit, Mr. Hutton would have de¬ tected it when he went into the room, for General K. could not have gotten out of bed, and must have vomited as he laid in l^ed. His testimony showed that Susan Jacobs was right and Mrs. Loney was wrong, though he (Mr. Sleek) had no doubt that Mrs. Loney thought she heard him vomiting. Mr. Steele then referred to the testimony about the sangaree, and said that in that matter, as in all the others the State had charged against her, this poisoner who the State claimed had it in her heart to murder her best friend and was bent upon her deadly purposes, had acted openly, and had told Colonel Loney that she was going out to buy the por¬ ter, and she mixed it in His presence. Was the woman deranged? There, had been no proof of even idiosyncrasy, and yet the State would have the jury believe that she went on accumulating proof against herself. She never seemed to move that she did not encounter eyes, and was listened to as she moved by the ladies in the house. He then claimed that Col. Loney was mistaken, and contended that it was utterly impossible that she should have told Col. Loney that she was going to take, a walk to the grocery store for a little fresh air when he was waiting with his buggy to take her to ride; Col. Louey was an unexceptionable gentleman, and his (Mr. Steele’s) friend, and he did not charge him with having done any intentional wrong. Mr. Steele then gave a brief detail of an interview he had held with Colonel Loney, soon after the charge was made against Mrs Wharton, in which Col Loney had made no mention of the sart- garee, and it was not mentioned in the indict¬ ment. Ladies would talk, and men would talk, and many of the witnesses were relatives or friends of Mr. Van Ness, all very good peo¬ ple, hut they must have talked about it. He (Mr. Steele) did not accuse any one, but he feared suspicions had been sworn to as facts in the case. Mr. Steele then referred to the manner in which Col. Loney, who was un¬ doubtedly a frank man, had refreshed his memory about the porter or brown stout just before the trial came on by referring to Mr. Stabler’s hooks Everything showed that he was mistaken about Mrs. Wharton’s having given General Ketchum sangaree. Even if she did give it to him, there was no poison ill it except what suspicion, which had haunted this case from beginning to end, put into it. Mr. Steele said he next desired to speak of the circumstauces on Wednesday. On the morning of that day General Ketchum had been found semi-comatose, his eyes fixed, his limbs rigid andtetanic spasms already upon him. Taking him just as he was then, Dr. Williams must have had great faith in his medicine if he thought a dose of yellow jessa¬ mine would have saved that dying man. Dr. Smith,whose skill in surgery had given him a world wide fame,and of whose reputation we of Maryland are proud and have a right to be proud of, said he was a dying man at 11 o’clock on Wednesday, Mr. Steele then re¬ ferred to other portions of the testimony to show that Mrs. Wharton gave him no poison on that day. Could she look for a more speedy death than that which she saw was coming on? Aud then how did she do it? First, in the presence of Mr. Snowden, she dropped the medicine. If she was sane would she have gone into the room aud thus openly, in his presence, have put poison into the medicine General Ketchum was to take? It was impossible that she could have put it in without Mr. Snowden’s seeing her. Mr. Snowden had confessed in his cross-examina¬ tion that he had found out by experiment the color of tatar emetic and yellow jessamine and laudanum, yellow jessamine and tartar emetic, and that shows that there was doubt about the whole thing. Mrs. Hutton had seen the dose as it was being given, and she had not noticed that it differed a hair’s breadth from the right color. If laudanum had been in it Mrs. Hutton and Mr. Snowden would have smelled it. Dr. Donaldson fiad said that it would have re¬ quired twenty drops of laudanum to have over¬ come the effects of one grain of tartar emetic, if that quantity had been in it, Mrs. Wharton and Mr. Snowden would have 162 TEE WEARTON-KETCEUM TRIAL. smelled it inevitably. Mr. Steele then con¬ tended that General K.’ssymptoms themselves contradicted the idea that tartar emetic had been given on that day. General K. vras given depressants, and they might have hastened his death. He made no charge against Dr. Williams, and knew him to be a skillful physician, and he believed he had done what he thought best for General K. He was not on trial, and no one thought of making a charge against him. There was no suspicion against Mrs. Wharton even when Mr. Van Ness left her house, and even afterwards, for Mr. Van Ness had sent Mrs. Loney with a kind, consider¬ ate message to her. It showed his affection for her, for he had been to her a son, and he was as good a young man as was in Baltimore. But afterwards suspicion arose, and suspicion was a plant of rapid growth; it grew up like the mushicon and with no more strength. All that the State could possibly claim was that she anight have poisoned him, not that she did poison. Mr.Steele then reminded the jury of the dread¬ ful responsibility which rested upon them, and said he would like to speak to them of the alleged motive, but his strength would not allow him. He reminded them, however,that the testimony of General Brice and Charles L. Ketchum, as to her declarations to them, were, by the rulings of the Court, no more in the case than if they had never heard of it, except just so far as she had assented. He then referred to the testimony about the vest, and said it was of no more importance than if his hoots or his hat had beep missing. The Court here took a recess for ten minutes, and the gallant Chief Judge insisted that the ladies should all have seats; he requested those who occupied seats to sit closer, and allow those who he observed were standing to be comfortable. Some of the ladies bring lunch and candies, and stoutly maintain their positions. Upon the return of the jury the Chief Judge informed them that it was impossible to con¬ clude the arguments to-day, and that Mr. Steele was too much fatigued to proceed. The Chief Judge further informed them that the Court would then, at 12:30, adjourn until half¬ past 10 o’clock on Monday next. This an¬ nouncement was received by the solemn-look¬ ing twelve with looks of disappointment, and the audience (especially the ladies) seemed to share in their feelings of impatience to have the trial proceed. The Chief Judge next ordered the audience to leave the court room, and there was at once something of a rush from the building by those who desired to secure front positions in the tiles which each day enclose Mrs. Whar¬ ton until she reaches her carriage. After the files had formed, the officers of the court, under orders from the Chief Judge, widened the distance between them from three to ten or twelve feet. A delay of five minutes or more followed before the objects of the eager expectations of the crowd appeared. Miss Wharton, on the arm of Mr. Fendall, of Wash¬ ington, came first, and was followed at a few paces by Mrs. Wharton, on the arm of Sheriff Chairs. As they passed they were closely observed, and around the carriage which was in waiting a jostling crowd of men and women had al¬ ready gathered. Every movement was scru¬ tinized, and not until Mrs. Wharton’s car¬ riage had gone ten or fifteen yards was she re¬ lieved from the gaze of the curious. The jury was soon after marched to their quarters at the City Hotel. They are there kept in an upper room of a retired part of the building, and are closely watched, night and day, by the officers in charge of them. Many of them show signs oifextreme restlessness, and two of the seven bachelors among them are said to be all anxiety for an early release. The five married jurors look as if they would prefer even a little henpeckiug to the loneliness which has proved so irksome and hard to bear. The attendance to-day was greater than on any previous, and the interest was of the most earnest character. So great was the crowd of ladies, that notwithstanding the surrender of more than half the court room to them, a number were observed to be sitting in the laps of others, and others again were obliged to stand. The aisle of "the court house was crowded with men, who seemed eager to catch every word. It is not improba¬ ble that during the closing hours of the trial ladders wili be put up to the windows by the irrepressible masculine attendants. Mrs. Wharton and her daughter were still very calm to-day, and the accused was a most attentive listener to Mr. Steele. Notwith¬ standing the heaviness of her veil she recog¬ nizes many of the familar faces of the Bal¬ timoreans who attend now, but does not make known her recognition to any of them until the session of the Court closes. It is said by those who have visited Mrs. Wharton in her prison, that these latter days of her trial bear heavily upon her, ana that the long suppressed feelings of herself and daughter find relief in weeping when they reach the privacy of their room in jail. The Sheriff allows her such privileges as are con¬ sistent with the regulations of the jail, and her room is comfortably butplainly furnished. Her meals have been served from Black’s res¬ taurant, and she is each day conveyed to and from the court house in a carriage. Mr. Steele will resume his argument on Monday, and will probably occupy two hours and a half in concluding hisexhaustive effort. Attorney General Syester will follow, and will not conclude until Tuesday, unless the Court holds an afternoon session, which, it is said, Mrs. Wharton’s health will not allow. Mr. Syester is a lawyer of undoubted ability, and is one of the most effective speakers iu Mary¬ land. Ho has great earnestness of manner, and a rare command of language, frequently using as many as one hundred and fifty words a minute. Though under 45 years of age he has been engaged m more than 25 murder trials, and has established a high reputation as a criminal lawyer. Mr. Charles L. Ketchum was not present on yesterday, but returned to-day. He left this • afternoon for Washington, and announced that he would not return. General Brice has not been present for ten days or more. THE WHABTON-KETGHUM TRIAL. 163 Among those present to-day -were Hon. Frederick W. Stone, Judge Kandall, of An¬ napolis; Hon, James T. Earle; Hon. Barnes Compton: Colonel H. D. Loney; Drsr. Williams, Chew and Miles; Professor Aikin; Captain J. Henly Smith, of Baltimore; Commodore Wor¬ den, Superintendent of the Naval Academy; Commander J. S. Skerrett; Dr. Landsdale, of the navy; James M. Garnett, President of St. John’s College; Rev. C..K. Nelson; M. Wilson Carev, of Baltimore; Captain James Clarke, member of the Maryland House of Delegates; Colonel Albert Ritchie, Wrn. Fell Giles, Jr., Colonel G. W, P. Smith, James M. Buchanan, Charles Beasten, J. A. L. McClure, Upshur Dennis, and Thomas J. Baer, of the Baltimore bar- and H. S. Howison, James B. Hodges, John Mason, Philip Randall, and others of the Annapolis bar. F©Sra , '£'»lFiS2S r r BAY. Annapolis, January 23,1873. The excitement attending the close of Mrs. Wharton’s trial seems to be increasing, and it requires but a glance at the dense crowd as¬ sembled to-dav in the court, room to tell that the hearts and minds of the spectators are stirred by a feeling of intense interest in the proceedings. The life of a woman is in t-he balance, and the approach of the hour when the question of life or death to her is to be iinally decided, draws around her an absorb¬ ing consideration. The court room was crowded to-day long in advance of the assembling of the Court, and the ladies exhibited much anxiety to secure positions from which they could see and hear all. The train from Baltimore brought a greater number than on any pre¬ vious day, and the court room was crowded to its utmost capacity. When the Chief Judge and Mrs. Wharton’s counsel arrived, the jury were in their seats, and Mrs. Wharton, unac¬ companied to-day for the first time by her daughter, and only by Mrs. Nugent, Mr. and Mrs. J. Crawford Neilson, who have con¬ stantly attended her, occupied their accus¬ tomed position. All was in readiness for the commencement of the closing week of the great trial. At 20 minutes past 11 o’clock Mr. Steele re¬ sumed his argument, and after thanking the jury for their patience in having previously Jieurd him, he came to the moral circum¬ stances. and said that the State had over and over again substituted naked and prurient sus¬ picions in the place of acts, ihe State had not only not proved Mrs, W harton’s guilt, hut bad proven that she could not have poisoned Gen Ivetchum. He then referred to the medieal and chemical testimony, and in the beginning said the proof offered fell far short of the charges the State had made, and that there was a virtual abandonment of the case by the State. Ho lirst referred to the testimony of Prof. Aikin, and said he desired to say noth¬ ing unkind of him, but the testimony he had use medical terms. for he was in the army during the late war, and he spoke fluently of the suddenness of its invasion, the rapidity bf its march, and the fatality of its termination; then he said that the identity bet ween this case and Dr. Baltzell’s was “complete.” Mr. Syester then reviewed the testimony of Dr. Warren, Dr. Baltzell and Dr. Williams in conjunction, and said he utterly denied the identity which Dr. Warren claimed, or that hyperesthesia existed. No medical witness, except Dr. War¬ ren, who Lad seen a case of cerebro spina), would say that in any case of cerebrospinal they had seen hyperesthesia exist. No matter that Dr. Warren fought bard to get hyperes¬ thesia in this ijase. He said that a touch was sufficient to sliow it, and that it was shown in General K.’s case by a touch, but that taking hold oi him would not have shown it. But what did Dr. Bird say? He said that in his case, when he bandaged the arm of his patient and inserted the lancet, the patient was thrown into convulsions. Then when Dr. Williams and Mr. Hutton un¬ dressed Gen. Ketchum, touching and handling him, there was no hyperesthesia. Where was the hyperesthesia then? So when Mrs. Hut¬ ton rubbed his hand there was no hyperesthe¬ sia. But Dr. Warren said it was present oner moment and gone the next. The other wit¬ nesses next testified that hyperesthesia was THE WHARTON-KETCHTJM TRIAL. 167 constant; so much for that theory of Dr. War¬ ren. The defence had again claimed that there was a total suppression of the secretions of the kidneys, but at last the defence had been, when Dr, Williams was recalled, forced to admit that his bladder had been found full. Then two of the mam, prominent, monumental symptoms, which the defence claimed, hyperesthesia and a sup¬ pression of the secretions of the kidneys,were not nresent, and the theory of their experts fell to the ground. Mr. Syester next came to the testimony as to the pupils of General K.’s eyes, and claimed that the claim the defence had made, that their condition (abnormal, hnt.inseusitive to light) was not sustained by the testimony of their own -witnesses, who had testified to the symptoms of cerebro spinal menigitis, and particularly that of Dr. BaltzelFs. Dr. Morris, who had given his tes¬ timony in an admirable manner, when he read the hypothetical state¬ ment, he one of the most astute and ex¬ perienced physicians in Maryland, had said lie could not assign a cause for the death of the patient described. Dr. Warren bad said that the attack General Ketchum had was as rapid as a train of cars going down hill with the brakes all up, and that it went too fast to take up the effects of tartar emetic even if it had been given him. At this time a lady in the audience fainted, aud a commotion was caused by the unto¬ ward event. The Court suggested to Mr. Syester that as it was live minutes of S o’clock he had better suspend. The Attorney General suspended and the Court adjourned until to-morrow at 10 A. M. The audience was so great that a consider¬ able time elapsed before the room was emp¬ tied. The crowd was greater to-day than the room could possibly contain, and men were observed clinging to the tops of the doors as they swung back; they were thus enabled to hear and to see. Miss Wharton was not present to-day, and has been unable to leave her room since yes¬ terday morning. The rial has proved too great a burden upon her, and she is now re¬ ceiving medical attention. Mrs. Wharton and those with her had again to-day to pass through tiles of eager men and women, and her carriage was surrounded by a large crowd. Kev. A. M. Randolph, rector of Emmanuel P. E. Church, Baltimore, was in conversation with her lor a few minutes after the close of Mr. Syester’s argument. During the delivery of Mr. Syester’s argu¬ ment to-day, Mrs. Wharton was very calm, and listened attentively to all that was said. Mr. Syester showed that he was determined to analyze the case to the utmost of his abili¬ ties, and urge his views upon the jury in a forcible manner, aud was heard with marked attention and several times caused slight laughter among the crowd by bis comments upon the testi¬ mony of the medical witnesses for the de¬ fence. He will close to-morrow, and the case will probably he given to the jury between 12 and 1 o’clock. To-morrow will be the most exciting day of the trial, and the crowd will doubtless be very great. Among those present to-day were Hon. John Thompson Mason, Secretary of State; Drs. Williams, Miles and Chew, Col. H. D. Loney, Wm. P. Preston, Commodore Decatur, Com¬ mander j. S. Skerrett, Jas. McClure, Hon. Jus. T. Earle and several others of prominence. EfiE,'E' , K'.§Ey her in giving General Ketchum that fiual dose ? She stood and watched the dying ago¬ nies of the man. and when she saw that there was no more hope for him, then she went away and took with her the instruments she, had used They never left her hands, and she carried them away with her. These circum¬ stances were all suspicious enough. The United States had been ransacked for wit¬ nesses to testify to Mrs. Wharton’s character, lmt the great body of those who knew her in Baltimore are not here; they are as silent as the grave. Then, too, what has the question of character to do with a case in which tho cir¬ cumstantial evideucesare all cogent and forci¬ ble? It had nothingmore to do with the case; than it had to do with removing the sus¬ picions of which Mr. Steele had spoken so earnestly. When Mrs. Wharton was told that poison had been found in Geueral Ketehum’s body, and in the vessels in her house, what: did she do? Did she act as anybody would j have done when they were told that a friend ' had been poisoned? No; she said if tartar emetic had been found in his stomach, he put it there himself. She not only acquitted her ! servants, did nothing, made no search, but was cold-blooded enough to suggest that, the friend who had died in her house had him- . self taken tho poison. Where was her hu¬ manity in that? Here Mr. Syester, in eloquent | language, begged the jury to cousider the sig- I niticance of that fact. General Ketchum was i hardly dead before Mrs. Wharton had her hands on bis estate. When his clothes were , packed no vest was to be found. Mr. Syester referred, at some length, to the testimony about the vest, and said that all the probabili- ; ties were that Mrs. Whartou had the vest, i And she had a motive in having it, for the State still claimed that she owed I General Ketchum $2,000. Mrs. Cottmau’s testimony was the merest child’s play that was ever introduced into’a criminal cast;.. Tho defence did not dare to ask her if there were any scraps of paper on the hearth before she saw those which they claimed were those of ; the note she owed General IC. Mr. Syester next addressed himself to the testimony ag to the bonds, and claimed that it was absurd to believe that Mrs. Wharton would have been paying General K. 10 per cent interest on i $2,000 when he hold $1,000 of her bonds, bear- ; ing only 5 per cent. The defence had proven that Nellie had bonds and enough money to take them across the water, and they had the right to prove that Mrs. Wharton, too, had bonds. But they j did not attempt to do it. If they could bavo < done it they would havo done it, as sure as sunrise. Mr. Syester next addressed himself to the proof (if Mrs. Wharton’s indebtedness, and contended that it was sustained by bis papers. I Earnest objection was here made by Mr. Steelo t to a reference to the bank book, and, after some excited discussion between counsel, Mr THE WHARTON-KETGHUM TRIAL. m t Syester said the Court would have ruled out uich testimony as irrelevant if it had been of¬ fered, and it was material to the main issue Mr. Syester next asked the jury to consider ■■he acts of Mrs. Wharton in attempting to get Mrs. Chubb’s mind so confused about the purchase of tartar emetic that she would not be able to testify at all about it. . The defence had charged that the whole University of Maryland was influenced by prejudice, but such was not the case. In conclusion, Mr. Syester reminded the jury in an earnest tnanner, that they had solemnly pledged themselves to a true deliverenee make between the State of Maryland and the prisoner. He concluded at exactly 2 P. M., having argued the case for six hours and a half. His effort in this great trial was such anoneaswell became him as the chief judi¬ cial officer of Maryland. The Chief Judge then called for the indict¬ ment, and directed Deputy Sheriff Bryan to carefully perform the duty the law imposed upon him. Mr. Bryan then, amid unimpres¬ sive silence, took the following oath: “You shall well and truly keep this jury to¬ gether, without meat or drink; you shall suf¬ fer no person to speak to them, neither shall yon speak to them yourself, unless it be to ask if they are agreed upon their verdict, without the permission of the Court—so help you God.” In a moment more the indictment was handed to the jury, and the Chief Judge in¬ formed the jury that the form of their verdict must he, not guilty, or murder in the first de¬ gree. The jury then retired, in charge of Deputy Sheriff Bryan, and ascended to their room in the story above the court room. During all these tryiag moments Mrs. Wharton and her daughter were very calm. Both of them were most attentive listeners to Mr. Syester’s argument. When the jury re¬ tired no word passed between Mrs. Wharton and those near her; both of them seemed to appreciate the solemn issues which had been now submitted to the jury. The crowd still remained in the court room, and all seemed determined to be present when the jury re¬ turned. In a few minutes the Chief Judge said the jury had requested to have chairs, and that the twelve chairs which had been taken from their room must he returned. Twelve ladies were accordingly dispossessed that the jury might he comfortable while they deliberated. In.a few minutes more the Chief Judge an¬ nounced that the Court would take a recess, but mentioned no limit of time. The crowd lessened, but the court room was still filled. The Judges soon left the bench, and the anx¬ ieties of the crowd seemed considerably calmed by their absence. At sixteen minutes of 3 o’clock. Sheriff Chairs came for Mrs. Wharton to re¬ turn to jail. She arose quietly, and taking his arm, left the court room. She was pre¬ ceded by her daughter and Mr. Fendall, of Washington, and Mr. Nugent, Mr. and Mrs. J. Crawford Neilson and Miss Rosa Neilson fol¬ lowed close behind. As the now famous prisoner over whose head hung the issue of life and death, passed, out, she was scrutinized by every one who could get near enough to her, and a rush was made for tho passage way, the brick walk leading to the court house door, and around her carriage, as soon as her approach was heralded by the hustle of the crowd. She was conveyed to her prison home to await a summons to reappear in court. SEir. SteeSe MairsSaal IFrey—An IBxjsSsuiaeaoia.. [We are authorized to state that the words “going with a lie in his mouth,” &c., which appeared in the report ot Mr. Steele’s speech, were used by him as generally descriptive of a detective and his business. They were not applied personally to Marshal Frey, or to his conduct in this case.] F©I£T’SVI'BE0E2B> E5AY. Annapolis, January 24,1872. At ten minutes of 10, the Chief Judge was in¬ formed that the jury had agreed. The court room was soon filled by/ an eager crowd, but few ladies being present. At twenty minutes past 10, Mrs. Wharton and her daughter, ac¬ companied by Mr. and Mrs. J. Crawford Neil¬ son, entered the court room. Mrs. Nugent and Miss Rosa Neilson were also present. Mrs. Wharton, her daughter, and her friends ap¬ peared in good spirits, as the favorable char¬ acter of the verdict was known to them. At twentv-five minutes past 10, the Chief Judge directed that the jury he brought in. At 20 minutes past 10, the jury entered. Mrs. Wharton had already been placed in the pris¬ oner’s box. At twenty-seven minutes past 10, the verdict of “Not Guilty” was rendered. The oppressive silence was broken by the calling of the jury by the clerk, and their answering. - Colonel Harwood, clerk, then said: “Gentlemen of the jury, are you agreed upon your verdictf’ There was a nod of assent by the jurors. Clerk—“Who shall answer for you?” A juror answered—“Our foreman.” Mrs. Wharton was then directed to raise her right hand. Clerk—“Gentlemen of the jury, look upon the prisoner at the bar. How say you; is she guilty of the matter whereof she stands in¬ dicted, or not guilty?” „ . ' Foreman (Franklin Dealer—“Not Guilty.” As the foreman answered, there was a slight manifestation of applause, which was instantaneously checked by the Court and bailiffs. Every eye was fixed upon the prisoner, who still stood calm and apparently unmoved, hut through the heavy black crape veil, which was not displaced, tears could be seen streaming down her face. Otherwise there was no sign of emotion. Miss Nellie wept and was deeply affected. When Mrs. Wharton left the prisoner’s box, Mr. Steele, Mr. Thomas and Mr. Hagner, her coun¬ sel, each shook her hand, with brief words of 'congratulation. Her friends present also took her hand,expressing gratification at the result of the trial. 172 THE WHAETON-KETCHUM TRIAL. It is understood that before agreeing the jury stood eight for acquittal and four were not fully determined on their verd’ct. It was first decided they would agree and not go in a hung jury. During the time they were out live ballots were taken, after which a verdict 6f “not guilty” was agreed to. From its commencement to its close the trial of the case has been conducted with marked ability 7 , equally 7 in the matter of evi¬ dence and argument. The State has been represented by Attorney General Syester and State’s Attorney Revell, who stand at the head of the profession as able and skillful attorney’s; while the prisoner was defended by gentlemen who have few superiors at the Bar. The Court was composed of Judge Miller, of the Court of Appeals of the State, and Chief Justice of this District, assisted by Judges Hayden and Hammond, three as able jurists as sit upon the bench of this State. In every respect the trial has been impartial and ably conducted. rhere was no charge to the jury by th Coart, the Constitution ox Mary’laud contain ing a provision that in criminal cases thejur shall be judges of the law as well as the facts Before adjourning, it was understood be tween the Court and counsel that the trial o Mrs. VV barton on the indictment for the at tempt to poison Mr. Van Ness would come of at the regular term of the Court in April. Previous to the entry of the jury in tin court room, Chief Judge Milier adinonisliei the audience that no manifestations of ap proval or disapproval would be permitted or the rendering of the verdict. After the jury had entered and taken their seats, for a few minutes a stillness and silence as solemn as ever witnessed at. a death-bed scene pervaded the room. Mrs. Wharton was standing in the prisoner’s box, with Mr. Crawford Neilson at her side, and by them stood Miss Nellie Wharton with Mr. Thomas, one of the coun¬ sel. Trials. n t .QQl 46 date ISSUED TO ml ? i . ‘71_ J& X _1 \^qq -O&t & i