Thursday, 7th August 1913 Dr. Harris Testimony is Attacked by Defense Expert

Reading Time: 58 minutes, [9726 words]

CENTRAL FIGURES DURING DRAMATIC MOMENTS IN TRIAL OF LEO M. FRANK

HOOPER, OF THE PROSECUTION, ARGUING FOR THE RETENTION OF THE CONLEY TESTIMONY

"BREWER ON COURT ROOM"

DR. HARRIS, ON THE STAND, TELLS ABOUT HIS EXPERIMENTS WITH CABBAGE

PAGE 1, COLUMN 6

STATE FINISHES TESTIMONY AND DR. LEROY CHILDS BEGINS EXPERT EVIDENCE FOR DEFENSE

Dr. Childs Characterizes Conclusions Similar to Those Made by Dr. H. F. Harris and Dr. J. W. Hurt as Remarkable

Guesses He Says Cabbage Is Most Indigestible of All Vegetables and Might Stay in Stomach for Many Hours

DEFENSE IS EXPECTED TO PUT UP CHARACTER WITNESSES IN VIEW OF JUDGE ROAN'S RULING

Dalton Swears He Has Visited Pencil Factory in Company With Women, That Frank Knew of His Presence and That Jim Conley, the Negro Sweeper, Was There He Tells of Frank's Visitors

When recess was ordered at 12:30 o'clock Wednesday in the trial of Leo M. Frank, charged with the murder of little Mary Phagan, Dr. Leroy Childs, called by the defense as its first witness, was on the stand. Dr. Childs had already testified in answer to a hypothetical question framed by Attorney Reuben R. Arnold, that a post mortem examination nine days after death would not show whether a blow on the head, such as that described by Attorney Arnold, had produced unconsciousness, or whether it had been delivered before or after death. Dr. Childs declared that such a blow as that described by Mr. Arnold might even have produced death. He characterized any statement to the effect that such a blow procured unconsciousness and that it could not have produced death, as nothing short of a remarkable guess.

Dr. Harris also declared that cabbage was the most indigestible of all vegetables and that it might remain in the stomach as long as four hours and a half. Looking at the cabbage taken from the stomach of Mary Phagan and submitted as evidence at the Frank trial, Dr. Childs said that it was impossible to tell how long this food had remained in the stomach.

Dr. Childs followed Dr. H. F. Harris, secretary of the state board of health, who was the concluding witness for the state. At the close of Dr. Harris' cross-examination, the state rested. Answering the questions of Attorney Arnold, Dr. Harris reaffirmed the testimony given by him previously; namely, that Mary Phagan was killed within less than an hour after eating the cabbage and bread found in her stomach; that the cause of her death was strangulation; that the blow on her head produced unconsciousness but could not have produced death and that she had suffered violence immediately before she was killed.

It is the evident purpose of the defense as shown by the testimony already drawn from Dr. Childs to vigorously dispute the evidence of Dr. Harris fixing the time of the little girl's death. Other medical experts, no doubt, will follow Dr. Childs.

It is now believed that the defense will put Frank's character in evidence, as the state has already succeeded in making an attack upon it through the testimony of Jim Conley, the negro sweeper, and C. B. Dalton. Should the defense put up witnesses to prove Frank's good character, the state will be permitted to rebut this testimony with any evidence it may have that is detrimental to Frank's character.

C. B. Dalton was the first witness called by the state Thursday morning. Attorney Reuben R. Arnold objected to each and every question and each and every answer of Dalton's testimony on the ground that it would be irrelevant, prejudicial and unjust. The objection was entered before Dalton began to testify and was overruled by Judge Roan. Dalton swore that he had visited the National Pencil factory with Daisy Hopkins, that Jim Conley, the negro sweeper, was always present and that Frank had received women visitors in his office. Dalton gave no specific dates. He was cross-questioned by Attorney Rosser.

When Thursday's session started Deputy Sheriff Plennie Minor, in charge of the court room, and his several assistants announced that every spectator who disturbed the court by applauding any decision or any action in the case, would be promptly ejected. The deputies are determined to prevent a reoccurrence of the scene of Wednesday, when Judge Roan announced his important ruling on the testimony of Conley.

If there is any more applause it is probable that the court room will be cleared.

COURT CONVENES.

A number of medical students stood in line at the court house door for a couple of hours, Thursday morning, and were among those early arrivals who gained admittance to the court when the doors were opened. They were there, some of them explained, to hear the further testimony of Dr. H. F. Harris, secretary of the state board of health, whose evidence is vital to the state's charge insofar as it tends to prove that because of the undigested cabbage in Mary Phagan's stomach the little girl was killed within thirty to forty minutes after she ate her last meal at home.

In other respects, the prelude of the court's convening was as usual. Leo M. Frank, the accused, arrived early, and breakfasted in an ante-room of the court. Mrs. Frank, his wife, arrived later and joined him in the ante-room. About half of the crowd that wanted to get in, found room. The remainder was stopped at the doors.

The name of C. B. Dalton was called as the first witness. Before he arrived in court, Attorney Arnold arose to object to each and every question directed to the witness, and every answer made by him, on the ground that his testimony would be irrelevant, immaterial and prejudicial.

DALTON TESTIFIES.

"I overrule your objection," said Judge Roan. "Go ahead, Mr. Dorsey."

Dalton was sworn.

"Do you know Leo M. Frank?"

"Yes."

"Do you know Daisy Hopkins?"

"Yes."

"Do you know Jim Conley?"

"Yes."

"Do you work at the National Pencil factory?"

"No."

"Have you ever been there?"

"Yes, four or five times with Daisy Hopkins."

"Did you go to the office?"

"Yes."

"Was Frank there?"

"Yes."

"Then did you go to the basement?"

"Yes."

"Where in the basement?" The diagram was handed to the witness. Dalton pointed to the inclosure behind the partition alongside the boiler.

"Did Frank know you were there?"

"He knew I was in the building. I don't know about the basement."

"Was Jim Conley there?"

"Yes."

"Who was with Frank?"

"Why, sometimes two and sometimes

(Continued On Page 4, Col. 1.)

PAGE 4, COLUMN 1

DEFENSE BEGINS THE INTRODUCTION OF EVIDENCE

(Continued From Page 1.)

one young woman."

Mr. Rosser took up the cross-examination.

ROSSER'S QUESTIONS.

"When was the first time you visited Frank's office?" asked Mr. Rosser.

"It was some time last fall. I don't remember the month."

"What time of day was it?"

"In the evening."

"Who was in there with Mr. Frank?"

"I don't know their names."

"Were they ladies or gentlemen?"

"Ladies."

"How many were in there?"

"Sometimes there were two and sometimes there were more."

"Do you know whether it was his stenographer or not?"

"No, sir."

"When was the second time you saw him?"

"I don't remember. I was in his office three or four times, but I don't know the dates."

"Who introduced you to Mr. Frank?"

"Miss Daisy Hopkins."

"When did you see Conley there the first time?"

"About the first of January."

"What was he doing?"

"He was sitting near the door when I went in."

"Was the door open when you came back out?"

"Well, he got up and opened it."

WENT DOWN LADDER.

"Where did you go in the building with Daisy Hopkins?"

The witness pointed again to the enclosure in the basement.

"Did you ever go down these stairs here?" asked Mr. Rosser, indicating the back stairs which it had been testified were nailed up months ago.

"No, I always went down this ladder," said Dalton, pointing to the ladder near the elevator.

"Where have you lived for the last year, Mr. Dalton?"

The witness gave an address on Hunter street.

"Where have you worked this year?"

"For the Western and Atlantic railroad."

"What kind of work do you do?"

"Carpenter work."

"Where did you work last year?"

"I worked for contractors."

The witness enumerated several contract jobs on which he worked last year, he said.

"Have you been absent from Atlanta in the last ten years?"

"Not for more than a week at a time."

"Whom else did you work for last year beside Mr. Heflin?"

Witness mentioned a Mr. Mc Ginnis.

"Whom did you work for the year before that?"

Witness named Mr. Mc Ginnis.

"Where did you live last year?"

"337 East Hunter street."

"Can you come any nearer telling the time when you met Frank in his office than sometime between September and December?"

"I don't remember."

IN THE AFTERNOON.

"What time of day was it?"

"Between 2 and 3 o'clock."

"Was the window of his office open?"

"Sometimes."

"Were there any curtains on the windows?"

"I never saw any."

"You saw two windows in each office, didn't you?"

"I don't know."

"Which office did you go into, the inner office or the outer office?"

"I went into the one next to the stairway."

"Do you know where the desk is in Mr. Frank's office?"

"I won't be sure, except I think I saw it sitting next to the wall."

"Have you see Frank this year?"

"No."

"You haven't seen him since last fall?"

"I have not."

SAW CONLEY ON EVERY VISIT.

"Did you see Conley each time you went through the factory?"

"Yes, I saw him each time."

"Who was the watchman, at the time you saw a watchman there? Was he a negro each time?"

"Yes, he was a negro each time."

"Who was the watchman you saw there this year?"

"He was a negro."

"When did you go there this year?"

"I went once on Saturday night, I think it was in January."

"Did you ever live in Walton county?"

"Yes, sir, I lived there about twenty years."

"Where did you go when you left there?"

"Came here."

"Were you absent from Walton county at any time while you lived there?"

"Yes."

"Where did you go?"

"I went to various places."

"Weren't you absent once for quite a long while?"

"Yes, I was in Lawrenceville once for two or three years."

"When was that?"

"I don't remember."

"Why did you go there?"

"My father moved there and lived there a while."

"Did you ever go to the factory with anyone besides Daisy Hopkins?"

MET OTHER GIRLS.

"No, but I've been to the corner there several times, near the Busy Bee, waiting to meet girls, and go home with them."

"Whom did you meet there? Can you name some of them?"

The witness mentioned several names.

"Where were you born?"

"I don't know."

"Well, where were you when you waked up?"

"I was in Lawrenceville, I think."

"Up to ten years ago you lived in Gwinnett and Walton counties exclusively?"

"Yes, the longest time I was away from home was two weeks, when I was in Alabama."

Mr. Dorsey took up the re-direct examination.

"Did you pay Conley anything?"

"Did you give Jim Conley any money?"

"Yes, I gave him a quarter every time I was there."

"When was that?"

"About once a week for about six weeks."

"Did Frank ever have anything to drink in his office?"

"Yes, sometimes he would have cold drinks."

"Did he ever have anything intoxicating?"

"Yes, beer once."

"Did you ever see any of the women up there doing stenographic work?"

"No."

By Attorney Rosser: "You say you saw beer there? Every time?"

"No, not every time. Usually there'd be a waiter full of cold drinks there." The witness specified several soft drinks.

BEER AND WOMEN.

"Well, what women were there when he had the beer?" continued Mr. Rosser.

"There were two besides Daisy Hopkins."

"Describe them."

"I didn't pay any attention to anybody but Daisy."

"She must have been pretty," said Mr. Rosser.

"Just as pretty as a girl can be," returned the witness.

"Can you fix the date of the first visit any nearer than you have done?"

DETECTIVE CHIEF A SPECTATOR

Staff Photo by Winn.

N. A. LANFORD.

"No, sir."

The witness was excused, and City Detective S. L. Rosser was called.

"Did you see Mrs. Arthur White on April 28?"

"Yes."

"When did Mrs. White first mention to you that she saw a negro as she came down out of the factory about 12:50 on April 26?"

Attorney Rosser objected.

"When did you first know that she claimed to have seen a negro?"

"On May 6 or 7."

"Whom did you learn it from?"

"From her."

"Did you ever ask her about a negro?" asked Attorney Rosser.

"I don't think so. She volunteered the information."

Before the witness was excused Solicitor Dorsey asked:

"Did you search around the elevator on the first floor of the factory?"

DIDN'T FIND BLUDGEON.

"Yes, on Monday or Tuesday."

The bloody stick said to have been found by the defense, and an umbrella handle, were exhibited to the witness by the solicitor.

"Were these there when you made the search?" asked the solicitor.

"No, sir."

"You took some chips to Dr. Claude Smith, didn't you?"

"Yes."

The solicitor exhibited some chips and asked: "Are these the chips?"

"They are the same."

Attorney Rosser: "You mean they look like the same?"

"No, they are the same."

BLUDGEON THERE TWO YEARS?

"Don't you know that this roller," continued Attorney Rosser, referring to the bloody stick, "had been down there for two years?"

"It was not there when I made the search."

The witness was excused. Solicitor Dorsey tendered in evidence the bloody shirt found by the detectives at Newt Lee's house. There was no objection. The solicitor tendered the chips in evidence. Attorney Rosser objected, saying that they had not been identified properly. Judge Roan said, "That's for the jury to judge. We'll let them in."

"Now, your honor," said the solicitor, "we want the cash book and the bank book showing the cash on hand April 26 and the deposits on about Monday or Tuesday or any time during the following week; and the officials of the National Pencil company have promised to produce them. I ask your honor to help me get them here."

COURT TAKES RECESS.

"There'll be no trouble about getting the books. We'll get them here," said Mr. Arnold.

"When we get these books here, and when Dr. Harris has finished his testimony, the state will rest," said Solicitor Dorsey. The solicitor explained "Dr. Harris can't sleep at night, and it was with difficulty that I got him here at all. He has promised to come down some time during the day." Mr. Dorsey intimated that he expected the defense to go ahead, and that Dr. Harris could be interposed. Mr. Arnold and Mr. Rosser preferred not to do that, and Dr. Harris was called by telephone at his residence, agreeing to come into court at 10 o'clock. Court recessed until that hour, at 9:45 o'clock.

DR. HARRIS ON STAND.

Dr. Harris arrived in court at 11:05 o'clock and the jury was brought back and resumed its place. Dr. Harris went upon the stand.

Mr. Arnold resumed his cross-examination of the witness. Dr. Harris admitted that nervous influences and certain things taken on the stomach retard digestion, but declared that nobody knows to what extent it is retarded. There is very little known on the subject, he said.

He continued that some people say that sleep retards digestion while others say that it aids it. It is the same way with walking after a meal. He himself has not experimented much along this line, said he, and it would be only after long and tedious experiment that any definite data could be obtained.

He admitted that mental activity retards digestion to some unknown extent. Little, if anything, said he, can be told about the process of digestion by external indication when a person suffers very much from indigestion, but many people suffer mildly from indigestion for years without knowing it.

Dr. Harris said that medical men generally assume that blood goes toward the stomach to aid digestion; that there is more blood there while digestion is going on.

SOMETHING NOT DEFINITE.

He said that there are no definite facts known as to how long it takes substances not digested to pass out of the stomach. It is recognized that some substances are neither digested nor emulsified while they are in the stomach.

Mr. Arnold asked him if cabbage stalks do not sometimes pass out of the stomach without ever having been affected.

He said that they do not pass out that way from a normal subject. He admitted that grains of corn and peas, when swallowed whole, might not be affected even by a normal stomach.

He said that nobody can tell where most vegetables are digested. Parts of vegetables are digested in one place, and parts in another, he said. Mr. Arnold asked if digestion is not the most mysterious thing with which medical men have to contend.

"It is not," said Dr. Harris. Mr. Arnold asked if man is not the only animal that is omnivorous, except possibly pigs. Dr. Harris said that cats, he thought, are omnivorous, although they eat very little meat.

"I have always understood," said Mr. Arnold, "that the feline species is the most carnivorous of all. Does a wildcat eat anything but meat?"

"I don't know. I have never associated with them."

"How about monkeys?" asked Mr. Arnold.

"They don't eat flesh to any extent, although they do eat insects."

CITES FAMOUS CASE.

Dr. Harris admitted that the investigations of Alexis St. Martin in a famous Canadian case led up to all digestive experiments.

"Isn't the study of digestion in its infancy?" asked Mr. Arnold.

"I wouldn't say that," replied Dr. Harris.

"You don't know the effect on man's digestion as well as you know the effect on animals, do you?"

"You do as far as the stomach alone is concerned," said Dr. Harris.

"What is laid down by science as the hardest vegetable to digest?"

"I never heard of any."

"Well, isn't cabbage laid down as one of the hardest?"

"I have seen that statement but experiments have shown that it does not necessarily prove true."

Attorney Arnold read a transcript of the evidence of Dr. Harris on direct examination, relating to his examination of Mary Phagan's stomach.

"What did you find out about the bread you found there?"

"Practically speaking, there had been no digestion of it at all."

"Did you call in any other chemist you make these tests?"

"No, sir."

"You did it all yourself, then?"

"I did."

ONLY IN STOMACH HALF HOUR.

"And you didn't call in any representative of this man?"

"No, sir."

"All you are willing to say is that this material in the stomach had been acted on only half an hour. You wouldn't undertake to say that it had only been in the stomach that long, would you?"

"Yes, I would. It couldn't have been in there longer and not been subject to digestion."

Dr. Harris reiterated that there was absolute evidence that the little girl had suffered violence of some kind.

"Dr. Hurt made a visual observation. Was the dilation noticeable to him?" asked Mr. Arnold.

"He could not have seen with his eye all that I saw with the microscope."

Dr. Harris continued that he found dilation of the blood vessels or hemorrhages in the tissue.

"These hemorrhages, doctor were they visible to the eye?"

"No, I observed them under the microscope."

"And you couldn't tell by visual examination, whether there were hemorrhages present or not?"

"No."

"And there were hemorrhages scattered through the tissues?"

"Yes, sir."

"And the blood vessels and tissues were swollen?"

"Yes, indicating diffusion of the blood."

"Could you see the blood vessels with the naked eye?"

"No, it was necessary to use a microscope."

"How much were these blood vessels swollen?"

BLOOD VESSELS ENLARGED.

"Perhaps two-thirds more than their normal size. Maybe double."

"There is no way to determine what was their natural size?"

"No, not definitely."

"If I get a bruise on my hand, could you look through the microscope and tell whether the blood had come out of the vessels or not?"

"Yes, sir."

"I believe you said in your testimony about the skull wound that there was no pressure on the brain?"

"Practically none."

"Was the cut through to the skull?"

"Oh, yes."

"Well, what arteries were cut?"

"There are only small arteries there."

"Well, bleeding comes from the veins and arteries, does it not, doctor?"

"Yes."

"Well, what artery was on the skull at the base of this wound?"

"There was no particular large artery under it."

"Did you notice any blood vessels under the wound?"

"Not especially. There are, of course, blood vessels, veins and small arteries at that point on the skull."

"A wound bleeds more at first, doesn't it, and the flow of blood diminishes with time?"

"Yes, sir."

"Right where the injury was inflicted you would expect to find the greatest flow of blood?"

"Yes, sir."

"You say this injury couldn't have produced death?"

"No, sir, certainly not."

"Did you find any blood on the brain inside the skull and beneath this wound?"

"Yes, sir, I found about one drop of blood a sort of effusion."

"This wound couldn't have affected the mental or bodily functions?"

"Not so far as the killing is concerned."

Mr. Arnold concluded his cross-examination. Solicitor Dorsey asked some additional questions.

"With reference to these poisons that Mr. Arnold asked you about yesterday, doctor, did you find any poison in any of the membranes?"

"No, sir, there couldn't possibly have been any irritating poisons such as carbolic acid, bichloride of mercury, or other poisonous salts. If there had been they would have shown up on the membranous surfaces."

"Your examination would have developed this fact?"

"Yes, sir, any quantity of these poisons sufficient to produce an effect would have been noticeable."

CABBAGE IN EVIDENCE.

Solicitor Dorsey offered in evidence the samples of cabbage first the little jar containing the cabbage taken from Mary Phagan's stomach; second, the two jars of cabbage taken from the stomachs of other persons, alive. Mr. Arnold was willing to admit the sample taken from the dead girl's stomach, but objected to the others as illegal, irrelevant and immaterial. He said that the conditions of these other stomachs had not been shown to be the same as the condition of Mary Phagan's stomach. Solicitor Dorsey insisted that the cabbage had been cooked in the same manner for the other subjects; that it had been eaten in the same manner; that it had remained in the stomach a definite period; that these other stomachs were normal.

"We don't want to argue it," said Mr. Arnold. "We merely want to get our objection into the record."

Judge Roan permitted the introduction of the exhibits.

Solicitor Dorsey then called on the defense for the pencil factory cash book and financial statements. They were not in court, and the solicitor announced that the state rested its case.

It was agreed among the attorneys that three witnesses for the state N. V. Darley, E. F. Holloway and Harry Scott could be called back to the stand by the defense.

DEFENSE OPENS WITH CHILDS.

Dr. Leroy Childs, the first witness for the defense, branded as a couple of remarkable guesses the testimony by Dr. Harris and Dr. Hurt, who were witnesses for the state. Dr. Childs stated that he is a surgeon, and has been engaged in the practice of medicine and surgery in Atlanta for the past five years. He graduated from Michigan, said he, in 1906; served later in a hospital.

Mr. Arnold asked the witness this hypothetical question:

"Say a body was found at 3 o'clock and rigor mortis was not complete. It was embalmed at 10 o'clock. It was taken up nine days later and a post mortem performed. Behind the ear was a wound cutting through to the skull, which one doctor says was 2 1-4 and another said was 1 1-2 inches long. There was a single drop of blood on the inside of the skull, but this did not in any way affect the brain or brain tissues. Could a physician performing this post mortem say definitely that this blow produced unconsciousness?"

ONLY A GUESS, HE SAYS.

"He could simply hazard a guess," said Dr. Childs.

"Would a blow on the body after death produce the same effects as a blow before death?"

"Yes, if it was inflicted within a certain "

(Continued on page 5, column 1.)

PAGE 5, COLUMN 1

DR. HARRIS' TESTIMONY IS ATTACKED

(Continued From Page 4.)

certain time say one to three hours."

"Then you would say that this blow as described could have been inflicted after death?"

"Yes."

"Would any statement that it could not have been inflicted, be anything but a guess?"

"No, not if the wound has been fully described to me."

"The difficulties of getting definite information would be increased or decreased on account of the fact that a post mortem examination was made nine days after death?"

"They would be increased because certain physical changes set in even after a body has been embalmed, and the burying and the exhumation in themselves would make a change. For instance, a body a few hours after death weighs less than at the time of death."

"With such a blow as I have described, could a person have remained conscious'?"

"Certainly."

"Doctor, people have remained conscious with their skulls fractured, haven't they?"

"In my own experience I have seen people conscious with both tables of the skull fractured."

"Have you ever heard any opinion given as to unconsciousness with so little data before physicians?"

"No, I have not."

"In fact, doctor, a blow might not show anything on the surface and at the same time render a person unconscious or even produce death?"

"A blow could produce death with only a slight swelling," said Dr. Childs. "I have known of persons being rendered unconscious for many hours by the blow from a sandbag, and even of their being killed without any external sign."

"In that case, doctor, the concussion causes the death? And where concussion causes the death, there is seldom any external sign, is there?"

CABBAGE HARD TO DIGEST.

"No, very seldom."

"How is cabbage classed among foods?"

"As a carbo-hydrate."

"Are carbo-hydrates considered hard to digest?"

"Not as a fast rule."

"Is cabbage considered a hard food to digest?"

"It is generally considered the hardest."

"Doesn't cabbage vary? Compare an old woody cabbage with a fresh, watery one?"

"I can only say that fresh vegetables are easier to digest."

"Where does digestion begin?"

"In the mouth."

Attorney Arnold directed the attention of the witness to the samples of cabbage produced by Dr. Harris. Designating the sample taken from Mary Phagan's stomach, he asked: "Tell me if that is masticated thoroughly, in your opinion?"

"Certainly not thoroughly," responded Dr. Childs.

"Does that cabbage look like it had been thoroughly cooked?"

"I wouldn't say."

"Is raw cabbage harder or easier to digest than cooked?"

"Raw is easier."

"What per cent of carbo-hydrate is there in cabbage, doctor?"

"Between 7 and 8 per cent."

"This is all of the cabbage affected by saliva in the mouth, is it not?"

"Yes."

DIGESTION RETARDED IN STOMACH.

"Does the stomach do anything toward digestion of cabbage?"

"It has a physical influence. By churning it may break up particles of cabbage."

Dr. Childs said that the juices of the stomach retard rather than aid the digestion of cabbage, and that the next real stage of digestion after cabbage leaves the mouth is in the intestine.

"Where is the process of digesting cabbage finally completed?"

"In the small intestines."

Attorney Arnold directed the attention of the witness again to the cabbage taken from Mary Phagan's stomach. "How long would it be before you would expect pieces such as that to get out of the stomach?" he asked.

"Authorities give four and a half hours for cabbage to pass out. There is no absolute rule, however. This varies widely."

"If you find cabbage up to the very second it leaves the stomach, it is still undigested, isn't it?"

"In a sense, yes."

"Isn't it possible for parts of the cabbage to pass through all the digestive organs and out of the body still undigested?"

"Yes."

"Aren't there many things that retard digestion?"

RETARDING DIGESTION.

Dr. Childs then named a number of physical influences which would retard digestion, among them being excitement and violent exercise.

"Well, you might find substances in the stomach that had remained there a long time, might you not?"

"Yes."

"Hasn't every stomach its individual idiosyncrasies much as has the brain?"

"Absolutely."

Attorney Arnold asked another hypothetical question. "Take a human body that has been interred nine days. Take out the stomach and in the contents find cabbage and certain remnants of wheat bread. Could you hazard an opinion or a guess that that person had taken it into his stomach one-half or three-quarters of an hour before death?"

"I certainly could not. I don't think anybody could hazard a guess within an hour."

COURT RECESSED.

"Well, isn't it impossible for anybody to state accurately and positively within two hours, doctor?"

"I wouldn't attempt to advance such an opinion myself."

"How long is it possible for cabbage like this to remain in the stomach?"

"I should say it is possible for it to remain there twelve hours."

"Digestion begins slowly, doesn't it doctor?"

"Yes."

"Now, take common wheat biscuits. How long before they commence to pass out of the stomach?"

"I should say two hours and a half."

Court recessed at 12:30, with Dr. Childs still on the stand under direct examination by the defense. He will resume at 2 o'clock.

PAGE 5, COLUMN 2

DEFENSE FIGHTS HIS TESTIMONY

Staff Photo by Winn.

DR. H. F. HARRIS.

Secretary of state board of health, who has been a great aid to state in Frank case. Having failed to shake him on cross-examination, the defense is seeking to contradict his testimony by that of other experts.

PAGE 8, COLUMN 1

JUDGE ROAN DECIDES CONLEY'S TESTIMONY MUST STAND

Defense Asks Mistrial When Crowd in the Court Applauds Announcement of the Decision Judge Roan, However, Refuses to Stop Trial Dr. Harris on Stand During Afternoon and Again Asserts That Mary Phagan Suffered Violence Just Before Death Dalton Called to Corroborate Conley But Court Adjourns Before

He Testifies

Dr. H. F. Harris, secretary of the state board of health, was the first witness called for the Wednesday afternoon session after the jury was called into the room. The direct examination under Solicitor Dorsey was resumed.

Dr. Harris again asserted very positively that Mary Phagan had suffered violence of some kind immediately preceding her death, and explained in detail his reasons for reaching this conclusion.

The secretary of the state board of health was excused from the witness stand at 5 o'clock before his cross-examination had been finished. He was very weak, he said in response to the court's inquiry, and was permitted to stop his testimony, which was resumed Thursday. Mrs. J. W. Coleman, mother of Mary Phagan, was the last witness examined before adjournment.

C. B. Dalton, mentioned by Conley, as having visited the factory in company with two women, was called just before court adjourned but did not testify.

Great excitement prevailed in the court room Wednesday afternoon when Judge L. S. Roan announced his decision to reverse himself on his ruling of Tuesday, striking out parts of Conley's testimony. From the spectators' gallery the crowd cheered the decision, but quieted down after Attorney Arnold, for the defense, made a motion to clear the room. Judge Roan refused to clear the court of spectators but warned the spectators not to repeat the demonstration. Attorney Arnold then moved for a mistrial, in this he was also overruled by the judge.

Judge Roan, in his ruling, held that all of Conley's testimony would remain in the record of the case and that Solicitor Dorsey would be allowed to introduce witnesses to corroborate the negro's charges against Frank's conduct in his presence. As to allowing the Epps boy to testify as to what Mary Phagan told him regarding her fears of Frank, the judge held that inadmissible and the newsie will not be recalled.

When court reconvened at 2 o'clock, Solicitor Dorsey resumed his argument. The solicitor renewed his contention, citing authorities to back it up, that as a general rule failure to make objection to incompetent evidence at the time of introduction is a waiver of that right.

In this instance, said he, the court should hold that the defense had waived the right to object. In case of doubt as to the relevancy of evidence, said he, it should be left to the jury for that body to determine its weight.

The solicitor said that he cited several Georgia cases, among them some very old decisions. The solicitor stated that no fixed rule can be observed regarding the introduction of evidence of acts similar to the crime charged. The law says simply, says he, there must be some logical connection which proves or tends to prove the other. It must be one of a system of mutually dependent crimes, said he.

"I intend to show," said he, "that this crime was one of a system of mutually dependent crimes."

The solicitor contended that he had the right to introduce evidence of transactions which serve to illustrate the state of mind of the defendant or his intention or purpose.

"The fact," he said, "that they are simply crimes, does not make them inadmissible."

DORSEY QUOTES AUTHORITIES.

The solicitor asked if he should proceed with argument on his second proposition involving his right to enter testimony corroborative of Conley's. Judge Roan told him to proceed with that argument.

While the solicitor argued Attorney Rosser sat in the witness' chair, lolling back, with his legs crossed, rubbing his head.

Solicitor Dorsey emphasized the fact that he was quoting the laws and decisions of Georgia courts.

"We object, your honor, to the ruling out of this evidence which is already in and permeates the whole record, due to the direct and cross-examinations, and we want to introduce other evidence along the same line," said the solicitor.

Judge Roan asked what he expected to show by Dalton's testimony.

"I expect to show that what Conley has said about these things is true," said the solicitor.

"What do you expect to show by George Epps?" asked the judge.

"I expect to show by him that when little Mary Phagan left him at Marietta and Forsyth streets to go to her death at the factory, she told this boy she feared Frank because he had tried to flirt with her, and that she expressed apprehension concerning his attitude toward her.

SHAKES FINGER AT FRANK.

"This man," said the solicitor, shaking his finger in Frank's face across the table, "this man here was her superintendent. He paid her off, and she had expressed a fear of him. This is relevant and material evidence and we want to get it before the jury."

Solicitor Dorsey read a number of decisions, announcing after each one, "That's a Georgia decision;" and they were all in murder cases, and tended to sustain him in his contention, that the evidence was admissible, and that after it had gotten into the records and been sealed there by cross-examination it could not be withdrawn.

He argued by these decisions that facts having a bearing on the case apparently might be disassociated from the crime itself, but still could be material to the charge.

Attorney Hooper took the floor.

"Your honor, I am going to obey your admonition and be brief in this argument. It is simply a question of law the law of Georgia, and that's what controls this court; not the decisions of the supreme courts of California and Minnesota.

"With all of the authorities which we have here at hand, there is no necessity for argument. I want to call your honor's attention to the rule and the law which govern this issue, and it is laid down here in the 88th Georgia, page 76, in plain Anglo-Saxon words." Mr. Hooper read it. It was of the effect that objections must be registered at the time testimony is offered.

Mr. Hooper made the further point that even if evidence was inadmissible at the time it was offered, the state has examined the witness on his testimony, and the defense has cross-examined him on it, and if it is ruled out now it only carries with it just what the negro related as to these incidents and not what was developed from him under direct and cross-examinations, which runs clear through the records.

Mr. Hooper called the court's attention to the fact that the testimony was necessary in order to explain what could not be explained without it Conley's signals and answers at the factory that day. Mr. Hooper read from a number of law books. As he lifted each from the table he reiterated "This is a Georgia authority."

Continuing, Attorney Hooper declared that the testimony already introduced would explain the signals, and show what was meant by the stamping and the whistling.

Attorney Arnold concluded for the defense, citing authorities. He argued against the admissibility of the statement that Mary Phagan is said to have made to the Epps boy relative to going to the factory. After citing two authorities, he asked the judge if the court wanted to hear more. Judge Roan said no.

Judge Roan then asked Attorney Arnold what he had to say about the state's right to put Dalton on the witness stand.

"Well, I don't know what they expect to prove by him," said Attorney Arnold.

Solicitor Dorsey stated, "I tell you I expect to corroborate Conley's story."

Attorney Arnold cited an authority against the introduction of this evidence.

At the conclusion of this argument, Judge Roan announced he was ready to rule.

"I have thought about this thoroughly," he said, "and my mind is now made up. I doubt its admissibility as an original proposition, but it has been examined and cross-examined. It is impossible to withdraw it from the minds of the jurors. I could erase it from the records, but I am going to let it remain."

GREAT APPLAUSE.

A demonstration of applause broke out in court among the spectators. The deputy sheriffs immediately rapped for order and Attorney Arnold arose.

"I am going to make a motion to clear the court room," said he.

Judge Roan said: "If there is another demonstration of this kind I will order it cleared."

The excitement subsided, and the court room became normal again.

"Your honor, I ask for a mistrial," declared Mr. Arnold.

"Why, the jury wasn't in here," said the judge.

"They might have heard it anyway," continued Mr. Arnold.

"Well, I'm not going to stop this case," said Judge Roan. This was construed by the attorneys as a definite overruling of the motion.

Mr. Arnold stated privately a few moments later that he had made his motion for a mistrial under the misapprehension that the jury was in court. He had withdrawn the motion, he said.

RULES OUT EPPS BOY.

"I am going to do what I think is right in this case," said Judge Roan, "no matter whom it pleases or displeases. I hold that the additional testimony of the Epps boy is wholly inadmissible."

Attorney Rosser arose.

"I want your honor to say whether or not you admitted that Conley testimony because it was admissible," said he, "for I am going to show line by line how it can be taken from the record. I will show you that it can be ruled out without affecting the record."

"Well, you can do that, Mr. Rosser, but I am not going to stop this trial now in order to let you do it," said Judge Roan. "You can do that at some other time. I am not going to let any of this argument get to the jury."

"Well, then your honor," said Mr. Rosser, "I just want to know if you are going to let the Conley testimony remain in the record."

"Yes, I am," said the judge.

"Now, your honor," said Mr. Rosser, "we object to the testimony of Dalton upon any subjects or about any time except things that occurred on that particular day, April 26."

RULING ON DALTON.

"I will hold," said Judge Roan, "that the state shall have the right to corroborate Conley. I don't know what Dalton will testify, but it will be time enough then to discuss his testimony when he goes on the stand."

"Then there's no use for us to object. You are going to admit it," said Mr. Rosser.

"Yes, I purpose to let the state corroborate Conley's story. However, I cannot rule as to Dalton's testimony until he gets on the stand and I see what it is going to be."

DR. HARRIS RECALLED.

Judge Roan directed that the jury be brought in. The state recalled Dr. H. F. Harris, secretary of the state board of health, to the stand. On account of Dr. Harris' illness, and evidently because it was anticipated that he would be kept on the stand some time, the deputy sheriff brought in a big leather upholstered swivel chair, to make it comfortable for him.

Mr. Dorsey resumed his direct examination of Dr. Harris.

"What are your specialties in medicine," asked the solicitor.

"Pathology, diagnosis and chemical analysis."

DIED OF STRANGULATION.

"What indicated to your mind that this girl, Mary Phagan, died from strangulation?"

Dr. Harris treated the question as frivolous. "Why, it was out of the question for that blow on the head to have caused it. There was but a drop of blood on the inside of the skull, and scarcely any pressure against the brain. Nothing else but the cord could have caused her death. The blueness of her hands and finger nails, and many other things, made it certain that she died from strangulation. The cord around her neck could not have caused these things had it been placed there after death."

"Doctor, did you examine the windpipe and the larynx?"

HE REPRESENTS JAMES CONLEY

Staff Photo by Winn.

Attorney William M. Smith, who clashed in the court room Tuesday with Attorneys for Leo M. Frank, who didn't want him to consult with client until Conley had finished his testimony.

"Yes, I didn't completely remove them, as I didn't want to mutilate the little girl. But I saw the whole windpipe, and there was no injury to it. In strangulation cases, injuries to the windpipe are rare."

"From the condition of her body, could you tell from what angle the cord was pulled?"

"No, sir," said the doctor.

"What about the lungs?"

"I didn't examine them very carefully, because you could tell but little about them on account of the nature of the embalming fluid used."

Dr. Harris testified that the embalming fluid's effect is only on the internal organs. It doesn't get into the skin, he said.

ASKS FOR BLOODY STICK.

The solicitor asked the defense to produce the bloody stick reputed to have been found by its agents in the factory.

"Could the wound on Mary Phagan's head have been caused by a blow from that stick?"

"I don't think it could," said Dr. Harris. "The blow must have been struck with an instrument with a sharper corner." The stick was perfectly round.

"Did you make a microscopic examination?"

"Yes, sir."

SAYS THERE WAS VIOLENCE.

"What is the value of a microscopic examination compared with an ocular or digital examination?"

"Why," said Dr. Harris, "they can't be compared. You can tell everything by microscopic examination, and practically nothing by an ocular examination."

Dr. Harris asserted very positively that Mary Phagan had suffered some sort of external violence and gave his reasons for his conclusion.

"About this cabbage "

"Yes, the other day when I was on the stand I was so ill that I really could not tell a great many things about the cabbage that I wanted to tell."

"Go ahead," said the solicitor.

Dr. Harris related some experiments that he made 15 years ago with the digestibility of cabbage. He was interrupted by Mr. Rosser, who said that as he understood it the rule is that a physician must tell what the scientific fact is and then explain the experiments from which the rule is deduced.

"I know of nobody else having made these experiments," said Dr. Harris.

Judge Roan ruled that he could give reasons why he reached his conclusions. He would rule, said he, that Dr. Harris could give the science and results of his own individual researches in connection with those of others in the scientific world.

Dr. Harris continued, saying that most ideas about the digestion of cabbage are wrong. "In my experiments I discovered that cabbage that was free from grease, freed itself from the stomach about as quickly as nearly any other article of food. Therefore I concluded this girl could have eaten this cabbage but a very short time before death probably half or three-quarters of an hour."

Attorney Rosser interposed another objection. "I don't doubt results of scientific experiments," said he. "I know, though that if I ate cabbage today it would be on my stomach tomorrow. This witness should confine himself to stating the results of scientific experiment, and not of his personal experiments."

CITES APPELBAUM CASE.

The several attorneys argued this objection. Attorney Hooper cited an authority opposing it.

Solicitor Dorsey called Judge Roan's attention to a ruling he made in the Appelbaum case. In that case, according to the solicitor, the judge permitted the introduction of evidence regarding experiments made with pistol shots directed against cloths at police headquarters to determine at what nearness the fire from a revolver would burn an object in front of it. "Isn't that instance parallel to this one?" inquired the solicitor.

Judge Roan ruled. "You can give the science of the subject not the results of individual cases."

Attorney Hooper, who had been going through some law books, arose. "Your ruling is exactly contrary to this authority."

"You should have produced that authority before I made this ruling," said Judge Roan.

Mr. Hooper explained that he got it as quickly as he could, and Judge Roan asked to hear it.

After the decision was read, Attorney Arnold spoke up. "Mr. Hooper's contention would be well taken if any two stomachs were alike," said he. "If Dr. Harris will say the stomach he experimented on was exactly the same as that of Mary Phagan, we will allow the evidence to go in."

Dr. Harris addressed Judge Roan to explain that he had once made an experiment on a girl of the same age as Mary Phagan. Attorney Arnold interrupted. "I thought I was arguing against the other attorneys," said he.

JUDGE SUSTAINS STATE.

Judge Roan ruled that Dr. Harris could continue his testimony, and the defense reserved an exception.

Dr. Harris had proceeded but a very short way in his story when Attorney Rosser interrupted him with the assertion that he was arguing and not merely stating the results of research. Judge Roan admonished Dr. Harris to proceed and leave out argument.

Dr. Harris proceeded, but was interrupted immediately again by an objection from Mr. Rosser. Dr. Harris attempted to tell of an experiment he made about 30 years ago. Attorney Rosser contended that he had no right to go back that far. There was some argument, Solicitor Dorsey answering Mr. Rosser. Judge Roan ruled with the state.

EXPEIMENTED ON OTHERS.

Dr. Harris took from his grip three bottles, which he referred to as specimens. He stated that the latest experiments which he had related were upon four persons. Two of these were experimented upon twice.

"In every instance the effect on the cabbage was practically the same," said the witness, "notwithstanding I had them swallow pieces of cabbage as large as that found in the stomach of Mary Phagan; notwithstanding that I made them eat the cabbage hurriedly or gulp it down." Dr. Harris was holding the bottles as he talked.

"We object to these exhibits," interrupted Mr. Rosser, referring to the bottles.

Judge Roan ruled that the exhibits were not in evidence yet. Before he could finish his ruling, Solicitor Dorsey interrupted him. "We know that, your honor. When we tender them, that will be another proposition. But if we can show by Dr. Harris, this expert, that he has experimented on other persons; that Mary Phagan's stomach was normal and that the stomachs of these other persons were normal; that the intact condition of the cabbage was not due to indigestion; that the cabbage was cooked by Mrs. Coleman, Mary Phagan's mother; that it was swallowed by these subjects in large pieces is your honor going to rule "

"I don't know, yet, what I'm going to rule," interrupted the judge.

"Is it possible, I was going to say, your honor, that after all this, this expert cannot tell the jury of his experiments and show them the results?"

Judge Roan inquired if the condition of the stomachs of the subjects upon whom he experimented was the same as the condition of Mary Phagan's stomach. Dr. Harris replied that the conditions were as nearly the same as it would be possible to find in different people. Dr. Harris proceeded.

"I examined Mary Phagan's stomach very carefully. It was normal in size and normal in every other particular. I examined it under the microscope, and I know that all the other subjects had normal stomachs. I could tell that by the secretions and by the other signs that physicians observe in determining the condition of a stomach."

"Your honor," Mr. Rosser interrupted, "the witness is attempting to argue and rule and testify all at the same time. He already has told enough to show that the same conditions didn't prevail in these stomachs.

"He said something about looking at one stomach with a microscope. That may mean something. I don't know. I think that these doctors are all guessers. He didn't bring out the stomachs of these other subjects and examine them with a microscope. Therefore the conditions couldn't have been the same."

Judge Roan allowed the witness to proceed.

Dr. Harris asked the solicitor to pass the specimens over to the jury, holding them out in his hand.

"Wait a minute, doctor," shouted Mr. Rosser. "You are not undertaking to direct this case, are you?"

RESULTS OF EXPERIMENTS.

The solicitor told Dr. Harris that that couldn't be done inasmuch as the specimens had not been introduced in evidence. Dr. Harris referred to memoranda concerning his experiments to which he made particular reference showed the following results: In a normal healthy boy of 14 years, digestion of the cabbage began in 38 minutes. The time of beginning of digestion in the other subjects ranged on up to 70 minutes in a full grown man with a normal, healthy stomach, said he.

"I examined with the microscope even the tiniest particles of cabbage in Mary Phagan's stomach those which she had masticated thoroughly and they had undergone practically no digestion. Within three-quarters of an hour after the subject eats cabbage you can detect with the microscope signs of digestion. This fact indicated beyond question that digestion had not gone on previous to the time the girl died or until the time when she became unconscious at least. I examined the contents of Mary Phagan's stomach chemically as well, and found that digestion had proceeded but a very short time. This is perhaps of greater importance than the microscopic examination."

"STUMP SPEECH NO USE."

"There ain't no use for the witness to make a stump speech," interrupted Mr. Rosser. "Let him give the facts."

Judge Roan directed the witness to proceed.

"As I was saying," I found 162 centimeters of food in the stomach. Practically none of the food had gone down into the small intestine. This showed clearly that the contents of the stomach had not been pushed on into the smaller intestine and this pushing usually begins about thirty minutes after eating, and within an hour the food is usually well on toward digestion."

Mr. Rosser interrupted. "Let the witness state facts. He's making a stump speech."

The witness continued. He stated that the amount of gastric juice secreted was considerably less than would occur in the average individual within an hour after eating.

"DEATH IN FORTY MINUTES."

Dr. Harris went fully into details of his examination of different acids in the stomach, and declared that they, together with the cabbage and the starch, made it possible for him to say with absolute certainty that Mary Phagan's death occurred within thirty to forty minutes after she ate her last meal at home. He declared that her digestion and her stomach were normal in every way.

As a result of questions by Solicitor Dorsey, Dr. Harris said he used a glass with which he could magnify particles taken from the stomach up to 2,000 diameters.

ARNOLD CROSS EXAMINES.

Attorney Arnold cross examined the witness.

"When did Mr. Dorsey first talk to you about this case?"

"I don't remember."

"When did you make the first examination?"

"On May 5, I think."

"Did Mr. Dorsey request you not to tell anybody about this examination?"

"He did."

"Did you comply with his request?"

"I did."

"Did he make that request as a solicitor general or as an individual?"

"He didn't say."

Dr. Harris continued: "I did not want to make any examination at all, but after talking to Mr. Dorsey he declared that I could be of great service to him, and because I liked him I consented to make the examination."

"What special examination did he tell you to make?"

"He told me to make a complete examination and to tell him all I could about it. Oh, yes; there was some suggestion at the time of poisoning, and I did make an examination for poison and found no trace."

"Wouldn't the same marks be left on the body if the cord had been placed around her neck while some other influence was at work producing death?"

"Yes, as long as the heart was beating."

NO STATISTICS POSSIBLE.

Dr. Harris declared in answer to questions, that there were no actual statistics as to the length of time it takes strangulation to produce death. He said there could be no statistics without degrees of strangulation and a knowledge of the exact time it started and the exact time death came. When strangulation was slow enough, it might take days or weeks. Drowning, he declared, does not produce the same results on the body as ordinary strangulation.

He said it was not entirely the cutting off of the oxygen that caused death from strangulation, but that other elements, such as the retention of carbonic-dioxygen poison, entered into the matter. A man's heart may beat after he is dead, said the witness. He once saw a man drown, and he was brought out while his heart still was beating, but that he could not be resuscitated. Dr. Harris said that he could not say that the man was alive when he was brought out.

"If the air is cut off from the lungs completely, how long would it be before death?"

"Nobody can say," replied Dr. Harris.

"What kind of poison did you look for, doctor?"

"I looked for alkaloids, vegetable poisons."

"Why didn't you look for mineral poisons, too?"

"There was some in the embalming fluid."

"Well, I went to the undertaker and he told me."

GAVE HIM FORMULA.

"What!" exclaimed Attorney Arnold. "Did that man give you his formula?"

"Yes."

"Why, he wouldn't even swear to it here."

"He must have thought better of me, then."

"What is prussic acid?"

"Organic poison vegetable poison. There was none present, however. Its odor is intense."

"Well, you didn't test especially for it, did you?"

"No, if it had been present the odor would have been enough."

"Did you test for nicotinic acid poison?"

"Yes, I made the usual test and found none."

"Were the contents that you took to make this poison test, in liquid or solid form?"

"Both."

"Did you make this poison test before or after the other test?"

"I made them all at the same time."

"What was the first test you made?"

"One for quantity."

"Well, how many tests did you make altogether?"

EIGHT OR TEN TESTS.

"I made six or eight, or possibly ten."

Attorney Arnold asked the witness to describe the several tests which he made. Dr. Harris explained them in scientific terms. Attorney Arnold interrupted with a score of questions to bring out details.

Attorney Arnold stopped him for a moment.

"Dr. Harris, you are talking so fast I don't know whether the stenographer is getting down what you are saying. It is very important."

The stenographer nodded his head, to show that he was getting it all right. Mr. Arnold told the witness to proceed.

ASKED ABOUT GASTRIC JUICES.

Dr. Harris stated that he found about two drops of hydrochloride acid in solution in the stomach. This is a very powerful property in digestion, and in a healthy, normal man, there are only about four drops. Mr. Arnold asked Dr. Harris a great many questions about the gastric juices, and the component parts of the gastric juices, and how they are secreted in the stomach.

The witness stated that next to hydrochloride acid, pepsin is a most important part of the gastric juices. Mr. Arnold wanted to know how much pepsin should have been in the stomach to correspond properly with the two drops of hydrochloride acid. That would depend upon circumstances, said the witness. There was no way to test the amount of pepsin. It was posible merely to tell the presence of pepsin. Pepsin, said he, is an animal product and it comes from the stomachs of cows and hogs and sheep. Mr. Arnold questioned the witness as to the next most important element in the gastric juices.

"There are no more of particular importance," replied the witness, explaining that the gastric juices consist principally of hydrochloric acid, pepsin and water.

"It is possible for an artificial gastric juice to be made, for a man to swallow with his food," said the witness; adding that the natural gastric juices cannot be separated from the stomach except by chemical action. Mr. Arnold again asked what other elements were in the gastric juices. Dr. Harris said there were several others of minor importance, one of which is rennet.

NO EXPERIMENTS ON DEAD.

Answering a question by Mr. Arnold, Dr. Harris stated that so far as he knew no experiments upon the stomachs of corpses, to determine the gastric juices' action on food eaten just prior to death, had been recorded. It would be difficult, said he, to get subjects who had died just after eating. The juices of the body "go out," very shortly after death, said he.

Dr. Harris stated that the analysis of cabbage varies greatly, that all cabbage is not the same. He declared that it is just as nourishing as any other vegetable except possibly peas, potatoes and carrots.

At 5 o'clock, after the cross examination had been on for nearly an hour, Dr. Harris showed that he was weakening under the strain. Judge Roan asked him if he would prefer to continue at another time. Dr. Harris said he would like to get a little rest. He had been out of bed but a short time, he said, and was weak. The court excused him upon his promise to return at a later time.

Dr. Harris admitted under questioning by Mr. Arnold that he had saved nothing of the contents of the stomach except the pieces of cabbage which he exhibited in the bottle. He searched carefully to see if there were traces of any in the stomach and found none.

MRS. COLEMAN CALLED UPON.

Mrs. J. W. Coleman, mother of Mary Phagan, was recalled to the stand.

There was some delay in getting Mrs. Coleman into court, and Solicitor Dorsey called J. N. Starnes, city detective, the nominal prosecutor, to the stand.

"Did you take some cabbage that Mrs. Coleman cooked, to Dr. Harris?"

"Yes, I bought some cabbage and took it to her, and she cooked it, and then I took it to Dr. Harris."

Starnes was excused without further questioning.

Mrs. Coleman took the stand.

"State the comparison between the cabbage you cooked for Detective Starnes and that which you cooked and which Mary ate on April 26."

"They were alike as nearly as I could cook them," said Mrs. Coleman. "I all but fry my cabbage. I tear it up well and cook it about an hour."

"What kind of pocketbook did Mary have on the day she left home, Mrs. Coleman?"

Attorney Rosser objected. "He's already asked her about that," said he.

Solicitor Dorsey said, "Oh, all right then; I forgot it if I did."

Mrs. Coleman left the stand.

DALTON TO TESTIFY.

C. B. Dalton was called for the state, but just after he entered the room Judge Roan adjourned court, at 5:10 o'clock, until 9 o'clock, Thursday, and Dalton was dismissed until that time.