SURPRISES FOR THE DEFENSE.
From a medical point of view, the testimony of Microscopists Tolman and Belfield, and Chemist Haines, of the Rush Medical College was exceedingly interesting. Stains from the floor of the Carlson cottage, the hair found clinging to the trunk purchased by Simonds, the hair cut from the head of the murdered man, the single thread of hair discovered on cake of soap in the kitchen of the cottage, and fresh and dried blood from the trunk itself, were the articles on which the experts had experimented. The chemist had been requested to determine whether the reddish stains were those of blood, while the task of determining the probable origin of the blood and the relation of one hair to the other was assigned to the microscopists. The evidence of all three experts was conclusive. Chemist Haines had subjected the stained chips from the floor of the cottage to four experiments, three of a chemical nature and the fourth with a microscope, and the result furnished indubitable proof that the stains were those of blood, while Microscopist Tolman, by other tests, was equally well satisfied that the blood had come from a human body. Additional tests had been made on a strand of hair found on the cake of soap, and which was lighter in color in some portions than in others, while Dr. Cronin's hair was brown. The fact that the single strand appeared light in color to the naked eye seemed to indicate that it could not have come from Dr. Cronin's head, but it was demonstrated by the experts that hairs placed on soap or other alkaline substances became bleached in a manner similar to the color of the single strand. This evidence was of vital importance as it linked the hair found in the trunk with the hair cut from Dr. Cronin's head, and went far toward proving that one of the murderers had washed his hands with the soap after the diabolical work in the parlor had been done.
A surprise was in store for the defense at this juncture of the trial, in the form of several witnesses whose identity and testimony had not before been made public. One of these, William Niemann, who kept a saloon a block and a half south of the Carlson cottage, swore that on the night of May 4th, between ten and eleven o'clock, O'Sullivan, the iceman, with two companions, one of whom strongly resembled Coughlin and the other Kunze, visited his place and drank several glasses of wine. O'Sullivan paid the bill, and the three men engaged in an earnest conversation that lasted some time, although they spoke so low that the drift of what they were saying could not be learned by the saloon-keeper. This evidence demolished the claim that O'Sullivan was in bed all night on the night of the murder, and although Niemann was rigidly cross-examined he held to his story without the slightest variation.