hich, for culpable carelessness
and inexcusable omissions, stands unrivaled. Not a single organ in
the whole body was thoroughly examined, and many of the more important
parts were not looked at. Death, preceded by the symptoms exhibited
in the case of Miss Stennecke, occurs not infrequently from insidious
disease of the kidneys, yet these organs were not taken out of the
body. The stomach was examined chemically by Professor Aiken of the
University of Maryland, who reported that he had found prussic acid,
and who testified on the trial that Miss Stennecke had received a
fatal dose of that poison. When, however, his evidence was sifted, it
was discovered that he had only obtained traces of the poison by the
distillation of the stomach with sulphuric acid. As saliva contains
ferrocyanide of potassium, out of which sulphuric acid generates
prussic acid, the latter substance will always be obtained by the
process adopted by Professor Aiken from any stomach which has in it
the least particle of saliva. If, then, the professor did really get
prussic acid, without doubt he manufactured it.

Dr. Hermann, however, testified that Miss Stennecke, whom he saw on
the morning of her death, must have died of a compound poison, because
her eye looked like that of a hawk killed by himself some years before
with a dose of all the poisons he had in his apothecary's shop. Dr.
Conrad confirmed the assertion of Dr. Hermann, that Miss Stennecke
could not have died from a natural cause, and testified that as the
liver was healthy, therefore the kidneys must have been so too--a
conclusion which could only have been evolved from his inner
consciousness.

In vain Professor Wormley protested, declaring that it was impossible
Miss Stennecke could have been killed by prussic acid, because that
poison always does its work in a few minutes, if at all, whereas Miss
Stennecke lived nearly twenty-four hours after the alleged poisoning.
What did it matter that Dr. Conrad had shown himself by his
post-mortem examination ignorant of the first rudiments of legal
medicine, and that Dr. Hermann was a village doctor of the olden
type dragged into court from a mediaeval contest with the diseases of
simple country-folk, while Professor Wormley had devoted his life to
toxicology and achieved a world-wide reputation? What did it matter
that the written words of all authorities upon such subjects in every
land were in absolute accord with Dr. Wormley? Under the r