THE MAYBRICK TRIAL.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume VII, Issue 2223, 11 September 1889, Page 2

THE MAYBRICK TRIAL.

The trial of Mm Maybrlok for the murder of her husband by poisoning In May laßt wib oomme'-ued at Liverpool on Wednesday, July 21, before Mr Jostlca Stephen and r special jary. The oonrt waa orowdad, and the exoltoment Inten&o when Mrs Maybrlck entered the dpok. No trial in EngUnd bas attracted bo much attention for ra*ny yearn. This Is dao partly to the intricacy of the oast>, and partly to the fact that the p«r ties occupied a high eoolal atatai, and aleo that the* prisoner ie a very handaomn woman. So far tho evlderoj has not differed to any! jtrent ex'enfc from that given at the Inqaflflt. Sir Oharles Rcbbsll, who repreaenta the prisoner, has been questioning the witnesses very oloßely to try end shake their testimony, but without much result. Mr Mlohael Maybrlok, the brother of the deceased, admitted that the prisoner had written to him In March expressing anxiety about her husband's habit of taking a mysterlouß powder. Mr Edwin M«ybrlok, another brother, also mentioned the new fact that the dooiors hnd suggested tha.t, as the deoofised aould retain nothing he ate, a damp olothdhouldba pluood over b(a mouth to allay (he Intense thlnt from whloh he sufFored In oroßß-pxamlnlng Dr Hnmphievs, tho deoeaaed'a mediont advdev, Sir Obarloa Rusaell Bucoaoded in making him admit that If his p»tleut had d'^i on Wednesday Instead of Sttnrdty he woald havq given a oertlfio»to of death from acute congestion i of j;he stomach, with ic^icnmatlon extending to the bowela, or ga«t^ltiq. Pfessed by Sir Obarles Bubroll, tha witness laid he oould not mention any post n\ortem symptoms In this oaern d'etuoiive of arsenical poisoning whfs'i were nob also dlsHnotlve of gastritis. Being raexamlned Dr Humphreys stated thmt he had no dnubtfl whateyerthat the deceased died of arfealoal poisoning, and thla opinion was founded pa the Bymptomß during life, the appearances after death, and tho results nf anolyßis, Mr Edward Davla, an*lyt ; c»l ohomlst of Liverpool, whose evidence had not concluded when the mail dosed, stated ♦hat he found distlnot traoes of ataenlo in a jog whloh bad oontalned arrowroot for the deceased's übo. Several medloiDo bottles also contained traoes, and Id tha f pooket of Mrs Maybrlok'a' d?e«alng-go»n weregtaini, whloh, on analysis, showed I