McKay. Both of these lawyers stood at the head of the profession. The latter, Mr. Hurlbert, attained a renown so high that in legal history he is styled the Curran of America. The great judge who presided at the trial, the eminent counsel who appeared for the respective parties, the strange circumstances connected with the case, gave the trial of McKay a deep interest. It was long and tedious, disclosing one of the most wonderful escapes from the gallows on record. The whole science of toxicology pertaining to arsenious acid, or white arsenic, was ex amined. As McKay was charged with killing his wife by this poison, all the phenomena at tending its operation on the human system were inquired into, leading to many interest ing medico-legal questions. Learned and ex perienced professors of chemistry, skilled in nice analytic tests, were examined and crossexamined. The suspicious conduct of McKay before and during the illness of his wife was proved. There was also proof introduced by the prosecution tending to show that the ac cused purchased arsenic of a druggist in a neighboring village, a short time previous to the illness of his wife. The prosecution, however, could obtain no further proof on this point than the fact that the accused had, a day or two previous, purchased some medi cine of this druggist. Neither party could prove the nature of the medicine, as the druggist could not or would not say whether there was or was not arsenic sold to McKay on that occasion. Some strange and threat ening language concerning his wife was proved to have been uttered by the prisoner. For motive prompting him to the act, the unhappy relations between him and his wife were proved. The people proposed to give in evidence the conduct of the prisoner, and the test of blood which occurred at the coroner's inquest; but this was ruled out by Judge Spencer. Hurlbert and Matthews exerted all their powers in the defence of their client. The
blood spot on the neck of the deceased fol lowing the touch of McKay had prejudiced the community strongly against him. This joined with the other strong circumstantial evidence against him rendered the defence apparently desperate. Hurlbert's cross-examination of the profes sional witnesses was conducted with so much ability, was balanced and pointed with so much medical and chemical knowledge, that to those unacquainted with him the lawyer seemed at times to be lost in the doctor of medicine or the professional chemist. His address to the jury was one of the ablest efforts of his long and distinguished career at the bar. Always laborious in preparation of his materials, luminous and forcible in their arrangement and use, strong in argument, deep in thought, critical in the analysis of the evidence, he was peculiarlyhappy in the application of all these qualifi cations to the defence of his client. The argument of Mr. Collier was equally powerful. As a legal orator he possessed that mysterious power sometimes called mag netism. An attractive delivery secured him the attention of his hearers. He seldom in dulged in superfluous flights of eloquence; but if there was anything in the range of legal literature he desired to use in his argu ment, he always had it in its appropriate place, using it with much of the elegance of Choate and the logic of Webster. Collier dealt with startling emphasis on the enormity of the offence, on the ease and se crecy with which it can be committed, and wove into his argument with great effect the history of the Italian poisoners, and the fatal but mysterious manner in which they mur dered their victim by subtle poison. He contended that very many of the sudden deaths that occur are the result of some potent but subtle poison. He pictured with thrilling effect the anguish of the dying wo man, tortured with internal fires, burning with unquenchable thirst, and racked with fearful convulsions; the husband of her youth — her natural protector — watching
