Calamity Town

when she was reluctant.

And the testimony of old Wentworth, who had been the attorney for John F.’s father. Wentworth had drawn the dead man’s will. Wentworth testified that on Nora’s marriage she received her grandfather’s bequest of a hundred thousand dollars, held in trust for her until that “happy” event.

And the testimony of the five handwriting experts, who agreed unanimously, despite the most vigorous cross-examination by Judge Martin, that the three unmailed letters addressed to Rosemary Haight, dated Thanksgiving, Christmas, and New Year’s, and announcing far in advance of those dates the “illnesses” of Nora Haight, the third actually announcing her “death”?agreed unanimously that these damning letters were in the handwriting of the defendant, beyond any doubt whatever. For several days the trial limped and lagged while huge charts were set up in the courtroom and Judge Martin, who had obviously boned up, debated the finer points of handwriting analysis with the experts . . . unsuccessfully.

Then came Alberta Manaskas, who turned out a staunch defender of the public weal. Alberta evinced an unsuspected volubility. And, to judge from her testimony, her eyes, which had always seemed dull, were sharper than a cosmic ray; and her ears, which had merely seemed large and red, were more sensitive than a photoelectric cell.

It was through Alberta that Carter Bradford brought out how, as the first letter had predicted, Nora took sick on Thanksgiving Day; how Nora had another, and worse, attack of “sickness” on Christmas Day. Alberta went into clinical detail about these “sicknesses.”

Judge Martin rose to his opportunity.

Sickness, Alberta? Now what kind of sickness would you say Miss Nora had on Thanksgiving and Christmas?

Sick! Like in her belly. (Laughter.)

Have you ever been sick like in your?uh?belly, Alberta?

Sure! You, me, everyone. (Judge Newbold raps for order.) Like Miss Nora?

Sure!

(Gently): You’ve never been poisoned by arsenic, though, have you, Alberta?

Bradford, on his feet.

Judge Martin sat down smiling. Mr. Queen noticed the sweat fringing his forehead.

* * *

Dr. Milo Willoughby’s testimony, confirmed by the testimony of Coroner Chic Salemson and the testimony of L. D. (“Whitey”) Magill, State Chemist, established that the toxic agent which had made Nora Haight ill, and caused the death of Rosemary Haight, was arsenious acid, or arsenic trioxid, or arsenious oxid, or simply “white arsenic”?all names for the same deadly substance.

Henceforth prosecutor and defense counsel referred to it simply as “arsenic.”

Dr. Magill described the substance as “colorless, tasteless, and odorless in solution and of a high degree of toxicity.”

Q. (by Prosecutor Bradford)?It is a powder, Dr. Magill?

A.?Yes, sir.

Q.?Would it dissolve in a cocktail or lose any of its effectiveness if taken that way?

A.?Arsenic trioxid is very slightly soluble in alcohol, but since a cocktail is greatly aqueous, it will dissolve quite readily. It is soluble in water, you see. No, it would lose none of its toxicity in alcohol.

Q.?Thank you, Dr. Magill. Your witness, Judge Martin.

Judge Martin waives cross-examination.

Prosecutor Bradford calls to the stand Myron Garback, proprietor of the High Village Pharmacy, Wrightsville.

Mr. Garback has a cold; his nose is red and swollen. He sneezes frequently and fidgets in the witness chair. From the audience Mrs. Garback, a pale Irishwoman, watches her husband anxiously.

Being duly sworn, Myron Garback testifies that “sometime” during October of 1940?the previous October?James Haight had entered the High Village Pharmacy and asked for “a small tin of Quicko.”

Q.?What exactly is Quicko, Mr. Garback?

A.?It is a preparation used for the extermination of rodents and insect pests.

Q.?What is the lethal ingredient of Quicko?

A.?Arsenic trioxid. (Sneeze. Laughter. Gavel.)

Mrs. Garback turns crimson and glares balefully about.

Q.?ln highly concentrated form?

A.?Yes, sir.

Q.?Did you sell the defendant a tin of this poisonous preparation, Mr. Garback?

A.?Yes, sir. It is a commercial preparation, requiring no prescription.

Q.?Did the defendant ever return to purchase more Quicko?

A.?Yes, sir, about two weeks later. He said he’d mislaid the can of stuff, so he’d have to buy a new can. I sold him a new can.

Q.?Did the defendant?I’ll rephrase the question. What did the defendant say to you, and what did you say to the defendant, on the occasion of his first purchase?

A.?Mr. Haight said there were mice in his house, and he wanted to kill them off. I said I was surprised, because I’d never heard of house mice up on the Hill. He didn’t say anything to that.

Cross-examination by Judge Eli Martin:

Q.?Mr. Garback, how many tins of Quicko would you estimate you sold during the month of October last?

A.?That’s hard to answer. A lot. It’s my best-selling rat-killer, and Low Village is infested.

Q.?Twenty-five? Fifty?

A.?Somewhere around there.

Q.?Then it’s not unusual for customers to buy this poisonous preparation?purely to kill rats?

A.?No, sir, not unusual at all.

Q.?Then how is it you remembered that Mr. Haight purchased some?remembered it for five months?

A.?It just stuck in my mind. Maybe because he bought two tins so close together, and it was the Hill.

Q.?You’re positive it was two cans, two weeks apart?

A.?Yes, sir. I wouldn’t say it if I wasn’t.

Q.?No comments, please; just answer the question. Mr. Garback, do you keep records of your Quicko sales, listed by customer?

A.?I don’t have to, Judge. It’s legal to sell?

Q.~ Answer the question, Mr. Garback. Have you a written record of James Haight’s alleged purchases of Quicko?

A.?No, sir, but?

Q.?Then we just have your word, relying on your memory of two incidents you allege to have occurred five months ago, that the defendant purchased Quicko from you?

Prosecutor Bradford: Your Honor, the witness is under oath. He has answered Counsel’s question not once, but several times. Objection.

Judge Newbold: It seems to me witness has answered, Judge. Sustained.

Q.?That’s all, thank you, Mr. Garback.

Alberta Manaskas is recalled to the stand. Questioned by Mr. Bradford, she testifies that she “never seen no rats in Miss Nora’s house.” She further testifies that she “never seen no rat-killer, neither.”

On cross-examination, Judge Martin asks Alberta Manaskas if it is not true that in the tool chest in the cellar of the Haight house there is a large rat trap.

A.?Is there?