s the rights of the prisoner, as one of the people, and
by due process of law the man is released from custody, free from even
a stain upon his character.

"Now let us for a moment suppose that the charge is one of murder; of
murder by poisoning, let us say. The first step is to place the
medical investigation of the facts into the hands of eminent experts.
Here we find that the very resources of the commonwealth become the
prisoner's greatest safeguard. The State having abundance of money,
places this investigation into the care of the very ablest men to be
obtained. It is not at all true, that these experts are retained
because of their known opinions. When they are retained, they have no
opinions whatever, because they are engaged to pursue an
investigation, and their opinions are non-existent until after the
conclusion of their analyses. Now, gentlemen, imagine that the
commonwealth's counsel would be base enough to dispense with an expert
witness, because his testimony would be detrimental to the hypothesis
of the prosecution, would such a course be possible? Not at all. In
the first place, the autopsy and the chemical analyses have been made
upon the tissues of the body of the deceased. In the course of this
work these tissues are rendered useless for any further analyses.
Therefore, the only investigation possible is the original one, and
the only expert opinions obtainable are those of the men, who, as I
have shown, are engaged long before they have any opinion to express.
If these men were omitted from the case then no experts could be
called to replace them; but what would be worse, these very witnesses,
discarded by the prosecution, would immediately be retained by the
defence. For, as Mr. Bliss has candidly admitted, the defence only
engages experts whose opinions are known to be favorable. That is the
difference between the paid experts of the defence, and those engaged
by the prosecution. The one is an advocate for a fee, whilst the other
is merely an independent outsider, who relates the medical facts which
he has found upon examination of the body of the deceased, and then
explains the scientific deductions which he makes from these facts.
The witness of the defence is biased; the witness of the prosecution
is not. No, gentlemen of the jury, when the experts for the
prosecution form opinions which oppose the idea of a crime, the
District Attorney has but one course which he can pursue. He must
protect t