TESTIMONY OF DEFENSE WITNESS JAMES E. BURNS
[Burns was a ballistics expert.]

James E. Burns, Sworn

MR. JEREMIAH McANARNEY. This witness is a little hard of hearing.  I may have to talk loud.  If you do not hear any question I ask or the District Attorney asks, tell us and we will repeat it.
THE WITNESS. I will.
Q. (By Mr. Jeremiah McAnarney) What is your full name?
A. James E. Burns.
Q. What is your present occupation?
A. Ballistic engineer, United States Cartridge Company.
Q. How long have you been working for the United States Cartridge Company in that capacity? A. Thirty years.
Q. What has been your experience with reference to firearms? Perhaps you had better go back and pick it up, that is.  Give us your life history, in so far as you are connected with firearms.
A. Why, with different-all makes of ammunition.
Q. When did you begin, thirty years ago, you said?
A. Thirty years ago I began working for the Cartridge Company.  I have been in this business for 30 years.
Q. For whom did you go to work first?
***
A. The United States Cartridge Company.
Q. Have you been with them all this time?
A. Yes.
***
Q. Now, have you had outside experience other than working for the Company?
A. Why, naturally I am, I like shooting and I have followed the rifle game in the militia.  I have been in the militia eighteen years, followed the rifle game, shot on the Massachusetts team and won distinguished marksmanship in the United States with the rifle; with the shotgun, an expert, and shot on the Eastern team against the West in 1893 and beat them. Pistol, I won the championship of Massachusetts.
Q. Well, I realize you are talking about yourself, but we want your experience.
A. I do this and go into this so I can feel the pulse of the shooter and, you know what he wants.
A man advertising ammunition has got to know what the shooter wants in order to develop the goods to be satisfactory.  That is the idea of going into the shooting game.
Q. So that during your experience during these thirty years in the factory you have kept in touch with the actual use of the various weapons?
A. I have.
Q. In competition?
A. I have. Because that is the only way to know.  You can make ammunition to suit yourself, but the other thing is to make it suit the other fellow, the fellow who is going to buy it, and the only way you can do that is to feel his pulse, get out and shoot with them.
***
Q. You have made a study of the bullets that were found in connection with this case, have you not?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Now, I wish you would turn to any data that you have.  I will refer you to this if you need it, as you go along (indicating). Have you that slip I had the other day, showing the different kinds of right and left twist?
A. You have it there (indicating.)
***
Q. Now, I will take up.-you have examined the bullets, have you?
A. I have.
***
Q. What bullets did you examine?
A. I examined six bullets.
Q. I call the witness' attention to "Identification 15".  What is that?
A. That is a photograph of the six bullets that were called the murder bullets.
Q. The bullets that were taken from the body of the men?
A. From the body of the men, as I understood.
Q. Now, I will connect that later.  Now, will you turn to your notes and describe what those bullets are?

Bullet One

A. Bullet scratched number "1" on base, made by the Peters Cartridge Company; weight was 72.3 grains; lands .040 wide. The diameter of the lands 297 to 302.  That is, thousandths of an inch.  *** That is, the imprint that the lands made on the bullet.  You might call it the groove on the bullet.  We don't.  We call it the land mark on the bullet.  The groove, the width was 125.  The diameter was .3075.  The length of the bullet was .465.  There were six grooves and lands on the bullet.  Fifty-seven knurl marks in the cannon lure. *** The cannon lure was .035 of an inch wide.
Q. That is No.1?
A. That is No.1 here (indicating), yes, sir.
Q. Now, you have there,-that we may understand these photographs what are those different pictures representing?
A. This here (indicating) represents the direct view of one land.  The bullet was turned around so that this land on the right showed to the front in the next picture and the same all the way through so you get a complete full photograph, front view of every land that there is on the bullet.
***
Q. So that the photographs you have there show the photographs of the six bullets that were taken from the body of the deceased?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And shows them so that you get an exposure of every land and every groove of every bullet? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Now, I direct your attention-you have given us one.  Now, will you give us No. II.

Bullet Two

A. No. II bullet, U. M. C. bullet, manufactured by the Remington Union Metallic Cartridge Company.  The weight is 70.6 grains.  The width of the lands, .040.  Diameter of the lands .305, .302 and .302; taken in three measurements.  The width of the grooves is .125.  The diameter was 309, 310 and 310, measuring at 3 points.  The length of the bullet was .449 of an inch, six lands. There was no cannon lure or no knurling,-smooth bullet.
Q. You have given them all now?
A. No, that is the second.
Q. All right. Keep right on. I want them complete.

Bullet Three

A. No. III?  No. III was a Winchester bullet.  The top of the lands,-the top of one of the lands was a part of the "W" shot.  That is the trademark that the Winchester Company uses on their bullets.
Q. That identifies that as a Winchester bullet?
A. That identifies that as a Winchester bullet, and also the weight identifies it.  If you notice the Winchester bullets, that is the heaviest one of the lot.  The Winchester bullet is 74 grains.  They won't go far from 74 grains.  The lands at the base, .050.  At the top, that is up here (indicating) where it starts in to the rifling, .060.  Deformed,-you could not get a diameter, but the two diameters given were .302 and .330 of an inch.
Q. No. III, calling your attention to the twist of the bullet shown on these photographs, and I ask you how the twist on No. III compares with the others shown?
A. No. III bullet has got a left-hand twist. All the others are right.
Q. From what gun may No. III be fired, or gun or guns?
A. It could be fired from a Colt; fired from a Bayard.
Q. Is there any difference in the measurements of the lands and grooves of a Bayard 32 automatic and a Colt 32 automatic?
A. There is.
Q. Give us the difference. How near are they to each other?
A. The Bayard is .040 wide; the Colt is 50. That is the width of the lands. Do you want me to read off full measurement, full dope on the two guns?
Q. Yes.  I want the comparison.
***
A. The Colt I used in these experiments, -I did not take the blow of the Sacco.
***
Q. Then I don't want the blow unless it was of the Sacco gun.  Give me the measurements you got from the Sacco gun and then give me your Bayard measurements.  Strike that question out. Give me the measurements of No. III bullet, the one with the left twist there.  You have given
that, haven't you?
A. I have given you that.
Q. Very well, now.
A. Just a minute.  I haven't given you all.  I haven't given you the grooves.
Q. Well, I want all.
A. I stopped.
Q. I interrupted you.  I beg your pardon.  You complete bullet No. III.
A. The width of the grooves, .105 of an inch.  It is deformed.  I could not get the diameter. The length is .462. Six lands and grooves. Fifty-four knurl marks. Cannon lures, .047 wide.
Q. By "knurl marks" you mean the indentations?
A. The indentations of the knurl, tool marks on the bullet.
Q. The knurling marks, meaning those little indentations that appear there where the shell is pressed onto the lead? Perhaps I better let you complete it. Give us No. 4 now.

Bullet Four

A. No.4 bullet, made by the Peters Cartridge Company. The weight is 721/2 grains. The lands is .040 wide.  The diameter is 299, 300 and 302, measured in three points.
Q. Repeat IlIl slowly.
A. The diameter of the lands is 299, 300 and 302.  Grooves, the width, 120.  Diameter, 308, 308, 305, measured at three points.
Q. 308, 308, 305. Does that finish it?
A. No.  The length is .467.  Six lands and grooves.  Fifty-seven knurl marks.
Q. Now, take up the next bullet, please.

Bullet Five

A. And the cannon lures, .035 wide. The next bullet, No.5.  Made by the Peters Cartridge Company.  Weight, 72.1 grains.  Lands, .040.  Diameter of the lands, 302, 300, 303.  Grooves, widths, 125, 308, 308, 309. I didn't take the
***
THE WITNESS. Cannon lures, .035 wide, six lands and six grooves.  Bullet marked "X" on the base.

Bullet Six

Q. What is that, No.6?
A. No.6, do you wish to call it?  It is marked "X" on the base. Weighs 70 grains.  Lands, .040 wide. Diameter, 3023, 3035.  Grooves, widths, 125 by 308, 308, measured in two places.  The length of the bullet was .443 of an inch.  All six lands and six grooves,-in fact, all these pistols are.  No cannon lure.
***
Q. What is the make?
A. Union Metallic Cartridge Company, Remington UMC.
Q. That completes this list of bullets?
A. That completes that list, yes, sir.

***
Q. For a minute I call your attention to bullet No. III, which has a left twist. That is a 32 Winchester bullet, is it?
A. Yes, sir.
***
Q. And I was interrogating you when I switched away from it as to what gun that bullet could be fired from?
A. Well, it has the characteristics of a Colt, but I wouldn't swear that it was a Colt because,-it is deformed.
***
Q. Tell us about how much deformity there is in that bullet.
A. The lead to the rifling is corroded, showed it was corroded and fouled.
***
Q. Now, you spoke of an imperfect land on bullet No. III.  How does that imperfect land manifest itself on bullet No. III so that it may be seen?
***
A. Visible to the eye right there (indicating).
Q. Now, in what way is it visible to the eye?
A. Wider at the top by .010 of an inch than it is at the bottom.
Q. What does the fact that that groove in the bullet is wider at the top than it is at the bottom indicate?
A. It indicates that the lead was corroded and fouled.  What I mean by "fouling" perhaps might be metal fouling.  Invariably it is metal fouling.  If a gun is corroded there, this jacket-which is soft, it is only .013 of an inch thick, thirteen to fourteen thousandths of an inch thick at the base or throughout the whole bearing of course would collect metal fouling.  That is copper and zinc. That jacket is 95 and 5, copper and zinc,-95 copper and 5 zinc,-and that builds up and that would form a false land, a false measurement, and as the bullet travels along the bore, common reason will tell you if it was 15,000 pounds pressure behind it, the bullet is going to be upset at the
base.  The sluggage is greater at the base of the bullet with that 15,000 pounds behind it, say 12,000 pounds normally.  It runs from 12 to 15.  That is why you get a variation in pressure; will cause a variation in sluggage.
Q. Tell us why the groove mark in the bullet is narrower at the base than it is up towards the nose of the bullet, apex of the bullet?
A. Because the pressure there upsets the base of the bullet and conforms it to the true lands as it goes along the muzzle, showing that bullet was fired, come right down to brass tacks, showing that bullet was fired in a gun with a fouled up lead.
Q. If I understand you right the-
A. With a perfect muzzle
Q. -the bullet enters into the lead and where it enters into the lead the lead is irregular?
A. Irregular.
Q. And the bullet may take on an irregular conformation?
A. Sure.
Q. But as she goes through the nozzle, having a perfect rifling, the bullet then at its base assumes the true rifling of that gun?
A. Yes, sir, always measure the base of the true lands.
***
Q. Assuming that the lead of the gun that fired bullet No. III had been clean and normal would you have found such irregularity as exists in bullet III on this photograph?
A. I have never found it.
Q. Have you some bullets that have been fired from the-we will call it the so-called Sacco gun? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Will you produce those bullets?
A. (Witness does so.)
MR. JEREMIAH McANARNEY. I am calling the Colt automatic, for the purpose of designation on the record, the Sacco gun.
Q. How many bullets have you that were fired from the so-called Sacco gun?
A. I had eight to start.
Q. How many have you lost?
A. Two.
Q. Well, you have six with you.  All right.  Now, do those bullets that you have there show the irregularity that is shown on bullet No. III in these photographs?
A. No, sir.
Q. How are the lands and grooves on those bullets, whether regular or not?
A. Regular, clean-cut.
***
MR. JEREMIAH McANARNEY. (To the jury) *** So that the jury may understand, I would like to state No. III is supposed to be the fatal bullet that was found in the body of Berardelli.
***
Q. In the measurement given of bullet No. III, what was the measurement at the base?
A. .050.
***
Q. What is the measurement up-
A. At the top?
Q. -at the top?
A. 60.
Q. So you have .010 greater width at the top of that groove than at the base?
A. Yes.
Q. Which is the true measurement of the groove?
A. 50.
Q. Well, having in mind the appearance of No. III on the photograph there, bullet No. III, and having in mind the grooves made on the bullets fired from the Colt automatic and designated as the Sacco gun, have you an opinion as to whether the so-called fatal bullet No. III was fired
from the Sacco gun?
A. I have.
Q. Was it fired from the Sacco gun?
A. Not in my opinion, no.
Q. What is the ground and base of your opinion, and on what do you base that opinion?
A. On the 11 bullets that I examined that were fired from the Sacco gun.  It doesn't compare with it at all.
Q. In what way does it not compare with it?
A. It shows a clean cut lead all the way through, the same diameter, the same width at the top
as it does at the bottom, practically no difference.
Q. What does the fact that the groove is clean-cut all the way through coming from the Sacco gun indicate with reference to the rifling of that gun, the condition of the rifling?
A. Clean lead.
Q. That it has a clean lead?
A. Yes.
Q. In your opinion was bullet No. III fired from a gun that had a clean lead?
***
A. It was not.
Q. Is there any doubt about that?
A. No doubt in my mind, no, sir.
Q. Any other reason that you have from the appearance of the bullet that would indicate that it was not fired from the Sacco gun?
A. That is all.  The main point.  The bullet is deformed so you could not get any connecting links as to diameter. Those were wiped out.
***
A. Yes.  Oh, there was another thing about this bullet which I did not quite catch.  It has a hollow base.
Q. No. III has a hollow base?
A. Yes.
Q. What significance has that?
A. The hollow base gives it a greater chance for sluggage or upset with the pressure in going through, and so that you get the true lands at the base.
Q. Now, I show you a set of photographs which have not been marked, and I ask that they go in for identification.
(Photographs of bullets marked "Exhibit 22 for Identification.")
***
Q. What do those represent?
A. No.1 bullet, No.2 bullet,-No. 1 bullet was fired in a Steyer rifle or pistol.
Q. What calibre or bore?
A. 765 millimeters, which is meant to be a 32.
Q. Is that right or left twist?
A. It has a right twist. That is the way the foreign makers designate their guns, in metric system.
***
Q. May it be fired in a 32 gun?
A. Yes.
Q. What is No.2?
A. No.2 is U. M. C. bullet, fired in the same gun, a Steyer.  No.3 is a U. S. bullet fired in a Bayard.
Q. What twist is that?
A. Left.
Q. And then there is a gun, the Bayard gun, that has a left twist?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. The same twist as the Colt automatic?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Well, continue right along there.
A. No.4 was fired with a Steyer. No:5 was fired with a Steyer.  And "X" was fired in a Steyer and that is a U. M. C. bullet.  The others are the same.
Q. Of those photographs you have there, how many have the left twist?
A. One.
Q. That is fired from a 32 Bayard?
A. 32 Bayard.
Q. That is bullet number what?
A. No.3.
***
Q. While the jury are looking at that, I want to ask you one question.  It is in evidence here last week, I want to just look at it for a second, but,-have you ever seen a Bayard 22 revolver or pistol?
A. 22?
Q. A Bayard,-I beg your pardon,-Bayard 25?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What twist has a Bayard 25?
A. Left.
Q. Have you such a gun?
A. I believe Mr. Fitzgerald has it.
Q. Is that (indicating) a Bayard 25?
A. Yes, sir. It is a 635 millimeters, which corresponds to the 25 Colt automatic.
Q. And the 25 Colt automatic shell may be fired in that gun?
A. Yes, sir, they are interchangeable.
Q. Whether or not all the Bayards are left twist?
A. All that I have ever seen were left twist.
Q. How many different calibres of Bayard have you see?
A. Three.
Q. What?
A. 25, 32 and 380.
THE COURT. May I ask where they are made?
***
THE WITNESS. Belgium.
Q. Whether or not any of those guns are around, or to what extent are these guns around now?
A. Why, lots of them.  I had one brought to me last week by a police officer.
Q. Well, you say there are lots of them.  How long since they have become so you say there are lots of them around?
A. They are becoming common since the War.
***
Q. What have you there?
A. Those are casts of this Bayard pistol, taken from the muzzle.
***
Q. Which calibre?
A. 765, or 32, what I refer,-I call it 32.
Q. Yes.
A. And the top here where the wire is, is the muzzle.
(Mr. Jeremiah McAnarney shows casts to the Court.)
Q. What does the twist,-what do those casts show the twist of the Bayard to be?
A. Left twist.
Q. How does the twist on this exhibit show with reference to the twist in the barrel,-is it the reverse or the same?
A. It is the same.  ***
Q. What have you here (indicating)?
A. Three 25 Colt automatic bullets fired from a Bayard pistol.
Q. What would you say is the groove on that?  What is the twist, right or left?
A. Left.
***
Q. Now, I am going to divert for a few minutes, and I call your attention to the Exhibit 27, that is what?
A. Harrington & Richardson.
Q. Before I go on that-
A. 38 Smith & Wesson revolver.
***
Q. I call your attention to that gun (indicating).  What kind of a gun is it, the one to your left hand?
A. Harrington & Richardson 38 revolver.  She is 38 Smith & Wesson cartridge.
Q. Have you at my request some time within a day or two examined that gun, or last week some time?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Have you at my request examined that gun with reference to the hammer in that gun being a new hammer or not?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Is that a new hammer?
***
A. No, sir.
Q. Can you tell us why you say it is not a new hammer?
A. Well worn down where the double acting sear.
***
Q. Is there any doubt in your mind, Mr. Burns, but that is a used hammer?
***
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And are you able to say the extent?  Is there any way of determining that?  In other words, how old a gun is that?
A. Well, that gun is sixteen years old.
***
Q. And calling your attention again to this hammer, calling your attention to the edges along on the right-hand side of the hammer, what have you to say with reference to the appearance there, as to whether it is a new hammer or not?
A. It is all roughed up.
Q. What does that roughness there indicate?
A. Use.
Q. Is the appearance of this hammer consistent with it having been put in this revolver in March, 1920 and not used any since then?
A. I should say not, as a new hammer.
***
Q. Now, Mr. Burns, I call your attention to the evidence which you heard while you sat beside me at the desk last week with reference to some marking appearing on the shell.  You heard Mr. Van Amburg, as he testified to some back flowing of the metal on the shells. What causes that? A. That is a natural cause, subject to any gun,-common.
Q. Kindly tell us in what way?
A. It is the pressure exerted on the fired shell,-forces against the face of the breech block.
Q. All I care about,-is it a usual thing that occurs in the ordinary Colt or any other gun?
A. Sure it is, yes, sir.  The usual thing.
Q. Anything you care to say or add to that or in any way explain it?
A. You can get those marks and again you can't get them, with the same ammunition.  It will show plain with one cartridge and it won't with another.
***
Q. I am more concerned with the situation,-is it an ordinary thing to occur usually in guns that have been used?
A. Yes, sir.
***
Q. That is all. I call your attention to Bullet No. III.  *** May I ask you, after you have examined that, is there anything you wish to say about that in particular?
A. Not any more, only it shows here (indicating), of course, the deformity where it has been deformed by striking some object, which did not show so plain in the photograph.
***
Q. Here are the other bullets,-bullet No. I.  Will you examine that bullet and tell us what make it is?
***
A Peters bullet.
***
Q. From what gun could the bullets other than the one that might have been fired from a Colt, from what gun or guns could they be fired?
A. From a Steyer or a Walther.
Q. From how many different guns could the other bullets found in the body of the men who was shot,--from how many different guns could those bullets have been fired?
A. Five different guns.
Q. Name the guns.
A. Colt, Bayard, Savage, Steyer and Walther.
Q. I guess you did not understand my question.  I was speaking of the other bullets, eliminating No. III.
A. Oh.
Q. Eliminating the Colt, from what other guns could,-from what other guns could those other bullets have been fired?
A. Savage, Steyer and Walther, made in Germany.
Q. And the Steyer is how spelled?
A. (Spelling) S-t-e-y-e-r.
Q. Are there many of those Steyer guns about?
A. Lots of them.
Q. And the Walther,-many of those around?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How do they compare with reference to twist, right or left twist?
A. Right twist, the same as the Savage. Widths of the lands
Q. How does the width of the land in the Steyer compare with the width of the land in the Savage?
A. Just the same, and the Walther the same.
Q. So that you have the same right twist and same width of lands and grooves in the Steyer, Walther and in the Savage?
A. The groove in the Steyer is a little deeper,-315, 310.  I will take that back.  312, 315
and 312.
***
Q. I omitted to call your attention to the firing pin on this Harrington & Richardson revolver. Whether or not that firing pin shows signs of wear?
A. It does.
Q. And I omitted to call your attention to the alleged pitting in the Colt gun introduced as Exhibit 28.  Whether or not there is sufficient pitting on that gun so that you are able to identify a bullet that goes through that gun?
A. Absolutely not.
Q. Why do you say that?
A. Because I have shot about 100 bullets; got them right there in the grip.
***
Q. Now, you made your experiments, and after firing those guns what do you say with reference to whether any man can determine a bullet came from the Sacco gun by reason of any alleged scoring on that gun?
A. No, sir.
Q. Why not, if you please?
A. Because you can't get a bullet through a gun,-a bullet will come through a gun.  You might fire ten bullets and they would all vary.  There would be some slight variation in the bullet, unless it was a perfect gun.
Q. Well, take six bullets, say, three bullets fired from the Sacco gun, how would they appear different from those fired from any other gun, in so far as scoring would be concerned?
A. The bullet that comes from the Sacco gun that I fired were practically perfect and clean-cut lands.
Q. In that connection I will call your attention to Government Exhibit 36, purporting to be three bullets fired by Capt. Van Amburg from the Sacco gun. Will you examine those and say whether there are any marks on those bullets by which they can be identified as coming from the Sacco gun by reason of any imperfection in the barrel caused by pitting or fouling of the rifling of the barrel?
A. (Witness examines bullets) No, sir, not positive of it.
***
Q. Why not?
A. In my experience in shooting of all these different bullets through guns the bullets vary so, the marks on the bullets vary so, it is impossible, and particularly with the Sacco gun, the pitting there is so slight that it does not mar the bullet very much and you have a perfect muzzle.  My cast showed that.
***
Q. You have mentioned different guns that could have fired the other five bullets that were found in the body of the men who were shot, as being certain kinds of guns.  Have you the guns here of the types you have mentioned?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What are you now showing us?
A. The Walther.
Q. That is a .22?
A. 32.
Q. Automatic?
A. Automatic  Walther pistol, made in Germany.  Here (indicating) is the Sauer.  Just a minute,-the Steyer.
Q. That is what?
A. That is made in Prussia.
Q. That is 32?
A. That is 32, yes, sir.
Q. Automatic?
A. Automatic.
Q. Right twist?
A. Right twist.
Q. That is the one you have described in your evidence?
A. Yes.  The same rifling as the Savage.
Q. Have you the Savage here?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. These are the three guns which you say-
A. You have a Colt there.
Q. I am taking what you give me.  Walther, Steyer and Savage.  Al1 right.  You have the three guns here for examination if need be, which you have described as being guns through which the five bullets which were found on the bodies of the deceased might have been fired?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And you give as your judgment that bullet No. III, alleged as the fatal bullet, was fired from a Colt or could have been fired from a Bayard possibly?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. I believe you have expressed the opinion it was fired from a Colt?
***
A. It shows indications of a Colt.  Still, I believe it could be fired from a Bayard.  Not having the
experience with Bayard pistols that I have with the Colt leads me to believe it is possible.
Q. So that you really are in doubt as to which gun it was fired from?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Now, you mentioned a 25 gun.  Have you that gun here, a Bayard 25?
A. Yes, sir. *** This is a Bayard 635 millimeter, which is the same.
Q. What is the twist?
A. Left.
MR. JEREMIAH McANARNEY. All I want to make out is the Captain was wrong, anyway. The Captain said it was a right twist, and I want to introduce the identical gun to show that it has a left twist.  I now offer it in evidence.
(Bayard 25 gun-635 millimeter-admitted in evidence and marked "Exhibit J".)
Q. Where is that Colt automatic?  I guess you put it up, haven't you?  That (indicating) is the Sacco one.
A. That (indicating) is the Sacco one.
***
Q. To one who is somewhat familiar with a Colt, is it much trouble to take it apart?
A. No.
Q. Well, take that apart.
A. (Witness does so.)
Q. All right. Put it together again.
A. (Witness does so.)
***

Cross-Examination

Q. (By Mr. Katzmann) You did not have any trouble putting it together did you?
A. No.
Q. That is why you did it so quickly, wasn't it?
A. I was a little rattled.
Q. Would you credit another man with being rattled a bit in taking it apart?
MR. JEREMIAH McANARNEY.  Just a minute.
MR. KATZMANN. All right.  I withdraw the question if you object.

Bullet Three

Q. Mr. Burns, how many bullets at Lowell did you fire through the Sacco gun?
A. Eight.
Q. I will tell you, when I refer to bullet No. III I refer to the Winchester.
A. Yes.
Q. Which is Exhibit 18 and marked with a "III" on the base?
A. Yes, sir.
***
Q. That is the one in which you said there was a little "W" near the cannon lure?
A. Yes.
Q. And it is a Winchester?
A. Yes.
Q. Winchester manufacture?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. So that you and I understand each other hereafter if I speak of that as bullet No. III?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Have you said this afternoon that bullet No. III was fired by a Bayard 32, or 765 millimeter? A. I said it was possible.
Q. Have you said more than that?  Have you said it was fired by a Bayard?
A. No, sir.
Q. Do you remember when Mr. McAnarney asked you the question, from what guns was it possible for all of these bullets to have been fired, giving an answer to that question?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you remember what you said then?
A. If my memory serves me right I said Colt, Bayard, Steyer, Savage and Walther.
Q. Yes.  And do you remember he then said you misunderstood and that he referred to the bullets I, II, IIII, 5 and X only?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And that you then changed.  Did you then say those bullets, those five, could have been fired from a Savage, a Steyer or a Walther.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you in the next preceding answer say that bullet No. III was fired by a Bayard?
A. No, sir.
Q. Do you now say that bullet No. III was fired by a Bayard?
A. Not positively.
Q. And do you now say that bullet III was not fired by a Colt 32 automatic?
A. It could have been fired in both.
Q. Do you say that bullet III was not fired by a Colt 32?
A. I will not, sir.
Q. Have you said at the conclusion or substantially at the conclusion of your testimony that "Bullet III could have been fired by a Colt, still I believe it could have been fired by a Bayard and I am in doubt as to which gun it was fired from"?  Did you say that?
***
A. Yes, sir.
Q. That is true, isn't it?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Then you are not saying bullet No. III was not fired from a CoIt, are you?
A. No, sir.
Q. What is the pitch of the rifling in a Colt 32?
A. One to sixteen.
Q. That means, does it not, one turn of the bullet in its flight to 16 inches of distance travelled? A. Yes, sir.
Q. What is the pitch of a Bayard 765?
A. I could not tell you directly.
Q. Isn't the pitch of the rifling of the inside of the barrel as measured by the marks there from on the bullet fired from that barrel a very important determining factor as between a Bayard and a Colt?
A. Somewhat, yes.
Q. And you don't know what the pitch of the rifling is in a Bayard 32, do you?
A. I know approximately.
Q. Have you ever measured it in a Bayard 765?
A. Yes, sir.
***
Q. What Bayard 765 did you measure it in?
A. This one.
Q. When?
A. The day that the gun was bought, or very shortly afterwards.
Q. When was that?
A. I haven't that record. I did not think it important enough.
***
Q. Was the purchase of the Bayard 765 millimeter made subsequent to the testimony of Capt. Van Amburg and Capt. Proctor?
A. I feel safe in saying we have had that gun over a year.
Q. Then your answer is, it was purchased before the testimony of those two gentlemen?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you have it, was it accessible to you when you measured bullets I, II, III, IIII, 5 and X?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you make any measurements of the rifling pitch in that Bayard 765 when you had those bullets in your possession?
A. No, sir.
***
Q. Is the pitch of the rifling of the Colt 32-if it was a Colt 32 from which bullet III was fired-consistent with the pitch of one in sixteen inches?
A. I wouldn't say that.  I wouldn't want to say.  You can't tell.
Q. Did you not measure that in determining the weapon from which bullet III was fired?
A. The bullet?  The pitch of the bullet?
Q. Yes, from the bullet.
A. It can't be done accurately.
Q. I did not ask you whether it could be done.  I asked you if you did it?
A. No, sir.
Q. Why didn't you do it?
A. Because it could not be done accurately on the bullet.
Q. Can't you measure the pitch of a bullet from the lands and grooves on the bullet after discharge?
A. No, sir, not enough of it to do it accurately.
Q. But you say that you did measure the pitch of the rifling in that Bayard 765, don't you?
A. I have got a record of it.
Q. Yes.  Are you acquainted with a Bayard 9 millimeter?
A. No, sir.
Q. Did you ever hear of a Bayard 9 millimeter?
A. I withdraw that.  I believe the 380 is called 9 millimeter.
Q. Yes.  And what is the caliber in English, in American standards, the caliber of a Bayard 9 millimeter?
A. Approximately 380.
Q. What we call a .38, isn't it?
A. No, sir.
Q. Isn't the European millimeter marking of 9 millimeters universally held in American to be substantially consistent with 38 American caliber?
A. No, sir.  The 38 Colt is one cartridge, and the 380 is another.
Q. I fear you misunderstand me.  I did not ask you about cartridges, nor did I ask you about a Colt.  I asked you-I withdraw that.  A 765 millimeter is 32 caliber, isn't it?
A. Intended to be.
Q. Well, you have so stated, haven't you, this afternoon?
A. Intended to be.
Q. Isn't the 9 millimeter 38 caliber?
A. Nearer 36.
Q. Nearer 36?
A. Yes.
Q. Have you ever seen a 9 millimeter Bayard?
A. We have one, yes, sir.
Q. What is the twist in a 9 millimeter Bayard?
A. I couldn't tell you without looking at the record.
Q. Will you look at the record?
A. I haven't the record here.
Q. Will you say it is a right twist?
A. I will not say anything about it because I don't care to trust my memory to that.
Q. The answer is, to take it at the present moment, you don't know what the twist is of a 9 millimeter Bayard?
A. No.
Q. Will you produce, please, the cast that you made of the barrel of the Sacco gun?
A. I can't.  You have got it, or somebody has got it.
MR. KATZMANN. I haven't it.
(Mr. Jeremiah McAnarney hands cast to Mr. Katzmann.)
Q. I will make an explanation so we will be sure we understand each other.  I am going to refer similarly, as I have to bullet No. III, to bullets I, II, IIII, 5 and X.  Do you understand me to mean by those numbers the other five of the six shown in your series of six photographs?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. All right. That is what we mean, so we are speaking of the same thing.  Have you an opinion as to whether bullets I, II, IIII, 5 and X were fired from the same gun, whatever it was?
A. I wouldn't say so.
Q. You have an opinion?
A. No, sir.
Q. You have no opinion about it?
A. No.  Well, I have an opinion in this way: That it is impossible to tell whether they were fired from the same gun or not.
Q. Do you mean that, Mr. Burns?
A. Yes, sir, I do.
Q. Have you examined bullets I, II, IIII, 5 and X carefully?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you find any peculiarities of marking from rifling on those five bullets that is distinctive? A. I noticed all of the little distinctions.
Q. Did you find anything that was distinctive as to the marking and common to the five of them? A. Not any more common to them five than to any other make of bullets.
***
Q. I hand you bullet No.5, which is Exhibit 25, and ask you if you find any evidence of peculiarity as to the lead on anyone of the grooves on the nose end of the bullet?
A. (Witness examines bullet).
Q. What I mean, specifically, is this: Do you find double marking at the upper end of anyone of those grooves.
A. Oh, yes.
Q. Yes.  Now, will you please examine.  Do you find it?
A. Oh, yes.
Q. As to one of the land marks?
A. Two of them.
Q. Two of them?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, I hand you bullet No. IIII, which is Exhibit 21, and ask you to examine that bullet similarly.
A. That has only got one peculiar land.
Q. Yes.  Had you noticed that before?
A. Certainly, sure.
Q. I show you bullet No. I, which is Exhibit 20, and ask you similarly to examine that bullet.
A. (Witness examines bullet.) That has got two.
Q. I ask you to examine bullet 6, which is Exhibit 24 in the same record.
A. (Witness examines bullet.) That has only got one.
***
Q. Does the double marking at the upper end of those grooves on the bullet indicate anything to your mind?
A. Yes.
Q. What?
A. A worn lead.
Q. Anything else?
A. A neglected gun.
Q. Anything else?
A. No, sir.
Q. Does it indicate anything as to the manner in which the bullet took the lead?
A. Not plumb.
Q. Not plumb?
A. Yes.
Q. That is, it did not jump the rifling perfectly?  That is what it means, doesn't it?
A. It did not go straight into the lead, perfect center.
Q. Isn't that a shop term, "It did not jump the rifling perfectly"?
A. Not straight.
Q. Yes.  And that is why you get the double marking at the end, isn't it?  At the upper end?
A. Yes, you are liable to get that in any gun.
Q. And isn't this splaying out that you have indicated as to bullet No. III, particularly on sheet 2 of the series of six photographs the same result only not so pronounced?
A. No, sir.
Q. Do you distinguish between a slippage there and a fouling at that point?
A. There is no slippage there.  It doesn't show indications of it.
Q. Isn't the fact that the nose end of the groove-and it is a groove, isn't it, that shows thousandths of an inch wider-it is a groove made by a land from the inside of the barrel, is it not?
***
A. Yes, sir.
Q. That is a groove on the bullet itself, is it not?
A. That is the groove on the bullet.
Q. Isn't the widening or the greater width at the upper end of that groove something that is common to every automatic?
A. No, sir.
Q. Is it not something that is exceedingly common?
A. It is common to a defective lead or fouled lead.
Q. And a fouled lead is not an uncommon thing, is it, in any automatic?
A. Yes, it is common.
***
Q. Is the fouling that caused, as you say, in your opinion, the widening of the upper end of that groove, something that was wiped out as the first bullet sped through the barrel after the fouling was existent there?
A. No, sir.
Q. Was it something that remained there permanently?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What is the reason then, Mr. Burns, that the rest of the groove, if the fouling matter remained there, that the rest of the groove is a thousandth of an inch narrower than the beginning of the groove?
A. It is 10 thousandths.
***
Q. And I believe you said to the jury, didn't you, it was visible to the naked eye?
A. Yes, sir.
***
Q. You show me that on bullet No. III (handing bullet No. III to the witness).
A. (Witness examines bullet No. III).  That one right there (indicating).  See it better with the scope on it.
Q. Oh, naturally.
A. But you can see it with the naked eye.
Q. You would say that is one ten-thousandth of an inch wider?
A One-hundredth of an inch.
Q. I thought you just said "ten-thousandths"?
A. The same thing.
Q. A hundredth of an inch is the same as a ten-thousandth of an inch?
A. No, the same as 10 thousandths.
Q. Oh, 10 thousandths of an inch?
A. Yes.
Q. That is what you mean?
A. That is what I said.
Q. All right.  I did not catch you as saying it.  Is there any difference in construction of the patch of a United States bullet and bullet No. III?
A. May I look just a minute?
Q. Yes, anything, please, that will assist you.
A. You refer to the thickness of the jacket?
Q. I refer both to the thickness and the chemical composition of the patch itself.
A. No, sir.
Q. What is the chemical composition of the patch on bullet No. III?
A. My last analysis showed it to be 94 to 95; 94 to 95 copper and 4% zinc, 5% zinc.
Q. Did you analyze chemically the component parts of bullet No. III patch?
A. What is that?
Q. Did you analyze the component parts of the patch of bullet No. III?
A. Not that one, not that particular one.
Q. That is what I asked you.  Do you know what the chemical composition is of the patch of bullet No. III?
A. Not that particular bullet.
Q. That is what I asked you.
A. I have analyzed one similar to it.
Q. I thought you said you could not find any similar to bullet No. III and that is why you fired United States bullets through.
A. In years past I have analyzed them, sir.
Q. How many years ago?
A. Within the last five.
Q. Did you have opportunity to go to the Winchester factory and seek to obtain any bullets of the same make, same characteristics as bullet No. 3?
A. I did not.
Q. Did you make any efforts to find such bullets?
A. Only all through New England here.  That is as far as I could go, between here and Lowell, and around with an automobile, in the time that I had.
Q. Where is the Winchester bullet manufactured?
A. New Haven, Connecticut.
Q. That is part of New England, isn't it?
A. As far as from here I could go with an automobile.
Q. When you went to look for one of those bullets, you went north to Lowell, didn't you?
A. And that was the most likely place to find them.
Q. Bridgeport, Connecticut, is south of here, isn't it?
A. South?
Q. Yes.
A. Is it?
Q. Well, what do you say?
A. Nearer southwest, is it not?
Q. All right, it is in the opposite direction to Lowell from here, isn't it?
A. Oh, yes, indeed.
Q. You were around here some days before you came into Court to hear the testimony of Captain Van Amburg and Capt. Proctor?
A. Seven or eight, I dare say.
Q. Plenty of time, didn't you?
A. I had plenty of time, yes, sir.
Q. And you did not go near the Winchester factory to get any bullets of that type?
A. I did not think it was necessary.
***
Q. Did you go down there?
A. No, sir.
Q. Did you write to them?
A. No, sir.
Q. Does your associate, Mr. Fitzgerald, come from the Winchester factory?  Is that where he is employed?
A. I do not think so.
Q. He comes from New Haven?
A. No, sir.
Q. Where?
A. From Hartford, Connecticut.
Q. Where did you say the Winchester was manufactured, the Winchester ammunition?
A. New Haven.
Q. New Haven.  Were you aware of the fact Mr. Fitzgerald was coming up?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you make any effort to reach him by telephone and have him bring up a Winchester bullet?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did he bring one?
A. No, sir.
Q. Did he come before or after the experiment at Lowell?
A. Before.
***
A. Is there any part of the marking?
Q. Of the lands marking and the groove marking from the inside of the barrel upon that bullet called the patch, the metal patch?
A. Why, it is all metal patch except the small base.  It is all on the patch.
Q. Does the composition, the chemical composition of the metal patch make any difference in the marking made by the lands?
A. Not so much as its physical properties.
Q. Well, do the physical properties make any difference?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Are the physical properties of the United States bullets, or cartridges, which you discharged through the Sacco gun, different or the same as the physical properties of the bullet No. III?
A. Again, please.
Q. Are the physical properties of bullet No. III different or the same, different from or the same as the physical properties of the eight United States bullets which you fired through the Sacco gun?
A. Can I answer that in my own way?
Q. I would like to have you answer it as the question is put.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. If you can answer it.
A. It isn't an honest question, unless you allowed me to answer it.
Q. It isn't a what?
A. It is a misleading question.  If you will allow me
Q. What did you say that question was before you termed it misleading?
A. I take that back.  I withdraw it.
Q. You want to withdraw that, don't you?
A. Yes, I do.  It is a misleading question, your question is.
Q. Have you any personal feeling about this case, Mr. Burns?
A. Not a bit, not a particle, no.
Q. You didn't intend to be personal when you made that remark to me, did you?
A. No, indeed.  I apologize if you take any offense that way at all.
Q. Now, answer it your own way.
***
A. The only-this No. III bullet was a hollow base bullet, with knurls and a cannon lure.  As near as I can make out, it had been made some little time.  It is not of recent manufacture.  The most recent manufacture of Winchester cartridges has got-Winchester ammunition of this caliber has got a smooth bullet.  The latest manufacture of this cartridge has got a smooth bullet.  Undoubtedly Mr. Van Amburg had the same trouble in getting it, because I noticed he had the smooth bullet and I had the same.  That is all I could find, and I thought it would be the last place to find them, at the Winchester Company, because we do not keep old samples of ammunition, and if we do, we keep them just simply for record to go by.  Now, this bullet of ours is the nearest thing I could get to this Winchester bullet, because it has got the same jacket and analysis and the contour, as near as I can make out, is the same.  That is why we used it.  We have a Winchester, and all kinds.  Is that satisfactory?
Q. That isn't the question I asked you.
A. You asked me why I used a U. S. bullet.
Q. No.  You misunderstood me.  I asked you what difference, in any, there is between the physical properties of bullet No. III and the United States cartridges which you discharged through the Sacco gun.  What is the difference in physical properties?
A. Very slight difference.
Q. What is the difference?
A. Less than half a thousandth in the jacket.
Q. That is as to thickness?
A. Yes.
Q. Would that make any difference in the groove that would be made by the lands as between those two bullets?
A. Very slight.
Q. It would make a difference, wouldn't it?
A. Not so you could detect it.
Q. How slight would it be?
A. I am not prepared to say how slight, how much a half-thousandth would make.
Q. What are the other differences, if any?
A. None.  You get about the same sluggage.
Q. You are talking and predicating your opinion, are you not, that this bullet, No. III, was not fired through the Sacco gun, wholly upon the matter of sluggage, aren't you?
***
A. Not entirely on the matter of sluggage.
Q. Upon what other basis?
A. On the perfect muzzle.  That is, for an inch, half or three-quarters of an inch.  I can't tell you just now.  I should say,- have you got the cast?
Q. Yes.
A. I can explain it a little better.
Q. (Mr. Katzmann hands cast to the witness.)
A. I should say for half an inch in the muzzle it was near perfect.  We call it "upset", to be a bit easier, perhaps.  It is a term we use.
Q. Mr. Burns, the upper end of that cast is the muzzle end, isn't it?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. The one in which the wire is inserted?
A. Yes.
Q. Will you look at the groove made by the land on the inside of that barrel about the center, please?
A. The groove?
Q. Yes.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. It that a perfect land mark from the land of the inside of the barrel?
A. No, sir.
Q. No.  Now, will you take Exhibit No 28, please.  Take out the barrel.
A. (Witness does so.)
Q. You know, of course, what I mean by clock-wise, don't you?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Holdingó
A. Can I brush it out?
Q. Yes, please.  You can't brush any pits out with that brush, can you?
A. No.
Q. All right.  Holding the groove, looking in the muzzle end of that barrel, holding the groove at nine o'clock, do you see a land at substantially six o'clock, holding those grooves at 9 o'clock by the clock?  ***  [D]o you see pitting at six o'clock along the right side of that groove?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Pitting sufficient to make a mark corresponding to it on the right side of the groove when this groove is held in the position I hold it in?
A. No (examining barrel).  It is six o'clock?
Q. Yes.  What do you say?  Will you hold that, please?  Is that right?  Do you see it?
A. It is more susceptible to the eye than it is to the cast.
Q. Well, it appears on the cast, doesn't it?
A. May I explain to you that a cast will show one, get this:
Q. Oh, I am going to try to.
A.- one ten-thousandth, not 10 one thousandths.  A cast will show one ten-thousandth of an inch,- .000l.
Q. That is to say, a cast is the most accurate way of getting a picture of the inside of the barrel, isn't it?
A. Decidedly, yes, sir.
Q. It shows this pitting corresponding to the pitting at six o'clock when that muzzle is held the way I indicated, does it not?
A. Fairly, yes, Sir.
Q. It is identical with it, isn't it, Mr. Burns?
A. But it is such a small, little thing.
Q. I did not ask you about the size of it.  It is identical with it, isn't it?
A. I should not say that.
***
Q. How does it differ?  Where is the difference between that pitting in the barrel we have attempted to show at about six o'clock and the marking on that groove in the center, as I hold it? Will you take them just the same position, please?
A. How do you know that that came out of that groove the same way?
Q I am not asking you,-you are answering my questions, aren't you?
A. (Witness examines.)  I wouldn't say that from that.
Q. What made the roughening and the breaking down of the side of the groove that I showed you in the case?
A. Practically no roughening to amount to anything.
Q. I did not ask you about the degree.  Now, would you mind answering my question: What made the roughening or breaking down of the side of that groove I showed you on the cast if it was not the pitting at six o'clock?
A. It was pitting all around there.
Q. I am calling your attention to that particular pitting.  What made it?
A. Can I answer that in my own way?
Q. Don't you like my question?
A. No.  There are so many pits there that it is pretty hard to tell which one made it and you are assuming it made that one there (indicating), and that wouldn't,-I wouldn't want to answer that question.
Q. You wouldn't like to answer that one, would you?
A. No, indeed, that is out of the question to answer that question.
***
Q. I am trying to identify a line of pits along the right-hand edge of that groove as you looked at it.  Isn't there a line of pits there, Mr. Burns, starting in the middle of the cast?  ***
A. You can find them all around there, sir, and I wouldn't try to identify anyone.  I consider it a waste of time trying to.
Q. Then I am wasting your time, am I, now?
A. No, sir, but I say for my own purpose,- you wanted my opinion,- that is it.
Q. Is all of your opinion on the subject-
A. A waste of time trying to identify any one pit, sir.
Q. Is that all you want to say on that subject?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Now you have had your way about answering as you have wanted to, haven't you?
A. I guess so.
Q. You have said all you wanted to say about the pits, haven't you?
A. I wouldn't want to identify that pit from that one.
Q. You have said all you wanted to say about the pits?
A. If it suits you, yes.
Q. I am not asking about it suiting me.  Suiting yourself, have you said all you want to say about these pits?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Now, I am going to insist upon you answering my questions my way if they are proper questions.  As I held that cast to you did you see a distinctive roughening on the right side of the groove I held towards you substantially in the middle of said cast?
A. Saw a very slight line there, very slight.
Q. On looking through the barrel of the Sacco gun at a corresponding point from the muzzle end of that barrel when the grooves were held at nine o'clock, did you see to the right of the land that was substantially at six o'clock when the barrel was so held, pits that in character and distance in
from the muzzle, extent and length as shown by this cast, correspond exactly with the pitting in the barrel of the gun?
A. *** You mean the pit at six o'clock?
Q. Yes.
A. On the left-hand side of the groove at six o'clock?
Q. Not the pit, but the pitting.
A. Any particular one that you have in mind?
Q. All of them, all of them that you can see.
A. Well, there is a whole bunch of them.
Q. Yes; and are they to the right or to the left of the land that appears at six o'clock as you now hold the gun barrel?
A. On both sides.
Q. Where is it the more distinctive?
A. Well, in one case it is to the left and the other it is to the right.
Q. Where is the larger number of pits?
A. On that particular groove that you have reference to?
Q. I am not talking about the groove, sir.  I am talking about the land.
A. Where is the pit?
Q. No, where are the pits to the right?
A. It is on the right side of the land.
Q. Yes.  As you are looking at it from the muzzle end?
A. Yes, one on the right, very slight.
Q. How many are there on the right about a little bit less than an inch in from the muzzle?
A. Oh, it is all full of them.  I lose count if I try to count them.
Q. There is a mass of them there, isn't there?
A. Yes, there is a mass of them, slight to the eye, to the eye.
Q. And this cast contains pitting to a ten-thousandth of an inch?
A. Yes.
Q. Wait a minute.  I want you to look at the same one.  Where my finger is do you see those pebbles, if I may so speak of them?
A. You might see mountains there, but I can't see them.
Q. Do you really mean that, Mr. Burns?
A. Yes, I do, I really do, sir.
Q. That you can't see, right where my finger is, with your naked eye, without a glass?
A. Yes, but without any distinction.  You can find the same thing all around, there are so many of them.
Q. Do you find them at the groove, side of the groove, which is the mark made by the land?
A. Oh, yes.
Q. How do they correspond,- do they correspond with the markings that you see looking from the muzzle end of that gun?
A. I wouldn't say so.
Q. Will you say they do not?
A. I will not.  There are so many of them there I wouldn't try to pick them out.
Q. Did you look at them with reference to the distance they were down from the muzzle end of that cast?
A. I did.
Q. Did you look at them with reference to the position they occupy?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. To the side of the groove?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Made by the six o'clock land?
A. Yes.
Q. How do they compare?
A. Why, you can make them compare.
Q. They do compare, don't they?
A. Yes, and they have got the same thing on other lands.
Q. I am not asking you about other lands.  I am asking you about that one.
A. If you wish to stretch
Q. I am not wishing to stretch anything.  How do they compare?
A. I won't answer that question.
Q. Why not?
A. Because you can't tell. I wouldn't state that that groove came from that same,- or that land was the same groove.
Q. Did you find on examination of the grooves in the cast which correspond to the lands in the barrel, do you find a collection of pits similarly placed with respect to any other barrel land on that cast?
***
A. I see pits all around it.
***
THE COURT. I think we better go on in the morning.  Tomorrow morning at nine o'clock.

Wednesday, June 29, 1921

***
Cross-Examination, Resumed

MR. KATZMANN. If your Honor please, it is agreed between counsel that Exhibit 37, two shot-gun shells, contain buckshot.
***
Q. (By Mr. Katzmann). What was the size of those shells, Mr. Burns?
***
A. Double 00 buck.
Q. How large would that be?
A. About 310.
Q. As big as an ordinary pea?
A. Oh, larger.
Q. Larger?
A. A little larger.
***
Q. I show you, Mr. Burns, Exhibit "H", and the fourth photograph, I call your attention to the photographs of bullets 5 and X, and ask you if you find anything on the grooves showing on those bullets that indicate a slippage at the lead, at the beginning of the lead?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Will you point out what you find?
A. (Witness does so.)
Q. That is the same thing, is it not, you find on bullet No. III and that you pointed out to the jury? A. No, sir.
***
Q. What is the standard width of the groove, of the groove in the barrel of the Colt 32?
A. Do you withdraw the word "standard"?
Q. Call it "official."
A. No. What is the width of the groove that I found?
Q. Now, look.  I am not talking about this particular Colt at all.  Is there such a thing in the manufacture of an automatic as a standard or official width of barrel groove or width of barrel land?
A. I understand there is.
Q. Well, that is what I am asking you about.  What is the barrel groove standard width in a Colt 32?
A. I think that Mr. Fitzgerald can answer that much better than I can.
Q. Well, now, I am asking you, Mr. Burns.  I can't ask the two of you at the same time.  I am asking you.
A. I wouldn't state that.
Q. Is it because you don't know?
A. Not officially.
Q. Not officially what?
A. Just exactly what it is, what the standard is.
Q. You mean you don't know what it is?
A. Not entirely, no.
Q. Not at all, do you?
A. It is from 50 to 52, if that will help out.
Q. I am not asking for help.  I am asking for facts from you.
A. I don't care to give it.
Q. Is it because you don't know?
A. Not officially.
Q. Officially?  You haven't any connection with the Colt people, have you?
A. No.
Q. Officially or otherwise?
A. No, sir.
Q. Do you know what the standard barrel groove width is in a Colt?
A. I know what it ought to be.
Q. Do you know what it is?
A. (Witness hesitates).  May I answer that question in my own way?
***
Q. You can't answer yes or no whether you know what it is?
A. No, sir, cannot answer yes or no.
Q. So you answer it both ways?
A. I did.
Q. Do you know what the standard width of the barrel land is in a Colt 32?
A. Yes and no there.
Q. You do know it and you don't know it.  That is the answer.  Is that right?
A. I will say no to that.
Q. You do not know it?
A. Yes.
Q. Will you say no, you don't know the barrel groove width standard?
A. I will say no to that.
***
Q. *** What is the most important measurement, in your opinion, Mr. Burns, in the matter of identification of a bullet and a gun as to whether or not a bullet has come from the particular gun or not?
A. The width and diameter of the lands and the same of the grooves.
Q. In the barrel?
A. In the barrel and the lead.
Q. Yes.
A. That is the most important part, the lead.
Q. I was asking as to measurements.
A. Well, there is the measurement in the lead.
Q. Now, Mr. Burns, what is the width of barrel groove of a Bayard 765?
A. Of the barrel groove?
Q. Yes.
A. 120.
***
Q. Thousandths?
A. 120 thousandths of an inch.
***
Q. Is not the land on the bullet the corresponding part to the groove in the barrel?  The raised part of the bullet, isn't that what is made by the groove in the barrel?
A. Your technicality is so entirely different from the language of expressing it that-
Q. Is there a land on bullet No. III between the grooves?
A. This (indicating) is the lands. The groove on the bullet is the lands.
Q. Yes.  The groove on the bullet made by the lands of the barrel?
A. Made by the lands of the barrel.
Q. Then what makes the raised part between the two grooves on the bullet?
A. This in here (indicating).
Q. Between the two grooves.  That is the part that is higher that we call a land on the bullet?
A. The largest diameter of the bullet?
Q. I don't understand that question.
A. I asked you if it was the largest diameter of the bullet.
Q. I show you bullet No. 1.  Do you see certain grooves in it?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And they are formed by the land of the barrel, aren't they?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you see between those two grooves a raised portion?
A. Yes.
Q. Isn't that called the land on the bullet?
A. You may call it the land on the bullet.
Q. All right.  Haven't we been calling it the land on the bullet all during the trial, both sides?
A. It is that portion caused by the groove in the barrel.
Q. That is what I wanted to know.  What is the width of that same portion caused by the groove on the barrel of bullet No. III?
A. The width of the groove is 105.
Q. And the width of a groove on a Bayard is 120, isn't it?
A. 120.
Q. What is the width of the land in the barrel of a 765 Bayard?
A. 40.
Q. 40 thousandths?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What is the width of a land on a Colt 32'?
A. Which one in particular?
Q. The standard width?
A. Approximately 50.
Q. Do you mean when you so state the width of a groove is 105, that the width of the groove on bullet No. III is 105?  Can you hear me?
A. At all times I can.
Q. When you said the width of the groove was 105, did you mean that is what you found on bullet No.3?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Yes. That corresponds to the groove space in the barrel of the firearm that discharged it?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. I show you, Mr. Burns, one of the three bullets from Exhibit 35, which bullet is one of the three Winchester bullets fired by Capt. Van Amburg at Lowell on the day that you fired eight United States bullets.  I call your attention to the groove that is now in that bullet in the center between my two fingers, and ask you if you find a lead at the top of that bullet widening out as in bullet No. III?  I don't dare let go of it.
A. You hang right onto it.  You fooled me yesterday, and I don't want you to do it again.
***
Q. Can you take the bullet in your own hand and hold it that way (indicating).  I don't want to hold it for you.  Take it in your own hand and keep it so that groove is up so I may show it to the jury.
A. The metal is turned over.
***
Q. Do you see a widening at the top end of that groove I pointed out to you on the Winchester fired at Lowell out of the Sacco gun that corresponds to the widening on bullet No. III which you showed photo graphically to the jury?
A. No, sir.
Q. Does the groove that I have pointed out to you widen at the top end of the groove, the nose of it?
A. Not perceptibly.
Q. You can't see it?
A. I can see it.  I have seen it.
Q. Then it is perceptible, isn't it?
A. It is a turn-over of the metal.
Q. Do you see the widening?
A. No, sir.
Q. You do not see any widening?
A. Not any perceptible widening to the eye.
***
Q. Would you be able to see any better, Mr. Burns, or do you need to, as between this artificial light and daylight?
A. The light is not very good.
***
(The witness leaves stand and goes to window with Mr. Katzmann.)
Q.  Mr. Burns, I call your attention to another one of the Winchester bullets fired at Lowell, being a part of Exhibit 35, and to the letter "W" at the upper end of the groove there showing, and ask you if there you see a widening of the groove right under the letter "W" on that bullet?
A. Not any more than the next one to it.
Q. Do you see such widening?
A. A slight, but not perceptible, only under the glass.
Q. You see it, but it isn't perceptible?
A. Very slight.  You would have to measure it.
Q. Is it there at all?
A. I wouldn't say positive.
Q. Wouldn't say positive?
A. No.
Q. Even with the bullet you can't see any?
A. No.
***
Q. Mr. Burns, have I now turned up so that there is in the center of that bullet as I hold it, the groove with the letter "W" at the upper end of it?
A. Yes.
***
Q. Had you, Mr. Burns, before this morning, examined any of those three Winchesters fired at Lowell by Capt. Van Amburg?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. When?
A. Yesterday, or the-I believe it was yesterday, in the sheriff's room.
Q. Yes.  Did you then notice any widening of the bullet groove at the upper end on those Winchesters?
A. Not perceptible, no.  Nothing to compare with bullet No. III.
Q. Did I ask you that?
A. That is what we were comparing it with.
Q. Yes.  Did I ask you that?
A. I guess not.
Q. Is there a widening on those two bullets that have been shown you, at the upper end of the two grooves I called to your attention?
A. Not perceptible to me.
Q. You mean by that you can't see it?
A. I mean I can't see it.
Q. With the glass either here at this light or over at the window?  Do you tell this jury you don't see any widening at the upper end of those two grooves that I called to your attention?
A. Not what you would call widening, sir.
Q. Is it your answer that there is not any widening at the upper end?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Taking any automatic-I don't mean the Sacco gun particularly -any automatic, and fire from it in succession one bullet slightly smaller than the other bullet, would the smaller bullet take the rifling, jump the rifling any better than the larger bullet, or is the reverse rue?  Boiled down, the question really means this: Does the size of the bullet make any difference as to the manner in which it takes the rifling and receives its marks?
A. It does.
Q. Which one takes the rifling better on the same gun, the larger one or the smaller one?
A. How large and how small?
Q. Any measurable difference in size?
A. The larger one takes it the best, within reasonable measurements.
Q. Which is the larger, a United States bullet or a Winchester, and when I say "United States bullet" I mean of the character you fired at Lowell through the Sacco gun?
A. The Winchester is slightly larger.
Q. Yes. You say that in the seven bullets that you produced of the United States manufacture, that the upper end of no one of the bullet grooves is any wider than any other portion of that groove?
A. I said that they were clean-cut, not perceptibly wider.
Q. Are they any wider at the upper end than at the lower end on any of the grooves of any of the seven United States bullets which you fired through the Sacco gun at Lowell?
A. Not perceptible to the eye.
Q. How do they compare with the groove widths of the three Winchesters fired at Lowell by Capt. Van Amburg?
A. Fairly consistent.
Q. Do you see any difference between the widths of any of the United States bullet grooves fired at Lowell?
A. All bullets will vary, even from the same gun.
Q. Is there any class variance between the seven United States bullets and the Winchesters that Capt. Van Amburg fired?
A. Yes.
Q. What is the class variance between the bullet grooves on the seven United States and the bullet grooves on the three Winchesters?
A. More upset in the United States bullets than there is to the Winchesters.
Q. More upset means just what, more expansion?
A. More expansion.
Q. And is not the effect of more expansion to make the groove cut in the bullet cleaner cut?
A. Not always.
Q. Isn't that usually the very effect of a greater upset?
A. No, sir.
Q. What is the effect of a greater upset if it is not to make the groove cleaner cut?
A. Cleaner cut on the base.
Q. But not cleaner cut at the nose end of the bullet?
A. Not cleaner cut at the nose end of the bullet.
Q. The upset is the expansion that takes place immediately as the bullet leaves the chamber, isn't it?  Showing you defendants' identification Exhibit 23, that is a blueprint, enlarged, is it not, of the firing chamber and lead of a Colt 32?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Upset means expansion of the bullet, doesn't it?
A. Yes.
Q. There is a greater upset, I think you have said, on the United States bullet than on the Winchester bullet?
A. On this particular Winchester bullet.
Q. Yes; and on the three fired at Lowell?
A. It is greater with the United States.
Q. Yes.  Now, expansion of the bullet, the greater the upset the quicker it grabs-if I may use the expression-the rifling, doesn't it?  That word "grab" is not a very elegant one, but if it means anything to you, will you answer the question, if it is intelligible to you?
A. It isn't hardly intelligible. You are not really-
Q. Well, wait.  I show a chalk I have just made, which purports to be the inside of a barrel of a gun with six projections which I call lands, and which I hope you will recognize as lands.  What is the effect of the expansion of a bullet after it takes the lead, with respect to the grooves made in the bullet by the land?  That is, the greater the upset, what, if any, is the effect upon the method and manner in which the bullet takes hold of the rifling?
A. The bullet starts to mushroom at the base the instant it starts from the shell.  That effect (witness hesitates) is greater right there (indicating) with the hollow base than it is with the flat base.
Q. Do you think you have answered my question?
A. As nearly as I understand it.
Q. That wasn't the question at all.  I didn't ask you what part of the bullet mushroomed, whether it was a hollow or a flat base.  I didn't ask you any such question.  Take defendant's Exhibit 23. You there see, do you not, a land?
A. Yes.
Q. With the leads starting at the exit of the firing chambers, do you not?
A. The leads at the exit of the throat.
Q. Well, you mean,-that is the firing chamber, isn't it, where the bullet is, where the cartridge is before discharge?
A. Yes.
Q. And the firing takes place in that chamber?
A. Yes.
Q. Then that is the firing chamber, isn't it?
A. This (indicating) is the chamber.
Q. Yes.  Wasn't that what I asked you, Mr. Burns?
A. That (indicating) is the chamber.
Q. Yes.
A. This (indicating) is the throat.
Q. Yes.
A. This (indicating) is the lead.
Q. And the lead begins at the exit from the firing chamber, doesn't it?
A. No, sir.
Q. All right.
A. The exit of the throat.
Q. All right.  With expansion does the bullet become more firmly attached to the lands in the barrel?
A. At the base, yes.
Q. Not at the top?
A. No, sir.
Q. Is the only portion of the bullet which becomes attached to the land, the base of the bullet?
A. That is the main point, that is the gas check.
Q. Then if that is so, how do you get any mark on the nose of the bullet from the land?
A. Because the nose of the bullet is smaller, the contour of the bullet.
Q. Doesn't it become attached?
A. Slightly at the point.
Q. Yes. Then it does become somewhat attached.  Well, the United States bullet doesn't become any differently attached at the nose than the Winchester, does it?
A. Not perceptibly, no.
Q. Relatively it is just the same, isn't it?
A. As far as I can see.
***
Q. If there is a difference in the upper ends of grooves in a United States bullet fired at Lowell through the Sacco gun from the upper end of the grooves of the Winchesters fired at Lowell through the Sacco gun, how do you account for that difference?
A. The cannon lure on the United States bullet.
***
Q. Is that what controls such difference in width between twelve and fifteen thousand pounds pressure?
***
A. No, sir.
Q. Why did you make that answer?
A. I say that the cannon lure does not control the pressure.
Q. Well, what is it that- is there a difference between the upper ends of the United States Lowell bullets and the upper ends of these Winchester Lowell bullets?
A. Only in the cannon lure.  The Winchester bullet is not cannon lured.
Q. The cannon lure is not the upper end of the groove?
A. Do you mean the point?
Q. I mean what I said.  The cannon lure is not the upper end of the groove?
A. The groove?
Q. Did you ever hear of a groove in a bullet?
A. That is the commencement of the bearing.
Q. What is the commencement of the bearing?
A. Where the lands first attaches the bullet.
Q. What is that called?
A. That is the beginning of the bearing of the bullet.
Q. What is it called?
A. The front of the bearing.
Q. Yes.  You spoke of it yesterday as the top, didn't you?
A. The top of the land, I was referring to the top of the lands.
Q. Didn't you tell this jury yesterday when you showed them, in the photograph, bullet No. III, didn't you speak of the width of the upper end of that groove as compared with the width at the base end?
A. The upper end of the lands from here (indicating).
Q. No, pardon me.  Did you here speak to this jury and describe the widening of the upper end of the groove on bullet No. III?
A. I believe I did; the upper end.
Q. Do you take any umbrage at my using the same term today that you used yesterday?
A. No, not at all.
Q. That (indicating) is the cannon lure, isn't it?
A. That is the cannon lure, yes, sir.
Q. Is there any difference?  Have you answered this question?  If you have, I will withdraw it.  Is there any difference in width between the upper end of the cast that I showed you on the Winchester fired at Lowell from the width,-strike that out.  I put that question as I started.  Is there any difference in the widths of the upper ends of the groove of the Winchester Lowell bullets and the Winchester United states bullets?
A. That is a new bullet on me.
Q. Well, of course, what I mean, Mr. Burns, didn't you understand me to mean, without any tiresome repetition, I meant the Winchesters fired at Lowell and the United States fired at Lowell?
A. I couldn't see any perceptible difference in the width of the lands.
Q. I am not talking about the lands, Mr. Burns. I am talking about the "g-r-o-o-v-e-s".
A. In the bullets?
Q. Bullets, yes.
A. Yes. That (indicating) is the land mark.
Q. Is it a groove?
A. It is a groove in the bullet produced by the land of the pistol.
Q. Has anybody disputed that proposition?  Don't you want to speak of that as a groove?
A. I have never been in the habit of speaking of that as a groove.  I have been in the habit of calling that the land mark.  That is the first time I have ever heard it called "groove" in the bullet.
Q. And you didn't call it a groove, yourself, yesterday, a groove?
A. To make it intelligible to you, yes.
Q. Whatever your purpose was- intelligible to me?
A. Yes, because we didn't evidently understand.
Q. Did you call it to this jury a groove yesterday?
A. I possibly did.
Q. Did you?
A. I won't say positively what I called it.
Q. I think there is one question I may have asked you yesterday.  If I did, I would be glad to be corrected and not ask it again.  Does the difference in softness, in the degree of softness of the metal patch on automatic bullets cause any variation in the marks from,- in those different degrees of soft or hard patch in bullets fired out of the same gun?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. I show you Exhibit 27, being the .38 revolver. Do you say the double sear is in sight in any process of cocking or firing that weapon?
A. Yes.
Q. Where?
A. That is the sear right there (indicating). What I call the sear.
***
Q. That bright patch?
A. That bright patch there, yes, sir.
Q. About-a little bit better than an eighth of an inch square?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How many times, Mr. Burns, to your knowledge, was this Exhibit cocked and fired since you have had anything to do with it?
A. Cocked and fired more yesterday and today than it had any time that I know of.
***
Q. How many times altogether would you say you had cocked and lowered or cocked and fired it altogether?
A. Not over a half-dozen, I shouldn't think.
Q. Not over a half-dozen times?  I assume that you have in mind that you showed that revolver twelve times to the jury yesterday?
A. I raised it up here and kept it up and pulled the sear down and showed them.
Q. Then it was cocked and lowered twelve times by you personally yesterday, wasn't it?
A. I wouldn't say it was.  I don't think I cocked it every time.
Q. Count them up.  How many jurymen are there?
A. Twelve.
Q. How many times did you show it to them?
A. Showed it to each and everyone.
Q. Yes.  And did you not in each case at least pull back the trigger and lower it down again. to show the action of the sear?
A. Not to the full cock.
Q. Did you not, whatever cock you pulled it back to, did the sear rub against the lower end of the hammer?
A. Not every time.
Q. Didn't you tell the jurymen, twelve times over, that it did?
A. That it rubbed?
Q. Yes, every time, didn't you say?
A. Every time that was done, every time it was fired full cock this made the double action.  Every time that was done it came down, and I showed them where the friction was.
Q. Was there friction used twelve times yesterday?
A. I wouldn't state that there was.
Q. You haven't any knowledge, have you, as to how many times it had been cocked and fired since May 5, 1920?
A. No, sir.
Q. Would that make any difference, if you knew how many times it had been so cocked and fired by the custodian of this revolver since May 5, 1920?
A. It might.
Q. Did you have that in mind when you said this was not a new hammer?
A. I had no right to assume what had been done with the gun.  I judged as I saw the gun.
Q. You said that in your opinion that wasn't a new hammer, didn't you?
A. Yes, sir.
***
Q. Assume it had been cocked and fired scores of times between May 5, 1920, and yesterday, would that make any difference in your answer?
A. How many scores?
Q. Call it five score.
A. Five score, no.
Q. Wouldn't make any difference?
A. No, sir.
Q. A hundred times fired would not make any difference in your answer.  Is that right.
A. A score is twenty, is it not?
Q. Yes, and five scores is 100, is it not?
A. Yes.
Q. All right.
A. A hundred times wouldn't make any difference in my answer.
Q. Assume that since you-did Capt. Van Amburg examine that in your presence?
A. This gun?
Q. Yes.
A. I don't think so.
Q. Or Capt. Proctor?
A. I don't think so.
Q. Do you say that cocking and firing that trigger 100 times would not produce any shine on the lower end of that trigger?
A. Trigger?
Q. Hammer, I mean.
A. I would not expect it to.
Q. How many times, in your opinion, would it be necessary to cock and fire that hammer in order to produce the shine or polish such as you see or you have described of the lower end of the hammer?
A. Quite a number.
Q. How many times?
A. It all depends on the hardness of the metal.  If I assume the metal is case-hardened- and which it has all the appearance of- it would take in the thousands.
Q. If it isn't case-hardened?
A. It would show very quickly.
Q. How quickly?
A. Perhaps one-third of the time.
Q. What does that mean in numbers?
A. Why, I wouldn't want to state the numbers. That is getting down too fine.
***
Q. Were you willing to answer the question not knowing how many times it had been cocked and fired to the effect that it was not a new hammer, without knowing how many times that had been cocked and fired?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And the very thing that you described that made against newness was the polish on the lower end of the hammer, wasn't it?
A. And several other things.
Q. What other things?
A. Marks on the side there (indicating).  Very rusty in here (indicating), and rusted in there (indicating).
Q. I will take your word for it.
A. And that (indicating), the polish on the face of the hammer.
Q. When did that rust come on the hammer?
A. I couldn't tell you.
Q. Do you know that it did not come on since May 5, 1920?
***
A. I did not see the gun May 5, 1920
Q. Then you don't know, do you?
A. No.
Q. You don't know what its condition was on May 5, 1920, do you?
A. No, sir.
Q. I call your attention to the trigger.  Does that indicate any more wear than- what do you call this raised stuff?  What do you call that?
A. That is the checking.
Q. Checking.  Does it show any difference in wear, comparatively, between the checking on the upper end of the hammer and the condition of the trigger of that exhibit?
A. The trigger shows some.
Q. Yes.  Does the trigger appear to you to be older than the hammer?
A. No.
Q. But it shows more wear, does it not?
A. It shows more handling.
Q. Did you examine either edge of the hammer, examine it by sense of touch?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Does that appear to be new?
A. No, sir.
Q. Is it a sharp, clean edge?
A. It is (examining under light.) It doesn't have the appearances of a new hammer.
***
Q. Mr. Burns, that is the one thing you are going to stick to, no matter what question I ask you, you are going to say it isn't a new hammer every time, aren't you?
A. No.
Q. Did I ask you whether it was a new hammer or not, that question?
A. You asked me if this was a new hammer.
Q. I did not ask you that.
THE COURT. Go back and read.
(The question is read as follows: "Is it a sharp, clean edge?")
THE WITNESS. It is not a clean edge.
Q. Is it a sharp edge?
A. No sharper than the ordinary.
Q. Is there any difference as to the degree of sharpness on the left as compared with the right-hand side of the trigger in that curved portion, perceptible to the touch?
A. On the right-hand side there is a few nicks in there that you can feel with the finger.
Q. Can you feel them in the left-hand side?
A. No.
***
Q. What is the effect, what is the use of that screw I show you there (indicating)?
A. That is the fulcrum of the hammer.
Q. And on tightening it up what effect, if any, does it produce in the position of the hammer with respect to the groove in the hammer works?
A. I do not think it would have any, to amount to anything.
Q. If you tighten it unduly wouldn't it cause a bearing, a rubbing more on the left-hand side than on the right-hand side, if you tighten it unduly?
A. Excessive pressure there might do it.  It would be possible to do it.
Q. Did you tell the jury yesterday that on the left-hand side where the sear worked down at the bottom of the hammer that it was brighter than on the right hand side?
A. Yes.
Q. What caused that?
A. The sear rubbing over the face of the hammer.
Q. Did the position of the hammer itself, as controlled by that screw, have anything to do with the polishing more on one side than on the other?
A. The face of the sear had everything to do with that.
Q. Then I take it you mean that screw, if it were tightened unduly, had nothing to do with it?
A. I should say not.
MR. KATZMANN. That is all.

Redirect Examination

Q. (By Mr. Jeremiah McAnarney) Speaking of the bullets that you used in your test with the other experts at Lowell, why did you use the bullet that you used?
A. Because it had more of the same contour, same effect as the Winchester bullet that was used, or No. III bullet.
***
Q. I call your attention to these bullets (Ex. 35). Those are the three bullets fired by Capt. Van Amburg.  Now, how do they compare and how do they differ, if they do, from bullet No. III, which we will call the fatal bullet?
A. Bullet No. III has a cannon lure in it and it has a hollow base.  This bullet (indicating) has not a hollow base and it hasn't the cannon lure.
***
Q. The bullet No. III that was fired that was found in the body of the deceased and is shown here, what kind of a base did that have?
A. Hollow base.
Q. Now, what kind of a base was the bullet,- did the bullet have that you used in your test?
A. A hollow base.
Q. Did the bullet you used have a cannon lure?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And could you have used and have procured and used the same kind of bullet that Capt. Amburg used, if you wanted to?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Why did you not use the bullet he used, but used the one you used?
A. Because that bullet that I used was more,-corresponded more to the bullet than the other one, than the Winchester.
Q. What would be the difference in the effect of discharging a bullet, two bullets through the same gun, one that was a hollow base and one that was a flat base?  What would be the effect? Explain the different effects, if there would be any?
A. You get more upset, more sluggage, owing to the hollow base.  At the base of the bullet you get a better gas check.  The hollow base gives a better gas check at that pressure.
Q. In other words, as the bottom of this magnifying glass, you get a better gas check, a gas grip, on the hollow than you would on a perfectly flat base?
A. Yes, that is my experience.
Q. How would that manifest itself on the bullet as the bullet went through the rifling of the barrel with reference to the marks of the lands and grooves on the bullet?
A. It would show a perfect print at the muzzle in the base of the bullet.  You get more upset with a lower pressure.
Q. Which would you get the truer course of the bullet, the one that pad the hollow base or the flat base?
A. I would say hollow base.
Q. What is the effect of a cannon lure on a bullet.  Take that cannon lure there (indicating); what is the effect, if any, that has on a bullet?
A. It is used to fasten the shell, to crimp it.
Q. That crimp on that bullet, does that have any difference on the surface of the bullet?
A. Yes, it reduces.
Q. In any other way than reducing, does it affect it?
A. It strengthens the metal, of course.  Any corrugation strengthens or stiffens the metal.
Q. Now, have you anything further to say with reference to why you used the bullet you used rather than the one Capt. Van Amburg used?
A. Only that it corresponded nearer to the original No. III bullet; that was why I used it.  The only one I could find. The nearest corresponding bullet to bullet No. III in that respect.
***
Q. From which bullet would you be more apt to get a truer reproduction of the bullet No. III, by using one with the same kind of a base and one that had a cannon lure on it or one that had a flat base and a perfectly smooth surface?
A. Other conditions alike, the cannon lure and the hollow base.
***
Q. You answered the District Attorney that, on his calling your attention to a mark on a bullet, that there was a turning over of the metal.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What do you mean by turning over of the metal as distinguished from slippage?
A. That is the riding side of the land.
Q. You haven't told us much about that yet.  What do you mean by that?
A. That is where the bullet first strikes the lands and starts the turning.  Of course it turns the metal over.  You can expect that on every bullet. That is common.
Q. Is there a difference between "turn over of the metal" and a widening of the groove caused by jumping the land?
A. Yes.
Q. Is that recognizable?
A. Oh, yes.
Q. Well, I have to take a bullet.  I am taking one out of Exhibit 35.  You said it strikes the side of the land on the rifle barrel?
A. The riding side, the one that offers the most obstruction.
Q. Then as the bullet starts to mushroom, if it was turned right like that, this side, or, rather, the left-hand side of the land would come in contact with the right-hand side of the-
A. Have the greatest resistance.
***
Q. Would that turn the side over?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. So that on that side you would get a turn over of the metal.  Now, what I want made clear, how do you distinguish that, a turn over of the metal, from the width of the groove.  These men may not understand that.
A. I measured the width of the groove at the bottom, not near the top, where the metal is turned over; same as you would turn in pulling,-it turned over that metal.  I did not measure from that.  I measured from the bottom.
Q. Take the photograph No.3. Take that on the second photograph, No.3.  You have described that as being wider at the top than at the bottom?
A. Yes.
Q. Is that caused by the turnover of the metal or width of the groove?
A. The width of the groove.
Q. I see.  Is there any question about that?
A. Not in my opinion.
Q. All right.  I believe you stated yesterday it was practically impossible to get a bullet like that bullet No. III; they are not made now, those?
A. To the best of my knowledge they are not made now.
Q. And you said you went between Boston and Lowell way.  Lowell is your home?
A. Yes.
Q. You live that way?
A. Yes.
Q. In your search for bullets you took that course?
A. I took that course, yes, sir.
Q. I see.
A. May I add to that?
Q. Yes.
A. I had two assistants out looking for them.
Q. Well, you were unable to procure one?
A. Unable to get one.
Q. In the first of your examination by Mr. Katzmann this morning, you answered some questions rather ambiguously.  You said you could not answer yes and you could not answer no.  Do you now remember what you were talking about?
A. Repeat the question, please.
Q. Well, I have it now.  He called your attention to photographs 5 and X, and he called your attention to a double marking on 5 and X?
A. 5 and X.
Q. Yes.  And he asked you what caused that double marking and in answer to him you said you could not answer yes and you could not answer no and you wanted to explain, and it passed off. What have you to say with reference to that?
A. It is possible that that could be caused by metal fouling or defective lead.
Q. You mean by one of two things?
A. Yes, sir.
***
Q. Metal fouling at the base might cause a defective lead, might it not, if there was enough of it? A. Metal fouling in the lead would be liable to cause that.
Q. Yes. Well, that is what you wanted to say at the time?
A. Yes, sir.
***
Q. Taking that revolver, and from your examination of that revolver, the hammer on the revolver, is there anything on that hammer to indicate that it is in any way newer than any other part of that revolver?
A. No, not to my best knowledge.
***
Q. You say this gun is about how old, to your best judgment?
A. It was made in 1905.
Q. 1905.  Well, I think I have covered the situation.  With reference to the nose of the hammer, there, whether that indicates that has been struck on a shell or not,-look at the nose of the hammer.
A. *** (The witness goes to the window to examine.)
***
Q. Since your examination of the gun at the window, what was your answer with reference to the hammer nose?
A. It hasn't been used much in firing.
***
Q. The whole gun, does it bear the appearance of having been used much or little?
A. The whole gun bears very little indication of being fired much.
***

Sacco & Vanzetti Trial Page