This was one of the very rare cases where a chemical analysis
has been conducted in open court. The chemist first tested a
standard trade morphine pill with sulphuric acid, so that the
jury could personally observe the various color reactions for
themselves. He then took one of the contested pills and
subjected it to the same test. The first pill had at once
turned to a brilliant rose, but the contested pill, being
antiquated, "hung fire," as it were, for some seconds. As
nothing occurred, dismay made itself evident on the face of
the prosecutor, and for a moment he felt that all was lost.
Then the five-year-old pill slowly turned to a faint brown,
changed to a yellowish red, and finally broke into an ardent
rose. The jury settled back into their seats with an audible
"Ah!" and the defendant was convicted.

Let us return, however, to that point in the proceedings where
the defendant has been "held for trial" by the magistrate.
The prisoner's counsel now endeavors to convince the district
attorney that "there is nothing in the case," and continues
unremittingly to work upon the feelings of the complainant.
If he finds that his labors are likely to be fruitless in both
directions, he may now seek an opportunity to secure
permission for his client to appear before the grand jury and
explain away, if possible, the charge against him.

We will assume, however, that, in spite of the assiduity of
his lawyer, the prisoner has at last been indicted and is
awaiting trial. What can be done about it? Of course, if the
case could be indefinitely adjourned, the complainant or his
chief witness might die or move away to some other