Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1896-06-12
MAJ. THROCKMORTON
He Takes the Stand Again in the
Holt Case.
DESCRIBES TIE JUDGES KINDNESS
This tho Eighteenth Day Of the
interesting Trial.
THE OTHER WITH SEES

When the eighteenth day of the Holt will
case began this morning Mrs. Ray was
| again put upon the stand for further cross
| examination. When she was on the stand
| yesterday afternoon a number of letters
| from Judge Holt to the witness were pro-
duced and offered in evidence. They were
| given to the lawyers to be kept over night
| for examination. This morning Mr.. Worth
| ington announced that he would object to
| the reading of any parts of these letters
| except those that referred directly to Miss
| Hynes.
| In reply to questions from Mr.. Worth
| 1ngton. Mrs. Ray said that beside being
an orphan. Miss Hynes has neither sisters
| nor brothers. Mrs. Ray said that the con-
versation she had with Judge Holt with
reference to his affection for Miss Hynes
| took place at his home in this city early in
| July, 1884
| Mrs. Ray admitted that the loan of $4,000
| from Judge Holt, which was made to her
| husband. and which resulted In bad feel
| ing between the judge and Mr. Ray when
II was not paid. was made at her request
| The note afterward fell into the hands Of
| Mr.. Wash Holt, and when he sent an Off
| Ger to levy The furniture in the Raw
house she expressed great Indignation
| MI Darlington entered an objection to
| inns form of cross-examination. but it was
aioWed ON Mr.. WOrthington's explanatio
that 1t was for the purpose of showing tine
1eei,ng OF the witness toward one Of the
| parties to this suit
In reply to Mr.. Darlington the witness
stated that the note had all been paid ex-
| cepting Sla. Mr.. Ray asked for thirty
uays' IN which to pay the valance but Mr.
| holt refused to extend the time for even
| two days.
Mr.. Darlington then read extracts from
| letters to Mrs. Ray, in which Judge Holt
spoke IN affectionate terms of Miss HynesA
saying lhat there was no one with better
Ia, upon ner lMrs Rays love and devo-
| tion than her aunt. Miss Hynes The LAT
tefs were then passed round among the
jury SO that they might make compa risons
OF .ne handwriting with photographs of the
a:eseu VIII. which each juryman held in
| his hands. Mr.. Darlington ca lied their sne-
cal attention 10 the absence of the lab on
| the IN each signature. 1t VIII he re
hieihpered mat one of the witnesses for the
| cateator; spoke of this jab as character
| lstlc OF Judge Hollis handy riting in his sig
| nature He also asked them to note the way
IN winch the word Washing ton'' was writ
Mr. Worthington objected to all this az
an unnecessary consumption of time. hui
| ar. darlington explained that there were
nu, eis On letters in which any mention was
| hade OF Mss Hynes. and agreed to hasten
| riatters as much possible
Mr. harrington asked that one letter he
aIlo"ea TO go IN evidence In full. on the
ground that in 1t the judge said that Miss
| Hynes had replied to a letter from him even
more promptly than Mrs. Ray had done.
L viii be frank in saying that one req
son want this letter iE is the fac; that
| !hefe are number of is In 1t that have
| loops Mr.. Carvalh). the expert you know
| SAID That he had never seen loop letter /
IN an Judge Hollis handwritng'
| Now. Mr. Darlington. that's hardly a
!alr statement remarked Mr.. Worthing-
| ton. rather tartly
| The truth is always fair
| MI burlington did not seem to think
| II just right for lawyer to say anything
l cd IN Oh.
Judge Bradley decided that the stat.
| .nent smacked too strongly of evidence 10
| De proper and Mr.. Darlington smiled and
| agreed to modify it.
CrosS-eXamined by Mr. Worthinrton lIrs
| Ray said that she was OF positive but th,,
| the amount in issue betu cen her husband
| and Mr.. Holt was s7lo instead of x:,15
| she was not sure but that MIR. Holt mad
| granite" her husband several extensions of
| time on the note. Mrs. Ray explained the
| business relations between Mr. Ray and
| Mr. Holt. as she understood them which
she said. had made ner so indignant with
And you still are indignant"
| am
In One Piece.
| This concluded Mrs. Rays experience as
witIess, and the next witness called in
rehuttal vas Miss Sara A. Terry She
| testified that she was clerk in the regis
| ters office last August when the alleged
Will turned up so mystericusly. She said
! that when She first saw the document the
| paper was in one piece She used to know
Judge Holt. which was her reason for
examining the paper SO carefully. She
was also on speaking terms with Mr. Luke
| Devlin.
| DR.. w. NJ. Gray. the microscc pist at the
| Army Medical Museum. was next called
and questioned by Mr.. Blair Lee
DR.. Gray said that he was familiar with
| Wi ha h
| DDS of taking enlarged photographs with
| the assistance of the microscope. He iden-
| tiled a photograph of the alleged will
| which he had made. 1t was about four
! feet in length. and showed the handwrit-
! Jig greatly msgnified. The photograph
was submitted to the jury. Mr.. Lee claim
| ing that it showed that the separation be
| tween the two parts of the will was not
| &C mplete.
! This break or line of separation is Just
| between the last two lines of the alleged
| will. the one bearing the date, February
I. 1913 and the other the signature OF
| the testator. -. Holt 1t has Teen the
| contention of the caveatees throughout
| that the loop in the letter 'y' in the date
and the tops Of the "J' and the IT" in
| the signature were carried across this
| break in such way as to prove that when
the will written it was on one COM
| plete piece of paper.
DIR. Gray produced several photo micro
| graphs of these particular points. They
| were photographs enlarged to siXty-five
ulameteTS, showing the surface OIL the pa
| per, and the ink marks SO greatly exag-
gerated that they looked like pictures of
| the surface of the moon. DR.. Gray said
| that these enlargements showed su:h an
| interlacing Of fibers across the line as to
convince him beyond doubt that the
paper was one piece at the time he made
! the photographs.
Mr. Lee asked the witness whether he
| had made any experiments in the matter
| of writing across the line of severance be-
| tween two pieces Of paper and had photo
graphed the results
DIR. Gray said that he had, but Mr. Wor-
| Ellington objected to his testifying as to
| the results on the ground that experiments
| made for the purpose were rot competent
| as evidence. Judge Bradley sustained the
objection.
| Mr.. Lee said that he would show by this
witness that when an attempt was made
| to write across two pieces Of q paper that
| had been severed by sharp instrument
| the result was the spreading of the ink
| such as did not appear in the big photo
graphs of the alleged will.
| Mr.. Worthington remarked that If such
| evidence as that were admit ed they would
| be entitled to bring other witnesses who
| were more expert in writing across a line
| of severance. In this way the case might
| run on forever. He further objected or
| the groul.d that DIR. Gray had not qualified
| as an expert on this point prior to the
! time that he made the experiments for the
| ha obi