New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1896-04-28
MORE OF THE FLECHTER cIs,
THE RECORDER REFUSES 10 ArInv
DISPUTED VIOLIN TO BE PLAYrn
cOIvpT

The trial OF Victor s. Flechter WIN 4. -.
with having in his possession the Stradvsrs. =
sto.en from the late Professor Jean Jos.rs -
was resumed yesterday morning before 49,
Gon, IN Part /, General Sessions Tia A,.~..
violin has been In court every day snce A.. ~.
began 1t Is carefully sealed up every 49,, ~
after the adjournment Of the court, and p,.css \
the custody OF Clerk Hail.
Assistant D!strict-Attorney Osborne, vho 4. =.
Quoting the case for the peope. has praetiea, ~
coded that the violin produced In court ~, n
exception OF the scroll. is not Stradvanu, W
Harry p Durdan. who was on the stand M. .
court adjourned Friday, took the snM !,
violin was handed to him. and he wu ~
examined by A. c. Palmer. counsel for the 49,
In reply TO a question the witness said n, ~
violin he saw at No. % Gramercy Park had,'s
over the chin-rest. There was no crct =
belly OF the instrument he held in his hand -
the violin I saw at F!echter's store and Al 4
Gramercy Park" the witness said.
the er o.oD Ief conceded that the Violin ina n 49,, @
the Palm violin. Charles Pam few dsys -
testified he bought the violin from August GsnutsDs.
This his is the fifth time that. the psop. S,.
changed their base Of operations" cried Nj. PAW
NO, sir, We have not changed once" rep.u v,
Osborne.
Detective-sergeant Reilly was the next witness n.
II
1895 The violin was handed to the witness Re W
he did not think 1t was the one he took from ID =
fendant on the night OF Of. his t arrest r,s,
dealer. He testified he saw the violin which "a,
handed to him by Mr.. Osborne in Mr. Flechtw,
work shop In Union Square This VIOLIN" SAID Il
has been colored in the centre OF the belly sIns1
saw It in Flechter's workshop"
do you any sparkle In the wood Of this viou,>
asked Mr.. Osborne.
One OF the witnesses for the defence had testHh
sparkle in the wood and Mr.. Osbornes object NJ
to show that the instruments were entirely daens.
In reply to question the witness said the violin "
a good model Of grand Strad
In reply 10 Mr. Palmer, the witness said that IA
was in partnership 18th Mr.. Eller at the time no
lessor Perrotte sold the instrument to the defendant
and was part owner Of the violin.
us there much difference TO an expert betva
this violin and a Stradivarius?"
There is as much difference as between chan nj
cheese"
Had this violin a good toner"
No. sir. II never had.
you would be surprised IL this violin had na
Il would like to hear it played"
violin 10 be played. There are number d Il.
perts here who are prepared to demonstrats that
the violin possesses very hne tone
room az counsel made his request. and everybody
was on tiptoe Of expectancy TO hear the violin
The violin was not played, however. as NJ p p
Louis Koen'g. Of No. sS Bowery. u0lnm.t:,
testified that he thought the violin was 6raA
yarIus. bu. not a grand Stradivarius-
Daniel r. Ames. the handwriting expert, was the
recalled. and specimens OF handwriting OF Jonn D
Abraham, p,hc testified he wrote the lost viol1
personal" known as Exhibit No. Ii. we're show
70 him The witness in reply 70 question zen
thar In his opinion the Personal vas not wf1ttel
by the Same person who wrote the specimens q
handwriting submitted TO him. The latter, he SAD
were evidently written with effort at Imitation
while the Personal was an unstudied enorf AM
showed no care.
Several witnesses testified that the violin 10 couI'
was not he one shown at the police court pro
ceedngs, and then the case went over TIL To-Day.