The daily morning journal and courier. [volume] (New Haven, Conn.) 1894-1907, 1905-04-29
NO Defense made IN
nan PATTERSON Case
CONCLUSION OF AC-
TRESS THIRD TRIAL.

TRESS THIRD TRIAL.
Arguments to be Made Monday-coun-
sci for the Defendant Ask That Case
be Taken from Jury-Recorder Con
Refuses-Trying Day for Mans Sister
Declines to Answer Questions
Much Quoted Letter Ruled Out.
New York. April 2S.-After day re-
plete with interesting developments
both the prosecution and the. defense
rested the case of Nan Patterson, the
former actress, indicted for the alleged
murder OF Caesar Young, the wealthy
bookmaker, almost a year ago. The
prosecution finished its case just prior
to the adjournment of the court and
later Attorney O'Reilly, of counsel for
Miss Patterson, notified the prosecution
that his side would submit no defense
and would rest on the contention that
the state had failed to make out any
case against the defendant. This plan
had been under consideration for some
days but was only decided upon at a
conference to-day between the counsel
for the defense and Nan Patterson and
her aged father. The decision means
the speedy conclusion OF the young wo-
mans third trial for the sensational
tragedy on West Broadway. When the
case is called Monday, to which date
the trial was adjourned to-day, Assist
ant District Attorney Rand will begin
to sum up for the state. The success
sion Of events which marked the days
proceedings included the courts denial
of motion to dismiss the indictment,
the testimony Of the prisoners sister,
Mrs. J. Morgan Smith, in which she
made some interesting statements but
stood for the most part on her right to
refuse to answer questions on the
ground that the answers might incrini-
nate her; Mr. Rand S promise to quash
the conspiracy indictments against Mrs.
Smith If she should answer his ques-
tions and the protest Of the counsel Of
the defense to the court that Mr.. Rand s
nerciless method of questioning was
"badgering the witness, and the rejec-
tion again by the court of the much
Quoted letter of Mrs. Smith to Young
expressing fear as to the consequences
If Young did not see her sister.
The contention OF the defense in NOV
ing to take the case from the jury and
to dismiss the Indictment was that the
conspiracy accusation charge had been
practically abandonec; that the prose-
crtion had failed to prove that J. Nor
gan Smith bought the revolver which
caused Young's death: that the case
was circumstancial and the testimony
Of Drs. o TIanlon, Higgins and Phelps
Indicated suicide rather than murder.
The prosecution replied that It had
proved the fact Of the crime; that the
case should go to the jury on the char
acter Of the wound that could not have
been self-infiicted; had proven Smith
was in the pawnbro.Ser, Stern's, shop
the day the revolver was bought, and
that the prosecution had not expected
a. pawnbroker to make identifications.
Mrs. j. Morgan Smith identified 9
ring and bracelet as her property pawn
ed by her husband In Pawnbroker
stern's store. Mr.. Rand's effort to
make her admit that they were pawned
June failed. Mr. Rand tried to bring
out that she and her husband We're in
New York on June s last when the
prosecution was searching for them but
the witness declined to answer on the
ground that it might incrininate or de-
grade her. Mr.. Rand repeated his
promise to qllash the indictment IL she
would answer questions. The witness
said several times that she would
"stick,' to her sister. Mrs. Smith de-
MED that Leslie Coggins had told her
that the best thing Nan could do was to
marry Matthew Trimble Of washington.
Referring to the note sent by the wit
ness to Young that unless he saw Nan
she could not answer for the conse-
auences, the witness said that Miss
Patterson's emotions at that time We're
caused by Coggins misrepresenting
Young's marriage intentions toward
her. She said Nan refused to believe
the story told by Cosgins and was dis
appointed at the postponement of her
marriage to Young. The witness said,
however, that her sister had said moth
| ing of her future Intentions and was
not responsible for the much quoted let
ter. The court again to-day refused to
admit in evidence this intercepted let
ter. Mr.. Rand asked numerous ques-
tions tending to show the Smiths were
fleeing from Stern during their disap-
pearance from New York, but the witt
ness declined to answer that they left
any cities on his account though she
admitted she had heard he was in one