Albuquerque morning journal. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1903-1926, 1907-03-14

James c smith. Stanford Whites
brOther-in-laW. was called again as
the the first witness This morning and
was questioned by Mr.. Delmas for the
defense as ne the cablegram from
MI. Jerome. eummoning MIN to APP
pear ~ q witness.
Mn smith said he ala not have
either the original Of the cablegram
or a copy.
As ! remember the message. said
Mr.. Smith. IL read Your evidence
most important Your attendance de-
sired
he had first communicated this evil
dcnce 10 his lawyers
Abraham Hummel next took the
stand He testified that he saw Eve
lyu Nesbit AZ his office. October p.
1903. after her return from Europe.
Did you. after q conversation with
Evelyn Nesbit on october -, dictate
something ia a ste%nograuher" asked
Jerome
Delmas promptly objected upon the
ground that this was not In rebuttal
Of any testimony offered By the de-
Tense.
Justice Fitzgerald overruled the oh.
lection.
Yes answered the witness.
did Mrs. Thaw tell you that Thaw
wanted 10 iniure white and put him
IN the penitentiary and that ThaSv
had begged her time and time again
TO swear to documents he had pre-
pared involving Stanford White and
charging that he had %drugged ana
ruined her. and that Thaw mad beaten
her because she would not sign the
paper" asked Jerome. Delmas arose
10 lay the ground for an objection. lie
asked Hummel " at the time Of the
conversation with Miss Nesbit ne was
acting as her legal adviser and at
torney.
~ was acting only for stanford
White replied the witness.
And you did not contemplate some
action In Miss Nesbit's behalf?'
mo, there was no legal action con-
plated 80 far as she was concerned p"
There was NJ communication be-
tween the witness and Miss Nesbit az
client and counsel.
~ must object said Dolmas 10 the
question upon the ground that it f.
not proper rebuttal
Before the court could rule. how
ever, Jerome put further questions n
the witness which had reference to
the payments he received from stan
ford White for legal purposes. The
amount paid for this particular item
Of service. witness said, was about
500.
Delmas renewed his general objec-
tion.
1T is MOI rebuttal.' said Delmas
"It Is also immatorial and irrelevant
and not proper testimony
Mr.. Jerome proceeded TO argue the
points - law involved
His contention was that IL ID could
be shown that undcr oath Miss Nes-
bit denied that She told Thaw the
stories about Stanford White, which
ia this trial she testified To have mar
rated to ThaW in Paris. that fact must
have weight with the jury in deciding
whether she had IN truth made the
statement. related in her testimony
and which has been the basis oi the
theory that the defendant is insane
III her story is true continued Mr..
Jerome. ~ know of nothing In his
tory or literature more sublime than
EVELYN Nesbit's sclf-sacriice i'm her
r"enunekation of the love of the man
who, We are told, was paying honor
able court 20 her.
but she returned to- America on
October "a and ON October % she
was in Hummels office with the man
she now says ruined her and there
she said hat In Europe Thaw had
stripped her and bent her with Z whip
because she refused To- sign a paper
accusing white of druEgins and raw
ishinR her. Stanford White. she said.
never harmed her
Nj Jerome thcn read @ large NUM-
Der al decisions bearing upou the sub
iert pf introduction of evidence to
show that q witness has made state
mcut4 out of court which do no agree
with fatcments made ON the stand.
lu am the cases. me- declared. the
court have held that when ne atton-
ton of "a witness Is properly called to-
a contradictory statement made out or
court. ~ BIS competent 10 bring tosti.
mon, iu rcbuttal Go prove the state
mcnt.
"The proposition make to the
court is very simple. continued Mr.
Jerome. "tf Evelyn Neshit did not
ten Thaw this story in Paris thr
reason for his insult disappears. If
She ala not tell the story. the hNpo-
thetical question on which the eV-
perts have based their opinion disap-
pears ] contend under the law mn
der the authorities / have quoted. I
have ia right TO show that this
made the statement outside of court
but under oath that she did not tell
ThaV would not agree 10 amy ~uch
STORY as she has told here
MI. Jerome sat down and MI Del
mas arose. Tie said that ass the hour
ion the luncheon recess was approach.
ing and as Mr.. Jerome's argument me-.
oes-ii8tcd uu extended reply. ne Would
ask lbat the recess be- taken mmcdI-
at,l' so that hi- argument might not
Doc Interrupted
Mr. Jerome amended thr motion bv
asking chat court adjourn tur tho dav
] ava N'lN DESTROYS nl getting through
with this cI-e,' said NI Jerome ANA
J ann sure both MI Dclmus and Your
huuuI fCtl the stmc way. have dis
IIH..UN ff.. Frt.Hf.r .| rI.. A-..0.L. -t .