The Washington times., 1907-02-11


ing TO show that the defendants dec
larations at the time indicated that he
was OF unbalanced mind. This | be-
licvc. affords a sufficient foundation for
the Introduction of the will.
Now the district attorney insists not
only is il necessary 10 prove insanity
at the time of the making of the will,
but also at the time Of the killing:
The court may permit under the law
the Introduction of one class OF evidence
Professionally that the other class which
doVetailS into II VIII be offered later.
And. then IL this second class is not
enough to strike out the first class or
testimony which was offered provision
ally.
! intend to show by contemporaries
Gus documents of und0ubted genuine
ness that the state of mind existed
which I referred 10, and 1t is purely on
bare technical grounds that their ad-
mission in evidence is being opposed by
the learned district attorney.
Let me suggest that Mr.. Lyons is
/ here after considerable difficulty and
! that If the offer of the will be postponed
until some other time we VIII agree TO
I it. But let US hear the testimony of
| this witness now. II your honor pleases,
/ said Lawyer Delmas in conclusion
/ Nh. Jerome said that one reason why
he opposed the Introduction Of the VIII
was because the court could not judicial
/ ~ act as an expert in insanity
! THE man whose lips have been sealed
! by death at the hands of this dc1enudnt.
who has thousands Of friends in this
MIR. Delrnas objected to this kind of
! speech i'm the presence OF the jury, anc
| AIR. Jerome desisted-
Tho evidence regarding the declara-
| tionS of the defendants wife are on the
] records by consent said Justice Fltz-
I gerald. "This is the first time the court
| has been called upon 10 rule on point
J of this sort On Friday the defendant
/ suggested some matters 10 be presented.
| in order that some additional PROOF
! might he offered to show how the de-
PENDANTS mind might have beeen anect-
/ ed by stories nc had heard Inc Iech-
meal objection raised may be removed
| by the testimony of this Witness SAID
! the justice.
There Is another witness on the stand
| besides this one, and before we proceed
! any further that other witness,
| testimony should be concluded Sull
you may suit yourself on that point.
| Mr.. DelmaS said.
"The technical objection was mace,
| or rather the learned district attorney
declined
Jerome and Delmas Confer.
Let me speak to you personally -
interrupted Mr.. Jerome.
The two cOnversed for some minutes
Mr.. Jerome then withdrew his objection
and the examination of the witness by
Mr.. Delmas proceeded.
/ Q.-Mr. Lyons. I hand you an en-
velope marked. Defendants exhibit N
containing a will Tell me when you
first saw this?
Al cannot tell the exact date. L
was prior to April l, 1906.
Q.-Was the envelope sealed al THU
timer
Alt was sealed. and apparently con
taiued a document
Q.-WhO gave it 10 you?
AR. H. X. Thaw.
Q.-Arc you familiar with the hand
, writing of II. X. Thaw2
Al am.
Q.-When was it given TO you?
/ A.-Some time before April l. 1906.
Q.-Was there any request accom-
/ panying this PACKAGE
Answer yes or no. said Jerome.
Q-The package was placed in you
/ hand2
! At was
Q.-What did YOU do with it,
Al put il I'm my box and kept 1
j there until about November I. 1906.
Q.-What did YOU do with IL then?
Al gave il to my stenographer-
Q.-Was IT in the same condition a
you see IL nOw2
Ayes.
Odd you give the stenographer an,
e directious2
, Ayes.
! Q.-What were those dirdstioas.
An objection was sustained.
O.-What is your stenographer'
name2