Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1907-03-18
BEAT HER WITH
RAWH|DE WHIP
Statement in Much-Discussed
HummeI Affidavit,
ADMITTED IN EVIDENCE
Paper Tells of Repeated Cruelties on
Trip Abroad.
MR.. JEROME RESTS HIS CASE
With the Reading Of the Document
Prosecuting Officer Closes
for His Side.
fR.. JEROME RESTS HIS CASE

| NEW YORK, March 1S-After fighting
| for an hour and a half against the intro
duction in evidence OF the famous affidavit
| drawn by Abraham II. Hummel. at the re-
| quest of Stanford White, and with the al
! legged consent of Evelyn Nesbit. charging
| Harry X Thaw with having cruelty beaten
| Miss Nesbt on several occasions during
their trip through Europe in 1903. Mr.
| Delmas. attorney for the defense suddenly
| switched tactics at the trial of Thaw to-
! day and demanded that the whole of the
alleged affidavit go into the record and be
Eead to the jury District Attorney Jerome
| had contemplated reading only certain por-
tons of it. which, he declared. directly
contradicted the testimony of young Mrs.
| Thaw.
With the reading of the affidavit Mr..
Jerome announced that the people rested
| their case in rebuttal. Mr.. Delmas imme-
| diately offered in evidence the record of the
trial of Abraham Hummel on the charge of
conspiracy The district attorney did not
object, and the defendants lawyer pro.
| ceeded TO read the entire record to the
jury.
| Had Many Beatings.
The Humme affidavit had already been
discounted by the statement of its con-
| tents by Mr.. jerome at various times dur
ing his arguments as to its admissbility
| Mr.. Jerome had also quoted freely from
the affidavit during his cross-examination
of ysuR1 Mrs Thaw. During that cross
| examination she denied emphatcally hav-
ing made any of the statements contained
| in the paper.
The affidavit specifies numerous occasions
| in Austria, Switzerland and Paris when
Thaw is alleged to have beaten the young
woman. who was travelling with him as his
wife, until she swooned. Her bare skin,
she declared, had been bruised and cut
by the lashings OF Thaw's cowhide whip.
| Mr.. Delmas had not reached the district
attorneys remarks at the Hummel trial
| when the luncheon recess was ordered 1t
was to ge; Mr. Jerome's own words de-
.nouncing Hummel, that Mr.. Delmas under.
| took to read the entire record of the trial.
There was some delay before the Thaw
trial began today.
| The defense had three experts in
court today, making seven altogether APP
| pearing for the defendant. The alienists
new to the case are DIR. Charles w. Pill
grim, superintendent of the Hudson River
State Hospital at Poughkeepse. n. Y and
president of the state lunacy commission;
DIR. a. w. White, medical superintendent of
1
Washington d. c., and DR.. Minas Gregory,
In charge o. the pavilion for the insane
| at Bellevue Hospital, this city
The other four experts for the defense
are Drs Britton d. Evans and Charles G.
Wagner who already have been upon the
stand, and Drs. Smith Ely Jeliffe and
Graeme NJ. Hammond who have not as yet
been called, but have been in court daily.
Mr.. Delmas Objects.
When the proceedings finally began Mr..
Jerome offered in evidence the broken pieces
| of a Photographic negative of the last page
of the famous Hunmel affidavit, bearing
the signature of Evelyn Nesbit. Mr.. Del
mas promptly objected to it's Introduction
! and began an argument on the point.
Justice Fitzgerald overrued the objection
and the negative was accepted in evidence
Mr.. Jerome then offered in evidence a pho
Geographic PRINT from the negative.
Not Competent Evidence.
Mr.. Delmas said the Photographic copy
of the affidavit could not be introduced TO
contradict Evelyn Nesbit Thaw. for she
was not shown the copy on the witness
stand and had no opportunity either to
affirm or to deny her signature.
Mr.. Delmas argued further that the copy
| of a paper was not competent evidence on
LII.
case In which court had held that orig
inal papers only could be introduced against
a witness, and that even certified copies OF
papers were incompetent.
District Attorney Jerome went to some
length in explaining that the original of
the Hummel affidavit had been traced to
Mrs Thaws hands and she had said no
such paper existed Under these circum-
stances he said he should be allowed to in
troduce secondary evidence in the shape Of
copies of the original paperpzs Che evil
denciary value of Photographic copies. he
contended, had frequently been sustained
by courts.
Would Offer No Objection.
Mr.. Delmas, concluded his argument by
saying that if District Attorney Jerome
would put Evelyn Nesbit Thaw on the
stand and let her say whether or not
she made the statements contained IN
the pa per and whether or not she KNOW
fnsiS signed the paper. he would not OF
fer tfse slightest objection to the am
aayit going in evidence. and would In
sisr that the entire contents OF the parer
be read to the Jury.
/, For the purposes of the argument Dis
trIct Attorney Jerome joined the offer Of
the carbon copy of the affidavit in evil
dence, with the Photographic copy. and
IL fsl.
objection sto the affidavit after II had