The Bennington evening banner. (Bennington, Vt.) 19??-1961, 1907-03-15
'DISCREDITS
HUMMEL
Delmas May Call Jerome In
Thaw's Defense.
REBUKED BY WESTERNER
New York Lawsr On Stand Gst
In Statement Before Counsel
Could Object.


Hummel on the witness stand nj the
trial OF Harry X. Thaw declared that
Evelyn Nesbit told him In 1903 that
she had told Thaw In Paris that II was
not true Stanford White had drugged
and betrayed her.
The court had ruled out q somewhat
similar question regarding Evelyn Mes
bit Thaw's alleged afiiddvit. and Mr..
Delmas, leading counsel for the defense.
was on his feet with an objection to
the second Interrogation when Hum
mel quickly interposed his answer In q
loud voice.
AT the Interview In your Office"
asked Mr.. Jerome did Evelyn. Nesbit
prior 20 your debating anything tell
you that she had told Tbaw that Il
was not true that Stanford White had
drugged and ravished herr
Mr.. Dclmas was ON his feet Il. OBJ
ject. but before he could Do 80 and I'm
medlately after the district attorney
had ceased to speak Hummel said In
a loud voice, she certainly did"
Mr.. Dclmas looked az the witness
and. with scorn In his voice. said:
And you call yourself n lawyer"
Mr.. Jerome asked Mr.. Delmas 10 adj
dress his remarks TO the court. lie fur
Their said he understood Mr.. Delmas
TO have said he would not object 10 an
answer TO such question as was ask
cd the witness. His assistant. Mr.
Garvan. had told him Mr.-Delmas had
made such a statement while he pe-
romcl was out OF the room.
Il made no such statement" declared
Mr.. Delmas Il specifically reserved
the right TO object TO any question put
20 this witness"
Mr.. Delmaz turned to Hummel and
said:
'You heard me reserve that right.
didn't your
Il did," said IIummel. not In the
least pcrturb,d.
And the learned district attorney
heard mey- asked Mr.. Dclmas. turning
TO Mr. Guryan.
III the learned counsel from the IA.
cinc slope will address himself 20 the
court. We viii make lcttcr prgnss."
said Mr.. Jerome lie also added that
the prefix learned n left out would
tend a. shorten the record.
Irritable children are entitled 20
some consideration" replled Mr. Del
mas. $50 II the irritable district attor.
ncy prefers will refrain from ascrlb-
Ing 60 him the qualities he ~ scorn-
fully rejects"
There was general laughter az this
Mr. Dclmns first moved that District
Attorney Jeromc's question and Hum
mcr- answer b. stricken from the rec
ord. and Justice Fitzgerald seemed
about a. order that done when Mr..
Dclmns again took 10 his feet aud said:
Through the extraordinary conduct
Of the district attorney this question
and answer are la the record. Let
them stand. ! waive my right"
Mr.. Jerome wanted 90 know n the
motion TO strike out was withdrawn.
"rhc answer Il already with the
jury. Why should Il b. stricken outi
I withdraw the notion" said Afr, Del
mas.
District Attorney Jerome prcclpitat.
ed another clash by his next question.
"Did Evelyn Ncsblt. as she was then
known" he asked. SAY 10 you that
Thaw had prepared documents charg.
Ing stanford White with having drug.
gcd and betrayed her when she was
fifteen and insisted upon her signing
them. but that she told Thaw she
would not because the statement was
not trucT'
Mr.. Delmas objected NJ once on the
ground that the question was a rcpcti-
ton Of the one already ruled out by
the court.
Justice Fitzgerald said that the qucs.
ton ruled out included portions OF tho
present question.
Mr.. Jerome cited additional decisions
20 uphold his view.
Mr.. Dclmas In concluding a lengthy
argument on the new question declared
that the mere fact that Evelyn Nosblt
had refused 60 sign documents for
Harry Thaw was not evidence that she
had mndc the statements 30 him.
III your honor this afternoon should
be asked by some inquisItlve person 20
sign a paper saying you had ruled a
certain way this morning. the fact that
you declined 10 sign certainly would
not be evidence that you had made the