The Montgomery advertiser., 1907-03-16

Hirsch.
 Mir. Delmas waved Dr. Pritchard, when he was turned over by District Attorney Jerome for cross examina- tion. It was then announced rom sne defendants counsel table that there would be no cross examination of the experts for the state.
 Dr. Albert Warren Ferris of the College of Physicians and surgeons, the next expert for the prosecution was on the stand but few moments He answered the two hypothetical questions as the others had done ana was dismissed by MT. Delmas.
 Dr. A. r. Diefendor, of the State Hospital at Middleton, Conn, and a pro lessor of mental diseases at fale University was the fifth of the prose- cutions experts to testify that in ms opinion, based on the two hypotheti- cal questions. ythe prisoner was sane when he killed White.
 Mir Delmas started to ask pr. Die- fendor a question as to certain state- ments made in one of his works.
 Mr. Jerome objected and Delmas with drew the question.
 Dr. Diefendorf thereupon was ex- cused and pr. Mabon, the last Of the six experts was called.
 Dr. Mabon was of the same mind as the five doctors who preceded him on the stand
 When MT. Jerome had concluded his direct examination of Dr. Mabon, who Is superintendent of the State hospital for the insane at Wards Island, MT. Hartridge of Thaw's counsel said he had a few questions to put to him.
 Hartridge Takes Hand.
 'Ts 1t not true" he asked. that physicians often differ as to the form of insanity from which a patient may be suffering?"
 District Attorney Jerome interposed an objection, but 1t was overruled.
 They do." admitted Dr. Mabon
 Mir. Hartridge said that many things which are in evidence were let off the hypothetical question framed by the District Attorney, and undertook to supply some of tho details
 Mir. Jerome objected to the additions to his question. especially the refer ence to the Monk" Eastman gang, and said there was not a fact cor rectly stated by MT. Hartridge, which is not contained in one or the other of the two hypothetical questions put to the witness
 Mr. Jerome objected to MT. Hart ridges concluding clause in the ques- tioh as to whether or not the de- fendant was suffering from any form of Insanity then, of June 25. last. The District Attorney declared the law IS explicit as to the form of insanity which constitutes an excuse for crime-that the person must be suf- fering from such a defect of reason of his act or to know that the act was wrong.
 The luncheon recess wass ordered with the matter still pending.
 When the court reconvened after the luncheon recess MT Hartridge said he would withdraw the question asked pr.
 Then there is no cross examina- tioh?" quried Mir. Jerome.
 None" said MT. Hartridge. -
 Tn that case, your honor, said MT. Jerome to Justice Fitzgerald, I've come to the question as to whether or not Abraham Hummel was acting as at torney for Evelyn Nesbit at the time he was testifying about yesterday
 Evelyn on the stand.
 Call Evelyn Nesbit Thaw." com
 Young Mrs, Thaw soon appeared from the witness room and took her place in the chair.
 MT. Delmas called Mrs. Thaw's at testified as to. visiting Hummels of flee with stanford White. dts ana .,a,. with view to having his legal advice counsellor at law
 District Attorney Jerome promptly  had alreay been duly examined on the subject.
 Justice Fitzgerald overruled the ob- jection and Mrs. Thaw said.
 Mrs. Thaw then left the stand.
 MT. Jerome then summoned Hummel
 When Evelyn Nesbit called on you at your office.' asked MT. Jerome, "did she not tell you that Thaw had begged her time and again to sign and swear to documents he had prepared cnarg ing Stanford White with her betrayal and that when she had told Thaw il was not SO that he beat hery' MT. Delmas objected to the question Justice Fitzgerald overruled the ob' l jection.
 Yes" said Hummel. Did you thereafter and in the pres ence of Evelyn Nesbit dictate to { | stenograpner?" Mr Delmas objected on the grounC that the question was irrelevant. al
 MT. Jerome said he remembered tha Mrs. Thaw had sworn that sne hear' | the dictation and withdrew the ques tion.
 Can you recall what was dictated? !? asked MT. Jerome.
 T can"
 was the dictation subsequently, re duced to writing?'
 Yes"
 MT. Delmas protested that the quic answers of the witness did not permi | him to object He asked that the las answer be stricken out.
 Justice Fitzgerald ordered this don and MT. Delmas offered an oDJectio to the question as immateriai.
 Justice Fitzgerald asked If the die