The Washington times., 1907-03-12

Jerome Pleads for Admission of Smith Evidence
Ccontinued from First Page.l


Continued from First Page.l
come TO my office at his earliest con
yenience and tell me the facts in his
knowledge"
''rhe district attorney moved this trial
IN the supreme court the very day
appeared with a motion for a commIs-
sion 70 take dispositions from witnesses
IN California and other distant parts, "
SAID Hartridge In his argument.
Delmas Queries Jerome.
Mr.. Delmas asked what Mr.. Jerom,
proposed. including in the legal basi.
for his request that the court exercise
its discretion.
Il am extremely sorry that I am not
as conversant with the English Language
as Mr.. Delmas" said Jerome. 'and that
am not capable OF making myself un-
derstood as clearly as he. 1 also regret
that l am lacking In the years Of eX-
perience he has enjoyed. l hope he will
pardon me IL he believes that | in
tended TO mislcad him. All I intended To
convey when / said would submit cases
10 the court to establish my claim that
exercise Of the courts discretion would
be proper, l meant authorities-legal au-
neutrality-suspicious.
Delmas Cautions Jerome.
Mr.. DeImas replied:
There is no need for any heat on the
part Of the learned district attorney.
What l have always considered legal
basis to be was that all complex ques-
tiOns that constitutes evidence and af-
fidavits upon which an application may
be based. If that Is what the learned
district attorney proposes to submit
very well and good. But in any event
my question was not intended to pro-
woke the learned district attorney 10
wrath
You have not stated the date Mr..
smith left for Europe" concluded Mr..
Delmas.
"Oh. yes. it was three DAYS after the
tragedy answered Jerome.
We'll then when did he return
queried Delmas.
Jerome Reads From Testimony.
Il returned in the fall OF the year. ard
again went abroad about Christmas
time. 1 haven't the exact dates" said
Jerome. but quote them as I have read
them"
rs that as far as the district attorney
will attempt to fix the dates" asked
Delmas. IF it is. 1 wish to caution
him." continued Mr.. Delmas.
Il need no caution retorted Jerome.
Then l viii assume that Mr.. Smith
returned the first day OF the fan sea-
son. declared Mr.. Delmasr
Jerome presented an affidavit setting
forth his reasons why the court should
use its discretion in admitting or ruling
out Smiths testimony.
counsel for the defense adjourned to
the Justices private chambers To argue
the question, as il was not consTdere1
material for the Jury. A short recase
was declared during which the fury,
and the prisoner withdrew.
The Session Resumed.
The session was resumed at 1.25.
? During the wait that followed. District
Attorney Jerome chatted with Jurors
Nos. and 3. He was evidently telling
one Of his funny stories. Thaw called
the attention Of several reporters to the
incident
DO you see what he Is doing?'' asked
Ihaw. rs that right?''
He was assured that the district at
torney was simply chatting with the
Jurors. and he smiled. and remarked.
We'll. ! think that very unusual"
After the conference, Mr.. DeImas said
he begged to add to the statement OF
the district attorney the statement.
AT the time that Mr.. Smith was in
this city II the fall. all the facts now
known to Mr.. Jerome were known to
him
That is traversible, absolutely" ex-
claimed Mr.. Jerome.
Jerome cited a case wherein the prosa-
cuton was allowed 10 admit two letters
after the defense had rested its case
The court OF appeals had confirmed the
ruling Of the lower court in uDholding
the action Of the trial Judge The case
was that of Layton VS.. the People. in
which the original defendant was CON
Nicted Of murder in The second degree.
The district attorney went on auG cited
similar cases
Long Argument Presented.
Jerome went into a long argument in
support OF his contention.
Il was absolutely in Ignorance of
what the defense would be-" said Jer-
ONE Even after the trial had begun
/ did not know whethervth they would con-
tend the defendant was sane or insane
whether the homicide was a justifia bile
one. For the same reason they kent
as in ignorance of evidence the people,
did not feel called upon TO expose their
hand
The admission of this witness testi-
mony Is important as tending to show
laat thls defendant was not insane on
the night OF the murder. Just what the
nature OF the testimony is ] cannot dis
cuss here. but I will say that IL is