New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1907-03-31

DOME know when ne ara stop" the witness an
swered.
Brunfes said one OF his duties was 20 make
report every day. orders from Dr. Mcclure
OF any unusual occurrence in the prison. and ne
had written report. which Dr. Mcclure had
turned over TO the prosecution and which the
defence was trying 20 get. In it, he acknowi-
edged. he had written. at one time, something
about Thaw fearing poisoned food. but said he
GOT the information from DIR. MCGUIRE and knew
nothing about it himself.
FEARED POISONED FOOD.
The report was produced at this juncture. 1t
was contained in an ordinary memorandum
book about a foot long and two inches thick.
Turning 10 the entries on July %, Mr.. Jerome
read a passage which he asked the witness TO
identify. II read: IT. made a proposition TO
caterer 10 pay him $1,000 day to taste all
food sent from outside, as was afraid OF be-
ing poisoned Said it was 20 TO l shot"
Mr. Hartrldge made vehement objection to
the reading and it was eventually stricken from
the records
John J. HanIey deputy warden and head
keeper in the Tombs. was called. He said he
had seen Thaw every day since his imprson-
ment and spoke 10 him frequently, but only
after Thaw had spoken to him. He said he
had observed the prisoner particularly. and had
never noticed anything peculiar in his manner,
although y spoke rapidly. He said he thought
the defendant appeared to be right at all
times.
DR. Leopold Putzel Of the commission, who
had taken practically no part in the examlna-
ton up TO this time, appeared interested in
Hanley's testimony, and asked him a number Of
questions about IhaWS appearance. Did the
defendant every say anything to you about
conspiracy" he asked.
No: 1 can honestly say he never said
thing"
Hanley said that Thaw kept aloof from the
other prisoners when exercising. and on only
two occasions had he seen him associate with
any
DELMAs CALLED.
There was a brief delay after Hanley had
finished. and Mr.. Hartridge offered any or all
OF the counsel for the defence as witnesses
Thaw pulled Mr.. Hartridge'S coattalls energeti-
cally. and Mr.. Demas was first called. He was
asked what he had noticed Of Thaw's appear
ance and manner in court. and said: while we
were getting the jury the defendant kept a
strict watch on all talesmen and evinced great
interest He generally appreciative OF
the situation. and made many suggestions TO US.
can't say we invariably accepted them as ac-
eurate. but men differ such points. and a
layman's point OF view is frequently different
made TO the acceptance OF a taiesman, however.
! think can say. were always made the basis
Mr.. Hartridge examined Mr.. Demas: DO you
think his answers and observations were intelli-
CENT?"
''Oh. most assuredly.'
Upon what did he base his suggestions 10
cOunseI?"
Upon his observations OF the jurors. He
often discussed what the jurors had said in
their examinations"
Did he seem intelligently able to cope with
the facts?'
He seemed to entirely apprehend the facts"
PARTRIDGE HAS HIS TURN.
Following Mr.. Delmas as a turn about, Mr..
Hartridge was sworn. He said that Thaw had
made many valuable suggestions which were
followed by his counsel.
Mr.. Jerome asked: Didn't he lThawl repeat
edly desire TO address communications TO the
couTt?"
Il don't recall that he ala so at ALL" was the
reply.
Not Once?"
Il don't know. myself. You asked repeat
edly.'"
Didn't your fellow counsel ever tell you that
ne had tried 10 do sO3'
Fellow counsel" objected, and the court sus-
tanned the objection.
The examination OF Mr.. Hartridge ended the
] list OF witnesses. ana Mr. Jerome made his
argument for more leeway IN the commission s
hearing. He said his office had an average of
fifteen sixteen cases a year similar to the