New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1907-03-12
SETBACK FOR JEROME.
CAN'T GET IN TESTIMONY.
W'ife,s Dragging Story Stands
Expert Shut out.

Tistrict Attorney Jerome yesterday began his
effort 10 weaken the testimony given in behalf
~ Harry x Thaw by calling witnesses i'm re-
buttal II cannot be said that he succeeded TO
any appreciable extent The defendants coun-
eel were jubilant at the end OF a day that had
been orc long series Of legal combats between
Nr pelnlas and Mr. Jerome. with the honors
In favor Of the former.
As a matter Of fact. the prosecutor found
himself facing a stone wall, no matter what
,nrnine he might take He was blocked when
he called F. w Longfellow. Thaw's personal
counsel 10 show through him that Thaw was
familiar with such horrible stories as had been
told 10 him by Evelyn Nesbit. because similar
charges had been made against him in suit
brought by Ethel Thomas. He was blocked
when he tried TO show through Mr.. Longfellow
that the 'Hummel affidavit" made by Evelyn
Neshit syas in existence and, in fact. had been
given to one Of Thaw's counsel by Longfello|
He was blocked when he tried TO show through
The testimony of DR.. Rudolph H. Witthaus that
Evelyn Nesbit's story Of being drugged by STAN
ford White was untrue because there is no drug
in existence that would act she said the
6ruEged wine acted on her He was temporarily
blocked too when he called 10 the stand James
Clinch Smith. Stanford Whites brother-n-law.
who was on the Madison Square roof on the
night OF the shooting. 10 tell Of Thaw's actions
II was day OF defeats for Mr. Jerome
WHITES RELATIVE CALLED.
In placing Mr. Smith on the stand the prose-
clltor sprang a distinct surprise on the numerous
Thayy counsel Mr. Smith is a laSVyer ana llNeS
3 good deal OF his time in Paris He testified
that he had known Thaw Tor several years ana
that he saw him the roof garden on the
night Of June 25 1906. He had conversation
with him. and Mr. Jerome wanted Smith 10 re-
peat it, probably 10 show that Thaw eXhioited
no signs Of insanity. But here Mr.. Delmas In
tennessee and the witness got no further. To-
da,, Justice FitzGerald will decide whether he
will acoede 10 me application Of Mr.. Jerome TO
hermit Mr. Smith 10 be examined as a direct
witness for the state. Mr.. Smith vas absent
in Paris when the case began. returning TO this
country on February i.
Perhaps no disappointment was more keenly
felt bv Mr. Jerome than when the court refused
10 allow him TO attempt TO discredit young Mrs
Thaw's story. He put this story into the form
Of a long hypothetical question and asked Dr.
Witthaus, who is expert on drugs and pol
sons if there any drug known 10 scientists
which could have produced the effects described
b, Mrs. Thaw Mr. Delmas objected. and quot
ing from the law laid down by Mr.. Jerome
himself earlier in the trial he showed that the
question Was not allowable under the rules Of
evidence. The prosecutor fought hard and well,
but to no effect; the court ruled with Mr.. Del
mas. and DR.. WItthaus had 20 step down from
the witness chair.
MADE FEW SLIGHT GAINS.
The only gains made by the state were when
Patrolulan Dennis Wright who took Thaw TO
The Tenderloin station after the shooting; Ser
geant David Mccarthy. before whom he was
arraigned, and Warner Paxson, Henry F. Blaeze
and Meyer Cohen, witnesses 10 the shooting all
swore that. in their opinion. Thaw was rational
ar the time. Even some of this testimony
discounted by Mr.. Delmas's clever cross -exami-
nation Police Captain Hodgins badly
tangled up by the cross examiner "Thaw seemed
rather more rational than irrational" was far
as far as he would go. TO the District Attorneys
discontinue and the amusement of everybody.
Pefore the trial goes much further it is prac-
tically certain that Mr.. jerome viii make
strong effort 10 introduce testimony tending 10
show that Stanford White not with Evelyn
Nes5it on the night he is said 10 have I'll treated
her. I, is known that the prosecutor feels very
keenly the point, and it is said he has testi-
mony which would prove perfect alibi for the
architect could he procure its admission in
court.