Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1907-03-14
ATTACK BEGUN ON
| MRS. THAW'S STORY
Jerome Continues Examination
of Abe HummeI.
DELMAS ON THE DEFENSIVE
Whites Lawyer Proves an Eager Wit
ness.
WANTS TO BE GIVEN A HEARING
Slips in an Answer Before Thaw's
Counsel Has a Chance to
Make Objection. i
DELMAS ON THE DEFENSIVE
Whites Lawyer Proves an Eager Wit
ness.
WANTS TO BE GIVEN A HEARING

| Special Dispatch to The Star.
| NEW YORK, March 14-The hardest
| fight SO far offered by the attorneys for
| Harry X. Thaw was witnessed today in the
| criminal branch of the supreme court,
| when the defense sought to keep from the
jury the affidavit alleged 70 have been
| made by Evelyn Nesbt in the Office of Abe
Hummel in the fall of 1903. This affidavit
| is alleged to have been made after Evelyn
Nesbit's return from her unchaperoned
| trip through Europe with Thaw, and, ac-
| cording to the prosecutor, she then made
statements to Hummel which We're entirely
at variance with the story she told on the
stand.
Justice Fitzgerald made ruling in the
early stages Of the argument which, ac-
cording to some. precluded the admission
of the affidavit but it was clear as the ar
gument went on, that the ruling of the
justice was confined only to certain sections
of the district attorneys question to which
the defense had objected. 1t appeared to
| those In the court room as If Delmas were
| running to cover when he made his last
| ments that Evelyn Nesbit made to Abe
| Hummel in his office could not be admitted
under the rule that barred privileged COM
munications between counsel and client.
The upshot of the argument was that
| Evelyn Nesbt Thaw win again be called to
the stand7It appeared 40 though she might
| be the first witness of the afternoon, but
] the district attorney said that his expert
| witnesses had been kept so long in waiting
that he did not detain them any
| further From this it was believed that the
hypothetical question which Mr. Jerome had
! prepared would be put to the experts this
afternoon and that the further questioning
| of Evelyn Nesbit Thaw would be deferred
until later in the trial.
The argument this morning was so long
| and complicated that Mr.. Jerome got from
| his witness, Abe Hummel only one brie1
answer to a question. That answer, how
| ever was considered as having marked
| effect on the jury. Mr.. Jerome asked Hum
| mel If Evelyn Nesbit had told him that
| Thaw had tried to make her swear to many
things derogatory to Stanford White and IL
she had not refused to sign her name to
pa per that Thaw then prepared.
"She certainly did,, said the witness before
Mr.. Delmas could nterject his interruption.
NEW YORK. March 14.-After Abraham
Hummel had been called to the stand at
the opening of the Thaw trial today Mr..
Delmas began his argument In reply TO
District Attorney Jerome as to the admls-
sibility of the evidence Hummel has to
offer regarding the affidavit Evelyn Nesbit
is said to have made in his offices. The
district attorney claims that this evidence,
If allowed, will tend to show that Evelyn
Nesbit may not have told the defendant the
story which is said to have made him
insane.
DR.. Allan McIane Hamilton the alienIst.
who was employed by Thaw soon after the
tragedy, but who now has become wit
ness for the state, was in court today along
with the other experts for the prosecution.
Mr.. Jerome may call eight experts in all.
In beginning his argument, Mr.. Delmas
touched first upon the point of the profess
sional relations existing between Evelyn
Nesbit and Hummel at the time the afhdavit
was made Hummel denied yesterday that
he was acting for the girl. saying he was
employed by Stanford White, and that no
legal action was contemplated In behalf OK
Miss Nesbit.
that this witness was acting in the ca
pacity of attorney to this girl 1t Is not for
him. by his word. to deny that such rela-
ton existed. However. we VIII feSerNo
that objection.
Mr. Delmas then turned his argument to
the question of the admissibility of evidence
contradicting the statements of witness
made out OF court.
Contradicted Jerome.
Mr.. Delmas referred to certain authorities
which were cited by District Attorney Je-
rome yesterday in support of the admissi-
bility of such testimony, and said he was
amazed to find that one OF the decisions
fhA rsf
what the learned district attorney an
nounced." Much of what the district attor-
ney said yesterday. Mr.. Delmas said. was
Objectionable; but allowed him to talk Of
much that is not in the evidence here and
that might have been objected to because
was willing to trust to the fair-mindedness
Nof this jury, which is my only protection
Mr.. Demas then took up more of the de-
cisions which Mr.. Jerome cited yesterday
and discussed them in detail. He also took
up the question which Mr.. Jerome asked
Mr.. Hummel, and said 1t was objected to
clause by clause, and explained where in
his opinion each one was Objectionable.
The question called for reply from Hum
mel as to what Miss Nesbit told him in his
ofice-as to whether she told him Thaw
had stripped and beaten her, and that the
charges against White as to her ruin were
not true
Mr.. Delmas brought his argument to a
close by asking that the, court rule out
Hummers testimony as improper and hav-
ing no bearing on the case.
Mr.. Jerome answered Mr.. Delmas briefly,
claiming that as Mrs. Thaw's statements
on the stand had been direct and positive
he must be allowed to controvert them.
Tricked by Hummel.
After the arguments were concluded JUS
tice Fitzgerald said:
1.-THE eases cited are not proper authority
on the question under discussion. The OBJ
lection must be sustained"
This ruling seemed to bar all Of HUM