Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1908-05-21
PLATT'S SON WITNESS
Sharply Questioned as to Let
ters in Wood Case.
WHY THE CASH WAS PAID
To Save Father Embarrassment on
Eve of Marriage.
THE WEDDING CERTIFICATE
Much Testimony on the Genuineness
of the Printed Form-Justice
Insists on Haste.
THE WEDDING CERTIFICATE
Special Dispatch to The Star.

! with the order of Justice OGOrman tina,
the taking of testimony in the Platt-Wooo
suit must end today. no matter how late
| the court had to sit the attorneys fol
| both sides were on hand half an houl
/ before the time set for the opening oi
court.
| Miss Wood. who did not appear in the
| courtroom all day yesterday. was In
| court TODAY Her absence Yesterday was
said TO be due to d slight indisposition.
| The first witness called by MIR. Stancf-
field in behalf of Senator Platt was Law
| renee Hills a reporter for a New York
paper He met Miss Wood, he declared
at the Manhattan Hotel in October
1909. when she said that Mr.. Platt 5
| matrimonial affairs were of no interest to
her. and declined to, make any statement
regarding proposed breach of promise
| suit
was the next witness. He identified /,
letter which. he said. had been handed
to him by his father. The letter was
from Howe & Hummel. and read:
| Thomas c. Platt, ESD:
| Dear Sir--We are about to bring an
action in behalf of a young lady. the par
| ticulars of whose case you are familiar
with. Unless you arrange 1or CONFER
| ence with us De1Ofe tOlllOITo" IlooH We
| shall at once bring the matter before
the courts. HOWE & HUMMEI-.'
Conference With Hummel.
Frank Platt said that after his fathe"
turned the letter over TO him he saw De-
lancey Nicoll. and conference was ar
ranged with Mr.. Hummel.
"At the conference said Mr. Platt
"Hummel said that he was about to bring
an action for breach Of promise
"At this interview with Mr. Hummel
did the iatteG produce certain letters and
documents supporting to be from your
father?" asked Mr.. Stanchfeld.
"He did, replied Platt. He had sew
eral letters, three sets of typewrjtten
copies of these: several newspaper proof
sheets, photogra phic negatives of letters.
ETC.
in that interview was the amount of
money required for the release discussed?"
1T had been arranged previously by
Mr.. Nicoll. 1t was 10000 l handed
that amount to Mr.. NicOll and he handed
II to Mr.. Hummel'
Did you read the letters?'
Il did
What disposition was made of the
package containing the letters"
Destroyed Some Of the Letters.
II left them in my desk for time
Later l reread them and destroyed all
except a half dozen which have been
filed with this court
Mr.. Stanchfield handed Frank Piatt the
typewriter. "Little-bride-to-be letter
| Was there a letter in language or SUBJ
stance like that delivered up to you by
Mr.. Hummel?
| There was not"
Similar denials were made of the MY
/ dearest Mae the My dear May-June-
| November bride and other letters.
| None of the letters or papers handed
over by Mr.. Hummel. Frank Platt said.
| contained any reference to the alleged
marriage. nor any reference on the sub
ject of marriage between the plaintiff and
| the defendant.
| In cross-examination Mr.. lie Barber
asked. How was the plaintiff addressed
| in these letters?
How He Addressed Her.
She was generally addressed Dear
| May Dear Catherine and / think once
or twice Dearest / don't recall any
! particular instance of the use of the more
endearing terms
| How were they signed?''
| Most o. them were brief notes OF in.
| vitations to dinner to meet him, anc
| generally signed merely with initials
/ Were any of these letters improper?
! Yes. but not particularly So.
/ why. if there is nothing particularly
improper about these letters. was the sum
of $4,000 paid for theme
| Mr. Platt hesitated only moment. m,
father was about 10 marry again. 4
suit such as this woman threatened woult
have been very embarrassing at the time
| We paid the money to get rid of the an
noyance.
What was your object. Mr.. Platt, il
destroying some of the letters and keepine
the remainder"
Kept Being Interviewed.
'The plaintiff kept on making newspa
per interviews. l thought that probably
she wouldn't stay bought, SO ! kept the
letters which l thought pointed out that
there had been no engagement
4 Mr.. Stanchfield introduced dispositions
and witnesses accompanied by many
| books and documents to show that the
large certificate presented by the plalntlfi
could not have been in existence at tn.
time of the alleged marriage. The certii-
cate offered by her in evidence was manu-
| tactured by the r.. e. J. b. Young Com
pany. and has the words 'tone thousand
nine hundred and - blank space be
ing left following these words. Certificate es
| of this kind were not printed for til.
| Young company. according to evidenc,
given today. until 1907. Until that veal
the certificates were printed from litho
graph stone which bore the words ''one
Thousand nine hundred -, the wore
The several witnesse swore that ne
other Autographed marriage certifi-
Gates exactly like that shown by Miss
Wood would be Autographed by the
printers for any other firm. Therefore
it would be impossible Cor any certifi
Gates of this character to be obtained
previous TO 1902. The plaintiff allege
that she was married to Senator Plat
in 1901. and that he gave her the Ger.
| tificate in that year.
Immense Amount Of Evidence.
Mr.. Stanchfield had an Immense
amount of corroborative evidence t,
offer on this point. and Justice OGor
man interrupted him to urge that tn.
case must be hurried along.
Mr.. Stanchfield then offered a Ions
deposition from Thomas Porter. al
Omaha newspaper man. who interviewed
Miss Wood. and who says that she tolt
him that she was afraid Senator Plat
would beat her out by agreeing to mar
by her. which she did not want In do"
In order to hasten the proceeding!
Mr.. Stanchfeld suggested that he reat
only portions of The Porter dispositions