The Washington times., 1921-04-14
STOKES JUDGE
PEEPS ON ROOF
Court Decides to Get Direct
Evidence on What Divorce
Witnesses Could See.

NEW YORK, April 14.-Supreme
Court Justice Edward R. Finch
made a personal visit yesterday to
the house at IS East Thirty-fifth
street, the scene of the alleged
indiscretions of Mrs. Helen Elwood
Stokes and Edgar T. Wallace, one
Of the many correspondents in the
Stokes divorce case.
CLOSES EXCITING DAY.
The judicial inspection closed a day
OF conflict in court over the testimony
OF Zenas Matteosian, the architect.
He originally swore that he had seen
from an extension roof Mrs. Stokes
and Wallace. unconventionally clad, in
the latter's apartment.
He was certain that it was Mrs.
Stokes. he was certain it was Wallace
and he was certain Of the sight that
met his eyes-in his original testi-
mony.
To settle the controversy which has
arisen between opposing counsel, Su-
preme Court Justice Finch went to
the apartment at Is East Twenty
nth street to see for himself.
He was accompanied by Myles A.
Walsh, of counsel for Mrs. Stokes. and
Milton S. Cohn, of counsel for the
plaintiff.
Justice Finch and the two lawyers
with him were accorded access to the
apartment on the fourth floor which
was at one time occupied by Mrs.
Genevieve La Cross De Anquinas and
later by Mr.. and Mrs. Matteossian.
They went out on the roof OF the ex-
tension in front of the window Of the
room which, according to the Matte
ossians. was the bathroom OF the
premises when they occupied 1t. 1t is
not now the bathroom.
JUDGE DRAWS PLAN.
But the Judge and those. with him
were able to look over the brick cop
ing, and Justice Finch was given at
first hand an opportunity to Judge
what the witnesses who testified they
had seen Mrs. Stokes dressing her hair
near the window at a dresser near
window, and had seen Wallace pull
down the shade, could have observed
from tho point
After taking notes of the layout of
the premises, most as to the floor
which the Matteossians and that
which Edgar T. Wallace occupied, the
justice and the two lawyers departed.
No expression of opinion was vouch-
safed as to what had been seen by any
one-either the judge or those with him.
Martin Littleton. representing Mrs.
Stokes, and Henry A. Wise, repre-
senting wallace, ripped deep into the
architects testimony. They confront
cd Matteosian with photographs and
msps of the building in an effort to
prove it to be a physical impossi-
bility for anyone to have seen the
couple in the position described.
They called on him to exercise his
TT ofessional knowledge of perspective
and explain exactly the position he
had assumed on the extension roof
with reference 10 the Wallace win
dow. AS he phrased it, the roof ex-
tended from the bathroom OF the Mat
tCosian apartment on the third floor
of the building in the rear. The
Wallace boudoir was on the second
floor, flush with the main building
wall. BY looking down from the
roof through an open window, the ar
ohitect insisted that he could see Mrs.
Stokes brushing her hair in diaphan-
Gus lingerie, until Wallace pulled
down the shade.
WEAKENs IN TESTIMONY.
Pressed for specific details, Mat
teosian began to weaken. He plead
ca that he could mot remember de-
tells, that the incident was seven
years old now, and that he was not
sure just where he stood. Littleton
interjected:
Then tell us how in any position
you could have seen any one at the
dresser between the windows, unless
you could see through a chimney or
climb out into space?"
The architect studied the drawings
and photographs carefully, then said:
II don't know just how l could
see. but l know that did see"'
With voice that carried the sug-
Sestion of a snarl in 1T, Wise cut in:
Then you must have curved eyes
that see in circle, or else you must
have balanced over the coping of
the roof like an acrobat and which
was it?"
JUDGE VISITS PREMISES.
The lawyers battled over this for
half an hour until Justice Finch
called halt by stating that he would
see the premises for himself. The in
spection was made in company with
an assistant counsel from both sides
Matteosian will take the stand
again today when he will be interro-
gated further in the light of condi-
tions disclosed by the examination.
But before he left. Littleton struck
hard against the architects positive
Identification OF the woman in the
room. He had previously testified
that she was red-headed that he
knew her from a photograph seen
later in Wallaces room, and that he
was sure she was the Mrs. Stokes he
was facing in court.
The architect could not remember
whether II was the picture which
he had ben told was Mrs. Stokes
photograph. The more persistent the
cross-examination became the Stacker
became Matteosian's recollection. He
emphasized frequently that II all
took place seven years ago and Lit
tleton encouraged him to emphasize