Atlanta tri-weekly journal. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1920-19??, 1924-08-09

another wordy, gesticulating wran-
gle between barrow and Grove, ana
Judge Caverly adjourned court at
1920 D. m, until 80 p. m, direct
ing the opposing counsel to have
their authorities ready for him to
review at that time.
At the resumption Of the hearing
in the afternoon Judge Caverly
ruled with tn estate that the wit
nesses should testify without refer
enc etc the corded statements.
Miss Nathan was recalled to the
witness stand, and Mr.. Grove re-
sumed his cross-eXamination.
Mr.. Grove read from his record
of the state previously made by
Miss Nathan in his office in the
presence of her mother and sister,
asking if the witness at the time
had not said that she regarded Loeb
as a very manly character ne was
more of a young man than. boy
and "thta there never was anything
about his actions that would lead
YOU to believe he was other than
gentleman" To these Miss Nathan
answered affirmatiVely. Other
questions brought an Il don't re-
member" sometimes varied with an
additional II suppose [ did.
Miss Nathan replied Il did,
when asked il she had not stated
Loeb talked on almost any sub
ject," and that he was perfectly
sane and normal in every respect"
Charges Coercion
Miss Nathan on redirect testimony
asesrt6d an assistant states attor-
ney had tried to influence her opin-
ions of Loeb in the questioning in
h prosecutors office, that she was
i'll at the time, and that she had gone
to the office because of a grand jury
suboena although the grand jury was
not in session.
Miss Nathan denied she told Loeb
she would stick with him" and said
her questioners at the states attor-
ney's office had directed certain
parts of her statement be deleted.
She was. excused from the witness
stand at 2:15 p. IN.
Fraternity Head Testifies
Edwin Meiss. now a reporter for
the Cincinnati Inquirer, and former
~ a student at the University of
Michigan, was called and testified he
was the president of the fraternity
to whom Loeb belonged.
Meiss said he had seen Loeb faint
upon three occasions, that Loeb
spoke in a jerky manner, would
argue on Valueless points, HOP"
into Il room instead of walking in,
walked ina jerly manner, smoked
rapidly and nerVously, and was re-
garded as 'childish."
Meiss said it was his duty to APP
10
men, but that he did not appoint
Loeb because Loeb's Judgment and
conduct were not considered suffi-
Gent inspiration for a freshman.
John Abt, young graduate Of the
University OF Chicago, the next wit
ness, told Of his acquaintance with,
and observations Of Leopold.
Leopold's main thesis was that
whenever he contemplated an act he
balanced pain and pleasure, and if
pleasure ruled, he would not hesitate
to commit the act, Abt said.
Arnold Maremont, University Of
Chicago law student testified that
Leopold believed in his own happi-
ness regardless Of anything else, and
the only wrong he could conceive
was in doing anything that would
NOT give MIN pleasure.
He thought he was supreme and
should be given the right to make
laws to suit himself because if his
super-intellect," Maremont said.
In his estimation there was
man who approached the super-man
stage, and that man was Loeb" the
witness said.
MaremOnt completed his testimony
at 4;O3 p. m, and the hearing was
adjourned until 1890 tomorrow
morning.
The first Identification Of Loeb as
TIE actual slayer of the Franks bow
brought out in defense testimony
came yesterday when DR.. Bernard
Glueck, Of New York, the third men
tai pathOlogist to take the stand,
said Loeb throughout had admitted
to the expert that he. Loeb, struck
the blow. His notes, however, which
the prosecutor demanded that he
read, did not contain any direct refer.
ence to striking the death blow.