The Washington times., 1929-03-07
REFUSES To
SUPPORT
HINT Of
Thief I
continued from First Page,

NGQuLluuSu 1EOHI + Cl1Sb 4 05CJ
attempts to line up former Repre-
sentative Thomas L. Blanton with
the charges preferred by the palm
ist and with further attempts to
show that the veteran policeman
was merely paternar' in his rela.
ton with the palmist.
Evidence was also produced to"
day tending to show that the palm.
ist was highly nervous and suffered
from haIlucinations Of persecution
and robbery.
The defense produced letters writ
ten by Representative Blanton on
January IL and January 81 of this
year, in which Blanton said that
Mrs. Blalock had moved from the
city ION account of sickness.
On January 19 OF this year. tne
palnnist, at Abilene, Tex, signed
an affidavit in which she said that
she had left washington because
she feared her life was endangered
by Capt. BurlingaIne.
Testimony Produced
DR.. William Tindall, former Sec
retary of the Board of District
Commissioners. was the first witness
at the morning session. He pro.
duced a large bundle which he
identified as the transcript of testi.
mony in the trial of Policeman Or
Vile Staples.
After merely Identifying the
bundle, Tindan was excused from
the stand. Attorney Leahy did not
explain why he had the transcript
produced. Burlingame was a mem,
ber of the board which tried
Staples and recommended his dis
missal from the force.
= Alan Dawson, manager of the
Chemical Paper Company. which
occupies a building in the 1000
block of Wisconsin Ave. N. W.,
owned by Mrs. Blalock, followed DR.:
Tindall on the stand. He produced
the rent checks which his company
had paid to Mrs. Blaiock from
1925 to the present time. The
for the rent for January and Feb.
11uary bore the Endorsement OF Mrs.
Blalock and Burlingan1e.
Various other checks contained
the Endorsement only of Mrs. Bla.
lock. or bank Endorsement for de.
posit to her account.
The checks, however, for January
and February of this year also
bore the Endorsement Of Representa-.
tive Blanton.
Attorney Leahy asked the witness
why the checks bore Blanton's in
Glorsemert, and Dawson produced
two letters from BIanton which he
said would account for it. Leahy
started to read the letters into the
record, but Prosecuting Attorneys
Bride and Fowler asked that they
be permitted to examine them. and
then Fowler vigorously objected to
their introduction.
FOWLER OBJECTS
Fowler said that he was unable
to see the relevancy Of the testi-
mony, and declared that the prose.
cutting attorneys are not represent.
ing BIantOn and do not intend to
defend him.
The objection was overruled by
Major D. A. Davidson, chairman of
the board, and Leahy proceeded to
read the letters. The first one
dated January IL, 1879, was on the
official stationery of the House Dis
trict Committee. 1t said. Mrs.
Blalock has moved from the city on
account of sickness" and that she
had asked Blanton to obtain the
check for the rsnt.
Leahy interrupted the reading to
ask the witness IL he had ever re-
ceived a letter stating that Mrs.
Blalock left town because she was
in fear of Burlingame. The witness
replied that. he had not.
The letter also suggested that the
rent for the Wisconsin Avenue
property he Increased. The second
letter, dated January 81, 1929,
thanked the paper company for its
check and said that the writer
would forward 1t to Mrs. Blalock.
The letter. said, "this poor woman
was sick and, greatly worried when
she came to see me, and was In
duced to try to help her."
Other Letters Produced
Attorney Leahy then questioned
the witness about the controversy
over the repairs to the wall and the
rear of the property, and the wit
ness produced letters from various
attorneys acting on behalf Of Mrs.
Blaloek in the controversy.
Spectators were browsing in their
chairs when Noel was called to the
witness stand. His, reply to the
first question asked by Leahy cleo
trified the atmosphere and Kept
spectators on edge for the next
hour.
"Mr. Noel, in response to a sub
poena from this board, did you
produce your file of the case of
Schirmer VS.. the Gibson subcom.
mittee," asked Leahy.
"I'm sorry, but can't produce
that file. I've searched everywhere
for it but 1t has disappeared from
nv office. "Noel replied.
Leahy then fired q series OF ques'
tiOns at the attorney apparently
designed to show that the file had
been stolen. He asked Noel II he
meant that the file had been taken
from his office without his con-
sent. Noel replied, II wouldn't go
so far as to say that some one had
taken it, but It isn't there nOw."
Second File Gone.
Noel said he last saw the file
about six weeks ago and after re.
ceiving the subpoena last week
started a search for it, questioned