Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1929-03-07
ARE MISSING;
TRIAL NEARS CLOSE
Mysterious Disappearance of
Defense Documents Is
Reported.
Continued From First Page.)

which they occupied as tenants of Mrs.
Blaiock. The company, answering the
letter, refused to make the repairs TO q
rear wall, expressing the belief that
Mrs Blalock should rebuild this wall
despite the fact that the lease contained
clause fixing responsibility OF all re-
pairs on the company.
When Mrs. Blalock was on the stand
she said she had been told that MT.
Hart charged q $50 fee for writing this
letter IN her behalf. This was denied
by defense witnesses.
The next witness called, William
Weber, testified that he purchased q
house ct 613 H street northeast from
Mrs. Blalcck, naming the purchase price
as being $4,000. He said that the
transaction was handled for the palnist
by former Representative Blanton.
William Weber, jr., testified he as
sisted Mr. Blanton In removing trunk
belonging to Mrs. Blalock from the
premises. He said that Blanton rode
with him on the truck used in trans
porting the trunk to the formers Office
In the House ONCE Building.
~. Mystery Injected.
An element of mystery was injected
into the hearing when the next witness,
F. r. Noel. An attorney. with Offices
in the wilkins Building, began his
testimony.
Mr.. Leahy asked him to produce the
file In the case of Edward Schirmer VS..
the Gibson subcommittee.
Noel answered he could not produce
the file, explaining that 1t had been
removed from his filing cabinet with
out his knowledge. He said he made
thorough search for the file when he
first became aware of the fact that he
was to be called as a witness In this
case, but had been unable to find any
trace of it.
Leahy expressed surprise when told
that the Ale was missing and asked
Noel II he thought 1t mad been ttolen
from his office. Noel said he was not
willing to say IL had been stolen, but
added that it had been removed some
time during the past six weeks without
his consent or knowledge.
Mr.. Leahy refused to explain what
connection the schirmer case had with
the charges preferred against Capt.
Burlingar1e.
Edward Schirmer, 1t was learned
however. was originally employed by the
Gibson committee Of the House In con-
nection with the valuation of property
to be used for the erection Of Govern
ment buildings. He supplied the COM
rnittee with figures for use In its in
vestigation of District affairs. After
that time he has been engaged in some
| other tasks for the committee. with
which. it is understood, he is no longer
connected.
The defense attorney then requested
| Noel to produce his flies covering his
business dealings with Mrs. Blalock.
This file is also missing. MIR. Leahy,"
| the witness replied. II have made q
thorough search of my off1ce and have
| questioned all of my employees concern
| ing its disappearance. but have been
unable to locate it. was particularly
anxious to keep this Ale because I have
not received my entire fee for some of
the work done by me for Mrs Blalock,
and may need 1t to prove my claims
Leahy then questioned Noel as to the
location of his filing cabinets and to
their accessibility to strangers. Noel
answered that the filing cabinet was
situated In the rear of his Office and
that he did not see how 1t could be
reached by any outsider.
Claims Immunity.
Mr.. Noel said he represented Mrs
| Blalock as her attorney from 1921 to
December. 1927. AS Leahy prepared to
ask another question. Noel interrupted
him to announce that he would refuse
TO answer any questions the answer
to which might violate the privacy of
his business relations with his clients.
He quoted authorities from Jaw book
which he brought with him to srow that
he was entitled to this immunity.
He did state, however. that Mrs.
Blalock consulted him six or seven
times during 1927. and that he did
write several letters for her TO various
business firms In Washington.
Mr.. Leahy tried to secure an admis-
sion from the witness that Mrs. Bla-
lock had torn up several business docu-
ments on one occasion while she was In
his Office. The witness would not go
this far, however, contenting himself
with the explanation that, on entering
his Office he found the torn fragments
of several tax bill duplicates q lease
form, and a carbon copy OF o letter
to the collector Of taxes scat erred over
his desk and floor. He said that these
papers had previously been in Mrs
Blalocks possession.
Leahy asked Noel If he has formed
any opinion a. to Mrs Blalock's mental
or nervous cor&jtion.
Yes, ! regaHeed her as nervous and