Evening star., 1935-02-01

@. If the photographs were made
in an artificial kind of light, wouldn' t
that too make a difference? A. ]
don't think so.
Attack on Photographs
OF State Seen.
Reilly by his series of questions on
the photography of handwriting ap-
peared to be laying the ground work
for an attack on the trueness of the
States photos of the Hauptmann
writing which has been used for COM
parison with the ransom notes.
Reilly indicated 1--WE" in Haupt-
mann's writing.
@. You do not find a eve" like
that on the ransom notes? A. No.
The heavy-set defense counsel,
with arm extended, held a chart
showing "es" before the jury while
a ransom note was passed among
them. He sought to demonstrate
Trendley's assertion there was a dis
similarity between ransom note "eS''
and those of Hauptmann.
The session had relapsed into a
listless affair. The audience whis-
pered in sWreptitious conversation.
The three most interested persons in
the room apparently were Haupt-
mann, Col. Lindbergh and Justice
Trenchard. Mrs Hauptmann looked
bored. The testimony droned on,
punctuated occasionally by the boom
of Reilly's voice as he asked a ques-
ton.
Reilly referring to the "were" in
tended to be where" in the nursery
note. He said it was "a peculiar
word, an important word, it sticks
out"
Trendley examined the charts and
reported neither the word nor any
combination of It's letters was shown
@. Did you hear Mr.. Osborn say
he examined the ransom notes, par
ticularly the nursery note? A. Yes.
Trendley said there was a differ
ence between Hauptmann's "the's
and those in the nursery note. Os-
born, he added, had failed to photo
graph the nursery note "the'S."
Court declared 5-minute recess
at 1870.
Reilly asked Trendley il he con-
sidered the "y's" of the nursery note
a very distinctive characteristic, and
the expert said they were.
Admission of Card
Argued by Counsel.
The defense chief then produced
a Christmas card bearing some hand
writing not identified and inquired
if there was any similarity.
Lanigan objected to the production
of the card, and Reilly agreed to
argue the point at Side-bar during
the recess which followed almost i'm
During the recess Reilly denied the
defense planned by its handwriting
experts to accuse Isador Fisch, Haupt-
mann's dead business partner, Of PEN
ming the ransom notes.
eve never contended Fisch wrote
the notes or that he perpetrated the
crime" he said. 81 believe that he
got the ransom money. We don't
know who wrote the ransom notes"
Court reconvened at 11:42 am.
I'VE are not here" Reilly added to
his statement at recess time, Ito prove
who wrote the ransom notes, but to
prove Hauptmann didn't write them; :"
The defense position Of the hand
writing, although not phrased In SO
many words, seemed to be to cast
doubt on the theory that anyone al
ready mentioned in the case could
have written them.
It was also indicated that the de-
fense, through implication, might try
to convince the jury that Fisch had
obtained the ransom money In any
one of several ways.
Reilly resumed the questioning Of
Trendley with the remark: Il now
begin the second paragraph OF the
nursery note"
Witness Fails to Find.
First Two Words on Chart.
Trendley said he could not find the
first word I'VE" on the charts. The
second word, warn" was not found
on the charts either, the witness testi-
fed.
Reilly reached Zine seven" Of the
nursery nOCe.
@. And not q single symbol on the
Osborn charts? A. No.
@. From your examination Of the
nursery note would you say it was writ
ten freehand or disguised? A. It was
written disguised.
@. Part written and part printed?
A. Yes. It is my opinion the left
hand may have been used some time.
Reilly asked Joseph A. Lanigan to
identify q booklet containing photos
of the ransom notes. The prosecu-
ton aide refused. It was not in evil
dence, Lanigan pointed out, and the
defense was privileged to introduce its
own exhibits.
"This is unheard Of, your honor"
Reilly said. This Is q book Of pic
lures of the ransom notes, supplied
to the defense by the State"
Whose ransom ptes'" interposed