, 1935-02-08

two pieces had come from the same
board.
@. You are not attempting to tell
now that you AT say II two pieces
OF wood came from the same board?
A. I could II q piece hadn't been
cut out.
@. II there was any separation you
could not tell7
A. Positively not.
q. III the boards had been cut and
a piece taken out between them. you
would not be able to tell II the two
verse once the same piece?
A. I could not and no one else
could I don't think.
Pope resumed questioning.
@. II there was an inch and three
quarters missing. could you identify
two pieces?
A. II the grain was matching.
Mielke said he had a grove OF
southern pine trees back Of his mill
and was familiar with their growth.
Pope proceeding along a new line.
had the witness tell the jury he
had handled ten million feet OF
North Carolina pine and was ia
miliar with the various grades.
The mill man said the attic board
was mo. 2, common North Carolina
pine. used in sheating and similar
uses.
@. What part Of the tree did 1t
come from2
"A. The upper part.
q. Why do YOU say that2
"A. Because OF the spacing OF the
knots. They are wide apart. It's not
butt pine.
@. I show you the ladder rail
number is. What kind OF wood Is
that?
A. North Carolina pine.
@. How does 1t grade?
"A. Number 2 common. Same grade.
@. Is there any difference be-
tween this ladder rail t6. and this
other board dhe attic board?
The witness tapped the attic
board. There Is more life In this
board
Wilentz and Pope debated at the
jury box the demonstration of knots
in the board and rail by Mielke.
"I1l come down and see what's
going on" Justice Trenchard said,
interrupting the colloquy. He step
ped down from the bench and rest
ed his elbow on the back OF the
witness chair.
Pope went on, as Mielke was d.
rected by the justice 70 60 back TO
the stand. !,
Every Question Fought
The defense attorney PROFOUND
ec a long question. asking II Mielke
could tell whether this board and
rail we're part or the same piece.
Wilentz fought every question.
Mielke said he believed they were
not and the attorney general asked
the jury be instructed to disregard
the answer.
Justice Trenchard sustained VIII
entz's objection. When ! qualified
this man as q witness IL vas as
an expert on matching the grains
in the wood. I am inclined TO think
your examination Of him, Mr..
Pope, has been irregular in view
OF that limitation. ! therefore SuS-
tain the objection for that reason
From his knowledge" Of life IN
wood. Mielke was next asked TO
determine whether the two sticks
were Of the same piece.
Over Wilentz's objection, he an
swered that they not
Pope presented Hauptmann'S
plane to the witness and had him
examine the bit.
The hicks In the bit he said would
leave beads" on the surface planed.
The angle OF planning would affect
the distance between the beads"
somewhat, he said
Pope asked him II the number Of
times a plane was used would make
any difference on the hicks.
1T would work out about evenly"
the lumber man answered.
Mielke said that the knife OF a
good plane would retain hicks for
a long time.
@. A cheap plane knife Wouldn't
A. No.
He showed the witness Haupt-
mann's plane.
@. That's a cheap plane isn't it7
The witness looked at the bit
carefully and pronounced Haupt-
mann's plane knife was about
average"
Pope produced the two short
boards brought to court by De Bis
schop.
Mielke was asked TO examine the
saw marks on their surface and
determine whether there was any
difference.
Wilentz objected.
Mielke was allowed TO answer
that the boards we're not Of the
same piece.
Difference I'm Color
Wilentz took the witness and
drew the admission that he noted
the difference in the rail from the
attic board because Of the color.
CThe diScoloration was produced
by the fingerprint Solutionl.
After a brief recess Reilly an
pounced defense rests"
Hauptmanns eyes darted from
one side 10 another as Reilly made
lis announcement in a loud voice.
James ]. Farber. a New York In
surance man. was called by the
state in rebuttal.
He told OF his automobile being
Il, collision with that of BENJAMIN