Evening star., 1935-02-06

to demonstrate where the beer stein
stood on the nursery window ledge
Kelly explained it was in a recess
at the side.
Wilentz and Fisher, walking to the
witness stand together, collided, caus-
ing laughter.
WilentZ, Fisher and Kelly argued
whether the stein protruded from the
recess. Fisher produced a newspaper
picture of the window. in which Kelly
said the mug appeared to protrude.
Wilentz objected to it as an exhibit
because it was all marked up"
Justice Trenchard suggested the
picture might be admitted II Kelly
would state that it gave true repre-
sentation of the scene on the kidnap
night.
Kelly could not be sure and sug-
gested that he might do better" with
the original photograph
Justice Trenchard declined to admit
the newspaper picture.
Taxi Driver Called,
Knew Fisch.
The States picture Of the window.
Fisher demonstrated, did not include
the side with the stein.
Wilentz adduced that the picture
was not taken for the Hauptmann
trial. but was a true representation of
the window on the night of the crime
Kelly was excused.
Oscar John Bruchmann, young
Bronz tax driver, was next called by
Reilly.
O. Did you know Isador Fisch?
A. Yes. worked with him.
O. Where?
A. At the Knickerbocker Pie Bak-
ing Co.
Bruchmann said he drove Fisch
about, making sales of products.
@. After you stopped working for
him, did you see him again?
A. did.
@. When?
A. Some time in May, 1888.
The husky-voiced witness said he
was hacking" at the time when
Fisch came up to his stand one night
about Z o'clock and spoke to him.
WilentZ objected to testimony Of
conversations between the taxi driver
and Fisch.
II want to show that Fisch dis
played goldbacks." Reilly argued. I'm
forced to disclose what wish to prove
with this witness"
Il want to show that Fisch deliver
ed the shoe box to Hauptmann.
Wilentz objected to Reilly's remarks
as not supported by "a particle Of
proof in this case"
@. Did Fiseh display anything to
you? A. Yes.
@. What was It?
Wilentz objected again and he and
Reilly walked to the bench to confer
on the proposed testimony with the
justice.
Must Identify Money.
The conference ended and Justice
Trenchard called the noon recess at
1927 pm.
At the side-bar conference, Justice
Trenchard ruled that the defense
must show that the gold backs" the
taxi driver allegedly saw in Fisch'S
possession were ransom money or the
line Of questioning could not be pur-
sued.
Court reconvened after the noon
recess at las pm.
Bruchmann, the taxi driver, resumed
his place in the witness chair.
The witness, in response to a ques-
ton from Reilly, related how Fisch
got in his cab and he drove him to q
certain destination.
"He took a roll of bills out Of his
pocket" the witness said, telling how
Fisch left the cab. He gave me a
S. bill, but I can't swear whether 1t
was a gold note or not"
The prosecution objected and the
answer was stricken.
Intended to Show
Fisch Had Money.
Reilly said "for the purpose of the
record" the intention of the question
was to show that after April 2, 1882,
and to the time that Fisch sailed for
Europe he had plenty Of money.
Wilentz failed to have Reilly's state
ment excluded from the record. but
Justice Trenchard ordered Bruch-
mann's answer to Reilly's last ques-
ton expunged.
Bruchmann was excused without
further questions from either side.
Gustave Miller, New York plumber,
the next witness, in loud tones told
Of operating . shop in the Bronx.
Q. Now in 1888 and 1884 did you