Evening star., 1949-06-30
Judge Won't Let Psychiotnist
Tell Jury Opinion on Chambers

discussion. Mr. SLIykeF SAID Au-
grily he had seen him "conferrini
not only with the FBI but sitting
in the press section" He said Mr.
Bullitt was circulating copies Of
brochure he wrote purporting tc
analyze the Hiss-Chambers testi-
mony before the House Committee
last year.
Mr.. Bullitt had no comment for
reporters after the flareup. Il
don't know anything. ne said
hurrying from the building. He in
dicated. however, that he felt he
had been misquoted. or at least
quoted without authorization. In
the newspaper account which Mr.
Stryker made a part Of the trial
record.
The climax Of the cross-exami-
nation Of Mrs. Hiss. to which the
Government clearly attached
great Importance, grew out Of ear
her testimony by Mrs. Esther
Shemitz Chambers. wife Of Mr.
Hiss accuser, that in 1887 Mrs
Hiss was planning to take a nurs-
ing course at Mercy Hospital, Bal
timore.
Mrs. Hiss had testified on direct
examination that she never took
such a course.
1887 Letter Displayed.
Mr.. Murphy fished out one OF
four letters on exhibit in the trial
as known specimens of writing
produced on a Woodstock type
writer which. the Government
contends. was used by the Kisses
for copying secret material for
Mr.. Chambers. This letter was
written by Mrs. Hiss. May rs. 1887.
to Maryland University.
In it she applied for enrolment
in a summer course in inorganic
chemistry. She said she was "ex-
Itremely anxious" that the enroll
ment be expedited as she wanted
to obtain credit for a Mercy Hos
pital training course in medical
technology"
Having read the letter. Mr..
Murphy asked Mrs. Hiss If she
had ever told Mrs. Chambers that
she planned to take the course.
Certainly not" said Mrs. Hiss.
Because" said the prosecutor
you did not see her that year
when you were at your Thirtieth
street house. Is that right?"
quite right" Mrs. Hiss replied.
Witness Voice Steady.
The witness voice was steady,
but 1t was evident from the ten
sion of her manner that she was
aware of the significance Of her
words. At face value. they seemed
to pose these alternatives:
/. The Government had in
formed Mrs. Chambers Of the con-
tents of the sample letter. and al
lowed her to use 1t as testimony
against the defendant. Mr..
Murphy quickly disposed Of this
possibility by showing that Mrs.
Chambers had testified to the
same effect in 4 Baltimore libel
suit pretrial deposition last De-
cember 16-almost two months
before the Government came into
possession Of the Maryland Uni
versity letter. Un that testimony,
however. she said Mrs. Hiss 'ac-
tually had taken the nursing
for short time)
2. Mrs. Chambers might some
how have learned from another
third party (not the Government)
Of Mrs. Hiss plan to take q course
which she never. In fact. took. 81,
s.. Mrs. Hiss was lying.
Sensing hts advantage, DR..
Murphy moved in to clinch the
dilemma by making Mrs. Hiss re-
peat her statement that she never
told Mrs. Chambers Of her desire
to take the course. She had just
testified that she was aware Of
Mrs. Chambers statement in the
Baltimore deposition.
rs it fair to say" he asked.
that you did not discuss nursing
with Mrs. Chambers?"
Never Discussed Subject.
would you 60 so far as to say
you never discussed Mercy Hos
pital with Mrs. Chambers?"
The witness tilted her chin ut
the prosecutor. "Of course. I
would 60 that far" she replied.
softly but firmly.
For the rest, yesterday, Mr..
Murphy contented himself with