Q.?That’s what I’m asking you, Alberta.
A.?I guess there is, at that.
Q.?If there are no rats, Alberta, why do you suppose the Haights keep a rat trap?
Prosecutor Bradford: Objection. Calling for opinion.
Judge Newbold: Sustained. Counsel, I’ll have to ask you to restrict your cross- examination to?
Judge Martin (humbly): Yes, Your Honor.
* * *
Emmeline DuPre, under oath, testifies that she is a Dramatic and Dancing Teacher residing at Number 468 Hill Drive, Wrightsville, “right next door to Nora Wright’s house.”
Witness testifies that during the previous November and December she “happened to overhear” frequent quarrels between Nora and James Haight. The quarrels were about Mr. Haight’s heavy drinking and numerous demands for money. There was one markedly violent quarrel, in December, when Miss DuPre heard Nora Haight refuse to give her husband “any more money.” Did Miss DuPre “happen to overhear” anything to indicate why the defendant needed so much money? A.?That’s what shocked me so, Mr. Bradford?Q.?The Court is not interested in your emotional reactions, Miss DuPre. Answer the question, please.
A.?Jim Haight admitted he’d been gambling and losing plenty; and that’s why he needed money, he said.
Q.?Was any name or place mentioned by either Mr. or Mrs. Haight in connection with the defendant’s gambling?
A.?Jim Haight said he’d been losing a lot at the Hot Spot, that scandalous place on Route 16?
Judge Martin: Your Honor, I move that this witness’s entire testimony be stricken out. I have no objection to give-and-take in this trial. Mr. Bradford has been extremely patient with me, and it is an admittedly difficult case, being so vaguely circumstantial?
Mr. Bradford: May 1 ask Counsel to restrict his remarks to his objection and stop trying to influence the jury by characterizing the case?
Judge Newbold: The Prosecutor is right, Counsel. Now what is your objection to this witness’s testimony?
Judge Martin: No attempt has been made by the People to fix the times and circumstances under which witness allegedly overheard conversations between defendant and wife. Admittedly witness was not present in the same room or even in the same house. How, then, did she “overhear”? How can she be sure the two people were the defendant and his wife? Did she see them? Didn’t she see them? I hold?Miss DuPre: But I heard all this with my own ears! Judge Newbold: Miss DuPre! Yes, Mr. Bradford? Mr. Bradford: The People have put Miss DuPre on the stand in an effort to spare defendant’s wife the pain of testifying to the quarrels?Judge Martin: That’s not my point.
Judge Newbold: No, it is not. Nevertheless, Counsel, I suggest you cover your point in cross-examination. Objection denied. Proceed, Mr. Bradford.
Mr. Bradford proceeds, eliciting further testimony as to quarrels between Jim and Nora. On cross- examination, Judge Martin reduces Miss DuPre to indignant tears. He brings out her physical position relative to the conversationalists?crouched by her bedroom window in darkness listening to the voices floating warmly across the driveway between her house and the Haight house?confuses her in the matter of dates and times involved, so that she clearly contradicts herself several times.
The spectators enjoy themselves.
* * *
Under oath, J. P. Simpson, proprietor of Simpson’s Pawnshop in the Square, Wrightsville, testifies that in November and December last, James Haight pledged various items of jewelry at Simpson’s Pawnshop.
Q.?What kind of jewelry, Mr. Simpson?
A.?First one was a man’s gold watch?he took it off his chain to pawn it. Nice merchandise. Fair price?
Q.?Is this the watch?
A.?Yes, sir. I remember givin’ him a fair price?
Q.?Placed in evidence.
Clerk: People’s exhibit thirty-one.
Q.?Will you read the inscription on the watch, Mr. Simpson?
A.-The what? Oh. ”To-Jim-from-Nora.”
Q.?What else did the defendant pawn, Mr. Simpson?
A.?Gold and platinum rings, a cameo brooch, and so on. All good merchandise. Very good loan merchandise.
Q.?Do you recognize these items of jewelry I now show you, Mr. Simpson?
A.?Yes, sir. They’re the ones he pawned with me. Gave him mighty fair prices?
Q.?Never mind what you gave him. These last items are all women’s jewelry, are they not?
A.-That’s right.
Q.?Read the various inscriptions. Aloud.
A.-Wait till I fix my specs. ”N.W.”?”N.W.”?”N.W.H.”?”N.W.”
Nora’s jewelry is placed in evidence.
Q.?One last question, Mr. Simpson. Did the defendant ever redeem any of the objects he pawned with you?
A.?No, sir. He just kept bringing me new stuff, one at a time, an’ I kept givin’ him fair prices for ‘em.
Judge Martin waives cross-examination.
* * *
Donald Mackenzie, President of the Wrightsville Personal Finance Corporation, being duly sworn, testifies that James Haight had borrowed considerable sums from the PFC during the last two months of the preceding year.
Q.?On what collateral, Mr. Mackenzie?
A.?None.
Q.?Isn’t this unusual for your firm, Mr. Mackenzie? To lend money without collateral?
A.?Well, the PFC has a very liberal loan policy, but of course we usually ask for collateral. Just business, you understand. Only, since Mr. Haight was Vice-President of the Wrightsville National Bank and the son-in-law of John Fowler Wright, the company made an exception in his case and advanced the loans on signature only.
Q.?Has the defendant made any payments against his indebtedness, Mr. Mackenzie?
A.-Well, no.
Q.?Has your company made any effort to collect the moneys due, Mr. Mackenzie?
A.?Well, yes. Not that we were worried, but?Well, it was five thousand dollars, and after asking Mr. Haight several times to make his stipulated payments and getting no satisfaction, we?I finally went to the bank to see Mr. Wright, Mr. Haight’s father-in-law, and explained the situation, and Mr. Wright said he hadn’t known about his son- in-law’s loan, but of course he’d make it good himself, and I wasn’t to say anything about it?to keep it confidential. I would have, too, only this trial and all?
Judge Martin: Objection. Incompetent, irrelevant?
Q.?Never mind that, Mr. Mackenzie. Did John F. Wright repay your company the loan in full?
