Then followed this cross-examination:—
Q. You now say that on reflection you feel sure he is the man? A. I feel most certain he is.
Q. You were answering in the lower court from your observation, weren't you? A. Yes, sir.
Q. From what you saw? A. Yes.
Q. Your answer now is that you feel most certain that he is? A. Yes.
Q. That is not the position that you are sure beyond any doubt, is it? You are most certain now, aren't you? A. I am positive he is the man; certain he is the man. I admit the possibility of an error, but I am certain I am not making a mistake.
Q. Your answer in the lower court was you didn't have opportunity to observe him. What did you mean when you said you didn't have opportunity sufficient, kindly tell us, you didn't have sufficient opportunity to observe him? A. Well, he was passing on the street.
Q. He was passing on the street and you didn't have sufficient opportunity to observe him to enable you to identify him? A. That is what I meant.
Q. That is the only opportunity you had? A. Yes, sir.
Q. You have had no other opportunity but that one fleeting glance? A. The remembrance of that. (R. 133.)
Let Dr. Morton Prince, professor of abnormal and dynamic psychology at Harvard University, comment on this testimony:—
I do not hesitate to say that the star witness for the government testified, honestly enough, no doubt, to what was psychologically impossible. Miss Splaine testified, though she had only seen Sacco at the time of the shooting from a distance of about 60 feet for from 1½ to three seconds in a motor car going at an increasing rate of speed at about 15 to 18 miles an hour; that she saw and at the end of a year she remembered and described
