The San Francisco Call. Newspaper, February 16, 1896, Page 7

THE SAN FRANCISCO CALL, SUNDAY, FEBRUARY 16, 1896 7 ssees FEBRUARY 16, 1896 AMUSEMENTS, BALDWIN THEATER.— - nots,” to-morrow nlgh‘é. Sowm Opaen . CALIFORNIA THEATEE— Richard [IL" CoLUMBIA THRATER—*Hendrick Hudson Jr." MOR0SCO'S OPERA-HOUSE— My Partner.” TIVOLI OPERA-HOUSE.—“The Gentle Savage.” CRFEEUM.—High-Class Vandeville. GROVE: ALCAZAR.—"“White Slave.” METROPOLITAN TEMPLE—Benefit Concert of the Saturday Morning Orchestra, to-morrow night. OROVE-STREET THEATER—Between Polk and YVan Ness—U & L Benefit for Veteran Guard, G. A, R., to-morrow night. AUDITORIUM—Corner Mason and EIlls streets— | Entertalnment, Taesday evenlng, Febroary 18. SHOOT THE CHUTES— GOLDEN GATE PARK~Golden Gate Park Band. PACIFIC CoasT JockEY CLun.—Races t0-morrow. CITY NEWS IN BRIEF, All voters will have to be registered anew before the next election. Weather forecast for San Francisco: Fairon Bunday; probably cooler in the aiternoon. The West Side Christian Church has incor- p:mled and will hasten its steps toward build- g Ira D. Sankey, the singing evangelist, 18 ex- pected to come to San Francisco soon for an in- definite stay. The sailors of the Colombo will be enter- tained to-morrow by the members of the Italian colony. Casper, Wroming, St. Brandon, George Mil- | Ses Spray and Olive were the winners at side vesterdny. | ,Health Inspector Ben Davis made s tour of | the Market-street restaurants y. sterday. Asa MISS. OVERMAN TELLS HER STORY, Events of Her Early Life Related in-Minute Detail. MEETING DR. BROWN. The Statements Reflecting on Her Past Character Are Bit- terly Denied. THE PASTOR'S WIFE HER FRIEND Explanation of the Now Famous Tun- nell Lefgters Reserved for the Council. | For the first time since the Brown- Davidson scandal has rule he found them gencrelly clean. The first anniversary ball of the National Brotherhood of Electrical Workers last night £t 0dd Fellows' Hall was a brilliant succ | r)\lr& Davidson was arraigned before Jua, Bahrs ge | sterday, but she did not plead, A | Ter to the information was submitted. | Igard, in a lecture before the Me- | te list evening on alkali lands, | hey will some day be most val- | Goyernor Budd was notified last night that | the Navy Department will detail the monitor Comanche for the use of the naval reserve of | State. | i At & mass-meeting of the carpenters last g several valuable suggestious were | made &s to how the condition of the laboring n may be improved. { oating’ committee of the Young Peo- | Scciety” of Christian Endeavor reports | t eighty-One seamen have signed the pledge e society during the past vear. validity of the poker-pla; at considerat J ven for the bene- of the Berke- oon, March 6, 'm of Raphael Broth- ork, and wants it dis- t he did not figure in an him to be iriendly to Clellsn, for_attempting to commit | , was sent I will remain there for seven McClellan had eieven pri n t they were w rawn as he ve that from 31, 1892 received and $509,- 100 60 di There iS now on hand and deposited in various banks $18,098 70. | After two complaints had been drawn up and each time drawn before filing Einne Antonelli has ¢ filed a suit tor divorce from ner husk contractor. The plain- t ad two ceremonias she is now suing s cruelt has rendered an | Coun- nges in | e Ly the | or the Boards | ate to order a | era] coun- 1l not cand Drama edi- ts in the East. utation 10r wo: days of long ago A loving-cup in st ere of silver, 10 and 15-cent nd a handsome CANPBELL DEALS FAR A Fake Game in Which His Honor Lost the Bank Roll in One Deal. He Is Caught in the Act of Drawing Two Cards to Win the Last Bet Made. A faro game was raided on the corner of Geary and Kearny streets early yesterday morning, and the outfit was taken as evi- dence to the California-street police sta- tion, but was afterward sent to the new City Hall. However, it remained long enough in the first-named station for a game to be started and tinished with Judge Campbell as dealer, Lieutenant Esola as lookout and Officer Burpett and Patrol- driver John Martin as players. Soon after the outfit had been taken to the station Judge Campbell was espied on the corner of Kearny and California streets. He was invited over by Lieutenant Esola 10 inspect the haul. The judge was either overcome by recol- lections of younger days or, possibly, curi- osity started him on the downward path, for he immediately arranged the layout and started a deal with the aforesaid look- out and players, He was soon engrossed in his work,’and from the scien‘ific way in which he handled the pasteboards an interested aqnipoker ventured a remark that the Judge had missed his ealling, but as the zame ended =o disastrously for the dealer he has determined to remain merely a Judge and allow others to be the sports. John Martin, the player who kept] the game, was in luck from the time the first card was turned. He played the deuce for $20 worth of checfis and won. He then doubled his bet on the same card and won again. This seemed to worry the deadler considerably, but he mercl’v kept taking down the bets that were Jost by Officer Burnett, who seemed to play with hard luck or poor judgment; but maybe he took compassion on the dealer, or else they were ~combined to fleece Martin. However, Martin played all his checks again on the deuce and won again. This last lucky bet reduced the bank roli about one-half. Excitement was now at high pitch as Burnett was all in and there were but one or two more turns to be made, Martin at this time played the deuce and tray with sufficient checks to tap the roll. The onlookers almost held their breatn, the lookout was in a mnervous strain and the dealer was steadily schem- ing as he turned the cards. By some un- seen way the dealer bad looked under the box end noticed that Martin’s bet was sure to win, Then bhis. sxill came to the surface and he deftly drew two cards at one time from the box and was about to take down the checks when the lookout notified him of the deception. He merely smiled and said it was an ac- cigent and that he had lost his bank roll inone deal. Itwasan exciting exhibition and all breathed easier at the finale. The game was not played for money, but as much interest was tuken in the game by the dealer as though all things depended upon_his winning. Martin declares he would like to play for $20 a turn with the Judge as dealer, but he says he would hire bis ewnlookouts to Folsom by Judge Bahrs | r convictions | nd account of the special adminis- | . r estate has been filed, The | Iy 1 to December | | flashlight of public scrutiny and comment, favorable andl otherwise, one of the p{incx- been under the“ i the medium of the press since the devel- manper, recommending me highly to any one who might be interested. Lateron I presented this letfer to a Baptist church in Spokane, and as a result learned one of the bitterest lessons of my life. Assoon as the minister learned that I was married and living apart from my husband the sympathy and interest formerly extended me were withdrawn, “All this, however, is of little interest to any one, =0 I will skip that part of my life. When I'left Helena it was much against the wish of Mr. Silveira. In fact he went so far as to dispose of some of my hard- earned pennies at the gaming table, think- ing thereby to keep me as his chief sup- {port. And why not? It is pleasant to have a little home, especially if that home is neither an expense or burden to oue. So | it was with Mr. Silveira. For fully a year before I left him I wholly supported my- self, even to paying the laundry bills ana house rent. On my departure from Helena, such garments covered my back and filled my trunk as only my money had pur- chased. ] ‘“‘After & short visit to my home at \\'nlln Walla Iwrote to him, on the ad- vice of my parents, who up to that time had known nothing of my domestic tyouble:, advising him that I would never live with him again, but would seek re- dress through the courts. Being afraid that he might'attempt to carry out his oft- repeated threat to take my life I went im- mediately to live with'a married sister in Spokane, thinking to escape him should he seek me in Walla Walla. It seems, however, that my fears were groundless, for T never heard from him directly, even when notice wassent of my application for diveree, until, true to the nature of the man, he attempted to strike me through opments in the Brown-Davidson scandal. | | MISS MATTIE [From a photograph.] E. OVERMAN, pal witnesses has consented to talk. Miss Mattie Overman, about whom so.much has been written and said and against whose character the most damaging n- sintations have been made, consents to tell the story of her life to THE CALL. True, she does not deal directly with the more recent events of which she is the central figure, | council, but she grapples without the least show of hesitancy or fear of contradiction the stories invol | nature, from childhood down to the pres- ent time. “Imight just as well have done this long | ago,” said Miss Overman yesterday, by | way of introduction, “*but before I could collect my wits all those horrible stories from Tacoma, Spokane, Walla Walla and other points, founded only in the imagi- nation of sensational correspondents, were published. I was indignant that such things should be said, and so made up my mind to deny nothing until the hubbub had in a measure ccaszd. If anything is to be said now I want to commence at the very beginning of my life, so there may be | no after bickerings of things left untold. “I was born April 9, 138, in Benton County, of the then new State of Oregon. My parents were among the earliest set- tlers in the valley, having crossed the plaine in 1852, in wagons drawn by oxen. Their first stopping place was Portland, | future greatness of that city, they soon moved to Alsea Valley, where they lived for nearly a score of years. There I was born, being the eighth of a family of thir- teen children. “I was five years old when my parents | decided to move to the Territory of Wash- | ington, where they later settled on a farm in Columbia County. After- years of toil and Jabor it became a place rich in te- sources, and I recall it now as a spot fall of the sunshine of happy youth. In my six- teentn year, father disposed of his farm, and we moved to the town of Walla Walla, where we took a house sufficiently ample for the accommodation of roomers and boarders. It was at this place I met the man whom I afterward married.. “I never while in that city engaged in the dressmaking business, nor did my sister, who was with us during my residence there. I knew absolutely nothing of this kind of work at that time, being only 17 years old. The statement therefore pub- lished in the daily papers to the effect that I accepted $1000 from a man in order to es- tablish a dressmaking business is utferly without foundation. It was also said that I secured $300 from a clerk in this same man’s store, but was forced to.return it. This is unqualifiedly false, both as to re- ceiving the money and returning thal which I never had. - “Very much against the better judg- ment of my parents, I went to Spokane in the month of November, 1885, marrying on my arrival there D. W. Silveira, who at that time was keeping a boarding-house. After a short residence in Spokane we moved to Helena, Mont., remaining there until January 1, 1888. After a few months of married life, I discovered among other things that Mr. Silveira was unable to sup- port me. Being then clever with the nee- dle, I began first as a seamstress and later branched out as a full-fledged dressmaker. “This occupation I followed successfully for more than twelve months prior to my departure from Helena. Just here let me say that about one year previous to this time I experienced coaversion, and was taken into full membership in the First Baptist Church of that city. I soon had a wide circle of friends in the church. I be- came a member of the 1. 0. G. T., of which I was assistant secretary for ome term, being in good standing in the-lodge when I left. i 3 *On leaving Helena T obtained a letter of introduction from my pastor to any church where: T might care to present it. This letter spoke of mein the kindliess | not use my maiden name, which I had re- | gained through the divorce courts, until I reserving that for the |lived in Spokane was in course of construc- ng the moral side of her | | but not having a prophetic vision of the | The recent reports sent from Spokane con cerning me have not one grain of truth to | rest. on. To begin with, I was never known there as Miss Overman, for I did took up my residence in Tacoma. ““The block where I was reported to have | tion when I came away. My life there was extremely quiet. I attended church regularly and it was in Sabbath school I | first met Mrs. Tunnell. After closing up | my business in Spokane I went to Tacoma, | where my parents bad moved. During | my stay of perhaps a year in the former place I began dressmaking in families and with the exception of two or three months | found steady employment as long as I re- mained there. My parents since leaving | the old farm had many reverses and mis- fortunes, and as the olderchildren were all married or away from home it was the { pleasure and happiness of my life to give | them some comforts which they might not | otherwise have enjoyed. | “I was never fond of the gayeties of life, | my whole time and- attention being given to work and study, that we might be | blessed with music. and good and whole- some books with which to' cheer our fire- side when we gathered of evenings when | the day’s labors were finished. My sister, | with . whom I had formerly resided in Spokane being then a widow, resolved to take up her residence in Seattle. -After | her dressmaking business had sufficiently | increased I spent a-portion of my time as- | sisting her. It was then I had an un- pleasant business experience which has been so recently widely heralded. I meta party whom I now recognize asmy Seattle slanderer, and as I was in possession of unpleasant facts concerning him this was | an opportunity to strike me, which he | could not resist. The cause of this man’s bitterness toward me is simple. I had un- wittingly revealed to his wife that be was a regular visitor of a lady. I thought that he was merely a relative. *I positively deny that I ever attempted blackmail on any prominent man of Seat- tle, or that I ever behaved in public or private in the disgraceful manner accred- ited me. But to return to Tacoma. My work there was mainly among church people. Incidentally let me say that never at any time did I work in any but respect- able families. The horrible statement that I visited disreputable places is utterly without foundation. “While engaged in a pleasant family T met Mrs. Brown, who expressed a desire to have me. assist her with some dress work. So after a time it came about that at her dinner table I was introduced to her husband, Dr. C. 0. Brown. My acquain- tance with him in Tacoma was slight and principally of a business character, Mrs, Brown was always kind, and our acquain- tance by the time of her departure from Tacoma had ripened into friendship to the extent of oceasionally dining with her and evenings spent in rocial intercourse. She had noticed my failing health, and kindly invited me to accompany her to San Fran- cisco for a rest and change of climate. At that time I could not accept, “‘In the winter of 1893 I decided, on ac- count of my ill-health, to visit my sister, who had in the meantime moved to San Francisco. I left home in December, stop- ping in Victoria a few days to visit the sister who had formerly resided in Seattle and had for business reasons taken up her bome in the first-named city. Three or four days after my arrival there I was taken down with neuralgia, and for two weeks did not leave my bed. Assoon as I was able to travel I took the steamer for San Francisco. My stay in Victoria altogetner did not exceed three weeks, and my habits were necessarily of the quietest possibie character. ' I met no one in a social way. “Since this trouble came I have been | tion. I J{ serious oftense than to assist m giving or literally harassed to death with letters and callers. Some of the letters were amusing, others insulting, and many full of expressionsof confidence and sympathy. There have been offers of managers and theatrical propositions innumerable. Such as these I have not given a second thought. | “Now as to my stay in San Francisco, I can say nothing at present, except that when I have told my story to the council Dr. Brown will be cleared of all the charges resting against him. “The Tunnell letters are of easy explana- tion, as are the other acts with which I am credited.” Several timés during the recital of her story Miss Overman showed deep emotion, particularly when she referred to the re- ports of her career in Spokane,.Seattle, Walla Walla and other Northern cities. There was apparently mnothing of the “manufactured” in her recital of these earlier events. EShe talks in a perfectly vlain, straightforward way, without any affectation and with no other purpose seemingly than to tell the truth. Bheisat all times a ready conversationalist, quick to answer questions and never nervous. Her appearance before the council will be an event if nothing more. Sl i MRS. COOPER CHARGED. Mrs. Dr. C. O. Brown Accuses Her of Stuffing the Church Ballot— Affidavits In Support. Mrs. Brown openly charges Mrs, Sarah B. Cooper with attempting to corrupt the ballot of the First Congregational Church on the evening of February 5, at which time the pastor was given a vote of confi- dence. These charges are sapported by a number of sworn affidavits. To alf of this Mrs. Cooper, over her own signature, makes the simple reply, I do not consider the matter worthy of consid- eration.” Mrs, Brown, in support of the affidavits published below, makes the following fen- eral arraignment of Mrs. Cooper: “I desire now to place before the com- munity, not in the form of mere state- ments, but of solemn eflidavits, some facts which will show how sincere Mrs. Cooper 1s in her loudly advertised claim that she is acting with zeal for the purity of the church. *This has been her claim in her bitter, malign and untruthful attack upon the character of my husband. 4 “The Congregational church is self-gov- erning. It. depends, humanly speaking, on the purity of its ballot for the con- tinuance of its life. To lift one’s hand or to arise and give one’s vote foror against any measure is one of the most solemn acts of Christian responsibility in such church. “If the ballot of the self-governing church should become corrupt nothing could save that church from disgrace and final disrup- There cannot possibly be any more procuring a corrupt ballot at any church meeting. “With this in mind what will be the verdict of the people of San Francisco upon the facts set forth in the following aflidavits? They show that Mrs, Sarah B. Cooper deliberately sought to induce a. person who had never before been in the church and who was not amember to vote against my husband. “These facts speak for themselves. They show that Mrs. Cooper, by the use of false votes, would not have scrupled to defeat the vote of confidence in my husband, de- stroy my home and blast the happiness of my family. “Mrs. Cooper has made declarations without proof. I herewith substantiate my declarations by the proofs. . “These affidavits abundantly show the methods to whbich Mrs. Cooper has de- scended to defame my husband, and further show the kind of weapons which she is attempting to forge for the comple- tion of her inquisitorial task. “This community has drawn the veil of. silence and charity over that awful experi- ence which clouded her own domestic life. She should be the last to raise her voice in' bitterness in advance of official investiga- tion. By what right does she exercisea judicial funetion which does not belong to any other member of the church, and who gave her this right to declare my husband guilty before he has been examined by a proper tribunal? She proclaims that her life in this community has been an open book. Ittakes buta smallattempt toread in that open book somethings that honor cannot sanction. ButI will not at this time pursue this theme. +I have already laifl at her door one of the most serious offenses against social order, and I now present to the public the indisputable evidence that she deliberate- Jy attempted to corrupt the ballot of the First Congregational Church on the even- ing of February 5, 1896, when, in spite of her opposition, the church overwhelming- 1y voted its confidence in my husband. “In view of such facts as these and of her demand that my husband should cease to occupy his pulpit until his good name is vindicated, do not modesty and honor require that she should desist from teach- ing until her own good name is vindicated from these awful charges? “For such offenses against the civil ballot men go to prison. But this offense was against the church of God. Therefore nothing more can be done than to deliver the offender over to that contempt which an infamous act deserves. Those promi- nently engaged in the suffrage movement 1n this State may well raise the inquiry whether the ballot in such hands would tend to greater purity.' It will be seen by the aflidavits that Mrs. Blanchard admitted less under oath than she had told her friends. This was to be expected from so ardent an admirer of Mrs. Cooper, who had been aroused to the seriousness of her conduct. But it will also be seen that the swears to the essential _facts, and that she * ad- mits having siayed at the churcn meeting when all but members and pew-holders were requested to go, and that she falsified her word by saying that she was a member of tke church when she was not, and that she later told Mrs, Cooper that she was not a member before Mrs. Cooper urged her to vote. The other affi- davits tell the whole truth as Mrs, Blanch- ard told it to her iriends before sne had been put on her guard. “These facts came to me wholly without my seeking, and I now make this state- nient only with sorrow that Mrs. Cooper’s unprecedented attack on Dr. Brown and and her conduct in the procuring of a false vote make it necessary.” State of California, City and County of San Francisco, ss.—Deposition. Beit remembered that on the dth day of February, A. D. 1896, at 826 Bush street, in the City and County and State aforesaid, be- fore me, W. B. Benchley, a Notary Publicin and for said City and County, duly l;;‘poinled and commissioned to -administer oaths, etc., personally n%vpeure\l Mrs. Len® Blanchard, re. siding at 826 Bush street, in the City and County and State aforesaid, a witness pro- duced in behaif of the Rev. C. 0. Brown, pas- tor of the First Congregational Church in said City and County, in &0 action now pending in said_chureh, who, being by me first duly sworn, then and there testiiied as follows: Tam not a_memper of the First Congrega- tional Church of San Francisco, Cal.. but m sympathy being with Mrs. Sarah B. Cooper, b attended’ the businels meeting held at the First Congregational Church on the evening of the Hth day of February, 1896, for the pur- pose of proteting Mrs. Cooper, and I occupied aseaton her right during the whole of the business meeting. When the first vote was taken I arose {from my seal and voted with Mrs. Cooper against Dr. Brown, the pastor sof the church, but in doing so I was acting under great excitement and it wes an_accident that did _so. Just after the first vote was taken Mrs. Simpson, who lives at 317 Jones street, in the City of Ssan Francisco, State of | California, leaned over to me and arked me if 1 was & mémber of the church and I answered, “Yes,” in order to get rid of her, as [ did not. want her to be giving me away before all the ladies near us. I.told Mrs. Coopér a few min- utes later that I was noi a member of the church, and when the second vote was taken Mrs. Cooper asked me why I was not voting. I told her I was not a member of the church and had no right to vote, but she still urged me to do so. . On the next dey I made a friendly call on Mrs. Simpgon at her home, 817 Jones street, San Francisco, Cal. Ido not think her sister, Mrs. Cnurch, was present during all of our i terview. I told Mrs, Simpson that I was not a member of the church and asked her what she thought of my staying at the business meeting. She said that1 behaved like a lady while there, I told her that Mrs. Cooper asked me why L was not votng. I was worried, because people seid that I had voted against Dr. Brown. MRS. LENA BLANCHARD. Signature of deponent. State of California, City and County of San Francisco, ss. 1, W. B. Benchley, a Notary Public in and for said City and County, do hereby certify that the witness in the foregoing deposition named was by me duly sworn to testify the truth, the whol¢ truth and nothing but the truth; that said deposition was taken at tha time and place mentioned in the annexed caption, to- wit: at 826 Bush street, in the City and County of San Francisco. in the State of California, on the 14th day of February, A. D.. 1896, between the hours of 5 o’clock P. M.and 7 o'clock P. M. of that day; that said deposition was taken in shorthand by my stenographer, Miss ‘Anna Sale, and was by her transcribed in type- writing, and when completed was by me care- {ully read to said witness, and being by her corrected, was by her subscribed in my pres- ence. In witness whereof I have hereunto sub- scribed my name and aflixed my seal of office the 15th day of February, A. D. 1896. . W. B. BENCHLEY, Notary public_in and for the City ana County of San Francisco, State of California. Office, 630 Market street. State of California, City and County of San Francisco, DO . Be it remembered, that on the 14th day of February, A. D. 1896, at 317 Jones street, in the City and County and State atoresaid, be- fore me, W. B. Benchley, & notary publi¢ in and for said City and County, duly appointed and commissioned to_administer oaths, etc., personally appeared Mrs. Clara C. Simpson, residing ‘at 317 Jones street, in the City, County and State aforesaid, a witness produced in behalf of the Rev. C. O. Brown, pastor of thre First Congregatlonal Church in said City and County, in an action.now pending in” said chureh, who, being by me first duly sworn, she then and there testified as follows: “Iam a member of the First Congregational Church of S8an Francisco, Cal., and as such at- tended the Business meeting of said church, held at 7:30 o'clock r. M. on the fifth day of February, A. D. 1896, and was present during the whole of the session of said business meet- ing. I am personally acquainted with Mrs, Sarah B. Coaper and saw her at said business meeting, and she took an active part therein concerning all matters relating to Rev. C. Brown. “‘Mrs. Sarah B. Cooper was seated in front of me and the next seat on her right was occu- gl?d by Mrs. Lena Blanchard, who resides at 26 Bush street, in the City and County of San Francisco, who is #lso personally known to me. Mrs. Sarah B. Cooper and Mrs. Lena Blanchard occupied seats located in the front ortion of tne assemblage, directly in ront “of the rostrum of the meeting- room of ‘the said First Congregational Chureh, where the said business meeting was held. During the early part of the session of snid business meeting, I leaned over and asked Mrs. Lena Blanchard if she was & member of our church, and she informed me that she wes, also stating that she had joined our church six weeks previous, and that she had come to the business meeting ‘that evening in order to help Mrs. Cooper in the fight against Rey. C. 0. Brown. 5 “On the following dey she called on me here st my residence, and sddressed me very pleas- antly, asking me if I thought she was a mem- ber of our church. I said yes, certainly, of course I did, as you told me you were. She then said, ‘Well, I am not; bui I went down there and kept very quiet, so I would not be asked to go out’ Mrs. Blan- chard further stated that .she felt very sorry for Mrs. Cooper, and thought that she “had been treated shamefully; ‘Mrs. Cooper,’ she continued, ‘urged me toget up and vote, but I sat still and would not doso.’ I told Mrs, Blanchard that it wasa good lhing that she did ot vote, and some people woull have questioned her right to do so. Mrs. Blanchard further said: ‘I really feel very sorry for Dr. Brown, granting that he is guilty.’ Just then my sister, Mrs. Church, came into the room and said: ‘Why, Mrs. Blanchard, I hear you are a_member of our church’; and Mrs. Blanchard said, ‘Oh, no, I am not, but Mrs. Cooper asked me several times to vote.” *‘In making the foregoing deposition I have only told the trutb, and have none but the kindliest feelings for Mrs. Lens Blanchurd in giving my testimony. “MpsS. CLARA C. S1arsoN,’” Bignature of deponent, State of Californls, City and County of San Francisgo, ss." 5. . 1, W. B, Benchley, a Notary Public in and for sald City and County, do hereby certify that the witness in the foregoing deposition named was by me duly sworn to testify the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth} that said deposition was taken at the time and place mentioned in the annexed eaption, to wit: AtNo. 317 Jones street in the City and County of San Francisco, in the State of Cali- fornia, ou the 14th day of February, A. D. 1¥96, between the hours of 10:30 o’clock A. M. and 1 o'clock P. M. of that day. That said deposition was taken in shorthand by my stenographer, Miss Anna C. Busteede, and was by her transcribed in typewriting, and when completed was by me carefully Tead to said witness, and being by her corrected was by her subscribed in my presence. In witness whereof I have hereunto suo- seribed my name and aflixed my seal of office the 14th day of February, A. D.1896. W. B. BENCHLEY, Notary Public inand for the City and County of San Francisco, State of California. Office No. 630 Market street. State of California, City and County of San Franeisco, ss,—Deposition. Be it remembered, that on the 14th day of Febrnary, A. D. 1896, at 817 Jones street, in the City and County and State aforesaid, before me, W. B. Benchley, & notary public in and for said City and County, duly nngoimcd and com- missioned to aaminister oaths, ete., person- ally appeared Mrs, Mary C. Church, residing at 317 Jones street, in the City, County and State aforesaid, & witness produced in behalf of the Rev. C. 0. Brown, pastor of the First Congregational Church in said City and County, in an action now pending in said church, who being by me first duly sworn then and there testified as follows: “On the 6th day of February following the business meeting held at the First Congrega- tional Church Mrs. Lena Blanchard called jointly on my sister and myselt at our resi- dence, 317 Jones street, in the City and County of San Francisco. My sister, Mrs. Simpson, re- ceived her first, and lateron I came in and filned in the conversation and said, *Why, rs. Blanchgrd, my sister informs me that you are a member of the First Congregational Church of this City.’ To which she replied: ‘Oh,no, 1 am nof am a ;member of the Grace Church; butlastnight I attended the business meeting at the First Congregational Church, and have been going there ever since this racket commenced. Iattended the said busi- ness meeting s & friend of Mrs, Sarah B, Cooper. Mrs. Cooper urged upon me several times to vote, and pulled me by my skirts; but I did not vote,as 1 wasnot & member of the church.’ “My sister then remarked to Mrs. Blanchard: *It is & good thing that you did not do so, as some member of the church would have ques- tioned your right todo so.’ Mrs. Blanchard then remarked: ‘I am very sorry for Dr. Brown, eyeh though he should be guilty,’ further ar.lfing: “Mrs. Cooper is &n old woman, and I think they treated her shamefully, on Wednesday evening, February 5, rather Janu- ary 30, when they hissed rs. Cooper.” “There is nothing but the kindest neigh- borly feeling existing between Mrs. Blanchard and myself, but in the interestof truth and ;nstlco 1 make this statement. We never re- erred to this matter until my sister and I talked it over and decided it was only just and right that we make the statement. *MrS. MARY C. CHURCH.” Bignature of deponent. State of California, City and County of San Francisco, 5. ;. 1, W. B. Benchley, a Notary-X'ublic in and for suid City and County, do hereby certify that the witness in the foregoing deposition named ‘was by me duly sworn to testi. {:me truth, the wholé truth and nothing but the trnth; that said deposition was taken at the timeand place mentioned in the annexed caption, to wit: At No. 317 Jones street in the Cily and County of San Francisco in the State of California, on’the 14th day of February, A. D. 1896, between the hours of 1 o’clock A. of. and 1 o’clock P. M. of that day: that said deposition was taken in shorthand by my stenographer, Miss Anna C. Busteede, and was by her transcribed in type- writing, and when completed was by me care- fully read to said witness, and being by her corrected was by her subscribed in my presence. In witness whereof I have hereunto sub- scribed my name and affixed my seal of office, the 14th day of February, A. D. 189¢ B. BENCRLEY, W . Notary Public ini end for the City and County of San Francisco, State of California. Office No. 630 Market'street. Btate of Californis, City and County of San Francisco, ss.—Deposition. Be it remembered, that on_the 14th day of February, A. D. 1896, at 817 Jones street, in the City_end County and State aforesaid, be-, fore me, W. B. Benchley, a notary publi¢ in and for said City and County, duly appointed and commissioned to administer oaths, ete., personally appeared Mrs. Ruby A. Rogers, re- siding at 729 California street in the City, County and Stateaforesaid, a witness prodused in behalf of the Rev. C. 0. Brown, pasfor of the First Congregational Church in said Cit; and County, .n an action now pending in s.‘s ghureh, who beirig Lx me first duly sworn, then and there testified as follows: -“Tama member of the First Congregational Church _of the City and County of San Fran- cisco, Californfa. 1 attended “the business meeting of said church, held on the evening of tne 5th day of February, A. D. 1896. I saw Mrs. Cooper there, she and her daughter sat immediately in front of me and my daughter, Coopef. When the voting commenced and the business of the meeting brought up, the first Vote that was cast was Sor an Appeal from the decision_of the chair. Mrs. Lens Blanchard voted. She voted twice at that meeting, and my daughter challenged her vote the secoud time, and asked her: ‘Are you & member ot the church? She reptied: ‘No, I am not. Then my daughter said, ‘Excuse me, but T shall have to challenge your yote.” She then sat down, and said she was there, for the pur- pose of acting as bodyguard to Mis. Cooper, and that she intended 10 see that she Feceive her vrotection, e ehrgary »on the morning of Febru! 14, A. D. 1896, T cailed at the residence of Mz Lena Blanchard, at 826 Bush street, and asked her the question’: ‘Are you Mrs. Lena Blanch- ard?” To which she replied that she was. Then my deughter and fstated to her that 8s a matier, or actof courtesy, we had called. to make sure that we were not mistaken. as to her identity, as we were on our way to make an affidavit tefore a notary public that she had voted and that her vote had.been chal- lenged. She acknowledged that she had voted there, as Mrs. Cooper had urged her 1o do' so, and said, ‘Whv_don't you vote? ~And Mrs. Blanchard further stated that ghe certainly must have been hyp- noticed by Mrs. Cooper and that she was lagor- ing under great excitement; that she was not a church member, and that she knew she had no right to vote, and, continuing, she said: ‘I further feel that'lowe Dr. Brows an apology, and a very humble one at that.’ Itold herit was not too_ late to do so yet, and that if she felt she was in the wrong she should do so. “Ihave no feelings against Mrs. Blanchard, and this statement is made only in the cause of righv and justice, “‘Mes. RUBY A. ROGERS.”” Signature of deponent. State of Califoonia, City and County of San Francisco—ss. I, W B. Benchley, a Notary Public in and for sa1d City snd County, do herebv certify that the witness in the foregoing deposition named, was by me duly sworn 10 testify the truth, the wholé truth, and notking but the truth; that said deposition was taken at the time and place mentioned in the annexed caption, to wit: 317 Jonesstreet, in the City and County of San Francisco, in the State of California, on ihe 1dth day of February, A.D.1896, between the hours 0£10:30 4. M. and 1 P, M. of that day. That said deposition wes taken in shorthand by my sten- ographer, Miss Auna C. Busteede, and was by her transcribed in typewriting, and when com- pleted was by me carefully read to said wit- ness, and being by her corrected, was by her subscribed in my presence. In witness whereof I have hereunto sub- scribed my name and affixed my seal of office the 14th day of February, A. D. 1896. W. B. BENCHLEY, Notary Public in and for the City and County of San Francisco, State of California, Office 630 Market st. State of California, City and County of San Francisco, ss.—Deposition.” Be it remembered. that on the 14th day of February, A. D. 1896, at 317 Jones street, in the City end_County and State aforesaid, be- fore me, W. B. Benchley, & notary public, in and for said City and County, duly appointed and commissioned to administer “oatls, etc., versonally appeared Miss Carrie Dee Rogers, residing at 729 California street, in the City, County and State aforesaid, a witness pro- duced in behelf of the Rev. C. 0. Brown, pastor. of the First Congregational Church, in said City and County, in an action now pending in said church, who, being by me first duiy sworn, then and there testified as follows: “Iam amember of the first Congregational Church of the City and County of San Fran- clsco, State of California. I attended the busi- ness meeting of said church, héid on the even- ing of the 5th day of February, A. D. 1896. I saw Mrs. Cooper there; she and her daughter sat immediately in_front of my mother and myself. Mrs. Lena Blanchard saton the right of Mrs. Cooper.. When the voting commenced and the businsss of the meeting brought up the first vote that was taken was for an appeal from the decision of the chair. Mrs. Lena Blanehard voted. The first time she voted, 1 said nothing; but when she voted the second time I asked her if she was a member of the church and she said ‘No.” 1 then said to her, ‘Excuse me, if you are not a member of this church I must challenge your vote. You have no right to vote”’ She then sat down and said no more about the vote, but said that she had come to protect Mrs. Cooper from the tyrants of that church and that she was Mrs, Cooper’s bodyguard and would protect her. flsubseguemly, on the 14th day of February, A. D. 1896, mamma and I called on Mrs, Bianchard, at her residence at 826 Bush street, to ascertain if she was Mrs. Blanchard and to establisn her identity, as we were on our way to make our depositions beforea notary pub- lic to show that she had voted and that I had challenged her vote. She acknowledged that she had voted, bui stated that Mrs, Cooper had urged her to do 80, and that Mrs. Cooper must certainly have hypnotized her, as she was laboring under great excitement. She further stated that she owed Dr. Brown a very humble apology, and mamma_told her it was not too late to make the apelogy yet, if she felt she was in the wrong. “I have no feeling against Mrs. Lena Blan- chard, and this deposition is made only in the interest of truth and justice. “M1ss CARRIE DEE ROGERS,” Signature of deponent. State of Californis, City -and County of San Francisco—s. s. , W. B. Benchley, a notary public in and for said City and County, do hereby certify that the witness_in the foregoing deposition named was by me duly sworn to tesufy the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth; that said deposition was taken at the time and place mentioned in the annexed caption, to wit: At No. 317 Jones street, in the City aud County of San Franeisco, in the State of California, on the 14th day of February, A, D. 1896, between the hours of 10:30 o’clock A. M. and 1 o’clock P. M. of that day, That seid deposition was taken in shorthand bdy my stenographer, Miss Anna C. Busteede, and was by her transcribed in typewriting, and when completed’ was by me carefully read to said witness, and being by her corrected, was by her subscribed in my presence. In gwitness whereof I have hereunto sub- scribed my name and aflixed my seal of office the 14th day of February, A. D., 1896. W. B. BeNCHLEY, Notary Public in and for the City and County of San Francisco, State of California, Office No. 630 Market street. Inan interview last night Miss Hattie Cooper stated that Mrs. Brown’s agitation over the Mrs. Blanchard episode was both humorous and pathetic. ‘“‘Regarding the voting ifcident,” said she, *‘Mrs. Blanchard was at the prayer- meeting as a spectator, and being evi- dently of an excitable disposition was car- ried away, and when the members arose for the vote she popped up too. 1t was probably under the imp ulse caused by the general movement of the people around her. Asshe stood on her feet she saw the awful eye of Dr. Brown upon her, and suddenly remrinded that she was not a member of the church she dropped in her seat like a plummet. “That is all there is in poor Mrs. Brown'’s accusation of Mrs. Sarah B. Cooper’s at- tempt to manufacture a vote against Dr. Brown. My mother never in the slightest tried to influence Mrs. Blanchard to vote, and the statement that she did so 1s ridic- ulous. “Last night about 9 o’clock Mrs. Blanch- ard came to our house and was in the deepect trouble over Dr. Brown’s visit to her a few hours before. He descended upon her with a notary public and de- manded that she sign a deposition or be arrested for false voting at the prayer- meeting. He had engaged a stenographer to take down her exact words and was very much annoyed because that person. was late. Dr. Brown, in his impatience stood out on the porch and waited for the shorthand man. “Mrs. Blanchard told all this to us, and said: ‘I didn’t want Dr. Brown standing on my front steps. Iam a decent woman, and I was afraid the neighbors would see him. Oneof the principal ladies of his church lives just across the street from my house, and if she had seen him there it would bave been bad for me.’ “I don’t know where Mrs. Blanchard got her idea of Dr. Brown’s general baneful influence,” continued Miss Cooper, “but Mrs. Blanchard seemed to be sincere in her fears for her reputation and-her regrets at her visitor's public exhibition of himself in that locahty. " “She seems to be a poor, timid, neryous woman and just the person that could be intimidated into signing any paper, affida- vit or ‘deposition Dr. Brown might offer. ‘We told her that Dr. Brown’s threats of arrest were all nonsense and she should not pay any attention to them. She said she would not be afraid and started home, saying that she expected that the police offiters would be at her house waiting for her return. . ‘‘Aswe havesince heard that she and seve- ral of her friends have signed certain ridicu- lous depositions and statements, I pre- sume Dr. Brown and his notary publicand his stenographer and his policemen breath- ing threats of arrest were waiting for the poor woman when she got home.”” 1t has been intimated that Dr. Brown on the strength of the affidavits procured by his wife will ask the council not to admit any testimony which might be offered by Mrs, Lena Blanchard sat on the right of Mrs, | Mrs, Cooper. This lady says, however, that if such a course is followed the evi- dence in her possession will be given to the public through the press. There is a general belief among those who have figured more or less prominently in the case that the missirig witness, Mrs. Tunnell, is in the City. She is said to be in hiding, and only awaits the opening of the council to make her presence known. Professor Lloyd will occupy the pulpit gi the rirst Congregational Church to- ay. s SRR MRS. DAVIDSON IN COURT. Her Attorneys Submit a Demur-~ rer to the Informa=- tion. Mrs. Davidson made her first appear- ance before the Superior Court yesterday. She was arraigned before Judge Bahrs, but instead of her plea a demurrer to the in- formation was filed by her attorneys, and a greater part of the afternoon was spent in arguing-it. The demurrer which Mr. Gallagher sub- mitted was drawn up as follows: The People of the State of CtUMmhg vs. Mary A. Davidson, Defendant. DBMURRER. Now comes the above-named defondant, Mary A. Davidson, and demurs to the informa- tion filed in the above entitled action upon the following grounds, viz.: L Thstsaid Information does not substantially conform to the requirements ot section 950 ot the Penal Code of California. IL Teat the said information does nat substan- tially copform to the requirements of section 951 of the Penal Code of California. jiid That the said information does not subatan- tially conform to the requirements of section 952, Penal Code of California. Iv. That the said information does not contsin astatement ot the acts constitutingany offense in ordinary and concise language and in 's & manner as to euable & person of common intelligence to understand what is intended. V. That gaid information is not direct and cer tain as it Tegards the offense charged. VI That the said information is not nd certain, as it regards the pndcul% stances of the offense charged, the being necessary to constitute a complete defense. VIL 1hat the factsstated in said information do not constitute a public offense. VIIL That the said information charges more than one offense. WALTER GALLAGHER and J.J. GUILFOYLE, Attorneys for defendant. Mr. Gallagher, in his argument, tobk the position that Mrs. Davidson was an agent, not a principal, and her acts could not, therefore, be censured. He said, dur- ing his argument: An agent cannot be convicted of a crime un- less it may be some violation of the rights of his principal. The fact that the defendant carried a verbal message to Dr. Brown does not alter her character as agent. Would it be con- tended thatif the message had been written by Mrs. Baddin and had been conveyed to Dr. rown by Mrs. Davidson, Mrs. Davidson would then be liable? Or suppose that the District Attorney charged directly that defendant was the agent of Mrs. Baddin in all that she said or did, would there then be any doubts as to the insufliciency of this information? When & fact is alleged, which is capable of two interpretations, one of which favors inno- cence, the presumption favoring innocence must be indulged in, for the law demands that the presumption be always against the pleader. When it is alleged that Mrs. Davidson declared to Dr. Brown that she was the agent of Mrs. Baddin, that declaration .not being denied is equiyalent to a distinct allegation on the one hand and su admission on the partof the eople that the defendant was the agent of {ixs: Baddin, and so the court, must conclude how, as the agent of Mrs. Baddin, & conversa- tion she had with Mrs. Baddin was related to Dr. Brown. The prosecution has drawn from the facts the conclusion that the defendant was not the agent of Mrs. Baddin, and the only way in which they can hope to sustain the presump- on. 1f the doctor had feared Mrs. Davidson might fmpute to him certain things, the imputation should disclose that fact; and if the money was given to Mrs. Davidson for herself, and not for some other person, the pleader should so de- clare; and if the defendant had declared and threatened that she would, if disappointed in e financial venture, publish and impute to r. Brown certain acts in which Miss Overman figured, the information upon that point should not be silent. In fact, there should be no room for doubt as to what the people charged in the informa- tion, and if there be any doubt the very oppo- site to the theory of the prosecution will be presumed. Hence, because of the prosecution failing to vositively state certain facts, the court must presume a state of facts as foliaws: That the doctor did not fear tnat Mrs. Day- idson would impute to him certain things if she did not get $50C; that she did not get any money of any sum whatever for herself, and that she was the agent of Jane Elizabeth Bad- din, Therefore, our conclusion being that de- fendant was an sgent, the ‘people in the in- formation have charged thet defendant so claimed, and the people have admitted that claim by feiling to deny it. While the de- fendant denies that she was the agent of Mrs. Baddin, but was the agent of Dr. Brown, ahe is Dot permitted to contradict the presumption of the law from the allegations set out in this information, but whatsoever horn of the di- lemma the people will hook onto the defend- ant is proclaimed an agent. An afent is not a principal. Our Civil Cod section 2295, provides as follows: “An agent is one who represents another, called the principal, in dealing with third persons. Such representation is called agency.” ‘Walter Hinkle, Assistant District Attor- ney, and Davis Louderback, special coun- sel” for the prosecution, answered, Mr. Hinkle following Mr. Gallagher. Mr., Guilfoyle, Mr. Gallagher’s associate, came next with substantially the same argn- ments first made, and Mr. Louderback and Gallagher tlosed. 3 Coupsel for the prosecution argued that the law in reference to obtaining money by false pretenses had been applied by the defense to this case of extortion. It was claimed that if & person went to another and refusing to give names announced that the unknown t ird‘;garty would tell that which would bring disgrace, the party so threatening would be guilty of extortion. The question of agency, it was argued, was immaterial. Besides the prosecution did not charge that Mrs. Davidson was an agent. They accused her of being a prin- cipal. NEW TO-DAY. THE OWL DRUG CO,, 1128 MAREKET ST. BAKER’S TAR A POSITIVE COUGH CURE. BALSAM, ] THE OWL DRUG CO. San Francisco—Los Angeles. Pinkham’s Vegetable Compound. .75¢ Paine’s Celery Compounda. .60c Joy’s and Hood’s Sarsapari ee...600 THE OWL DRUG €O. CUT-RATE DRUGGISTS. ‘Williams’ Pink Pills -35¢ ‘(s)“mm‘f"l;‘. ¢ . ggg yrup of Fij 4 Cuticura Rf:olvent. .70c Warner’s Kidney Cure “85¢ Allcock’s Porous Plasters -10c Carter’s and Beecham’s Pil 153 Allen’s Malt Whiskey . Romany Oil WRITE FOR PRICE-LIST. 'THE OWL DRUG CO.