The San Francisco Call. Newspaper, June 22, 1897, Page 12

2 THE SAN FRANCISCO CALL, TUESDAY, JUNE 22, 1897T. EVIDENCE N FAVOR IGEL Testimony Tending to Es- tablish an Alibi for Him. FOUR NEW WITNESSES APPEAR. Proceedings Again Made Ex- tremely Interesting by the | Attorneys. LETTER FROM AN ALLEGED VEILED WOMAN. | Attorney Llovd Promised to Have His Client on Hand This Morning. It wasa “hot” session aithe Coroner’s office yesterday during the investigazion into the death of Isaac Hoffman. The rise in the temperature was directly due to the presence of Reuben H. Lioyd, who on that occasion made his public debut in the case. First he had it out with the Coro- ner, but in a comparatively mild way. Toward the close of the session, however, he and Attorney Ach had the most excit- ing passage-at-words that has yet occurred in this connection. In the course of it Ach charged Lloyd with uttering an “‘in- famous falsehood.” Neither apology, #x- planation, blows nor shots followed. The matter was simply ignored. A most interesting witness was Miss Lillian Cohn, a stenographer emploved in | the store of Heyneman & Co., at 33 and 35 Battery street. She testified to having seen Eoffman walking along Bush street toward Sansome in company with another man, at about 6:25 ». M. on the evening of June 1. She knows Figel by sight, and | gave it as her opinion inhat the second in- dividual was not tue bookkeeper. Her testimony in part corroborated by one of the salesmen employed in the same establishment with her. It was ther disspvointing day for those who expected to see F.gel put on 1he rack. There had been an understana- ing between the Coroner and Lloyd that | 1he suspected man should be placed on the stand the first thing vesterday morn- | ing. The appointea hour came, but the | call for Figel was unresponded to. After each witness leit the stand tne Coroner | repeated his demand for the absent wit- | ness, but with equally froitless resulte. At last Lloyd explained that Figel mus: | have misunderstood the hour, and added | that he would be on hand at noon. He said that he would have his clien: present | at9 o’clock this morning without fail It | was then 11 o’clock, an hour and a haif earlier than the usual time for adjourn- | ment. By this time the Coroner had teen worked up to such a state of aggravation at the mannerin which his plan to ex- amine Figel yesterday had been frustrated that he summarily adjourned the inquest until this morning at 9 o'cleck, at the same time ordering Mr. Lloyd 10 have the elusive witness present at that hoar with- out 1 The attorney promised to com- | ly. ¥ During the examination of some of the | witnesses Lloyd suggested several ques- tions to the Coroner, and Ach objected to his doing so. The latter claimed that, ac- | cording to the code, the attorney for the | accused had no right to be represented at | the Coroner’s inquest. It was this that | led to the rupture between the two attor- | neys previously referred to. After the ad- | journment Lloyd had a conlerence with | the Coroner, to determine, if possible, | what rights snd privileges were 10 be ac- | corded to him as the representative of Figel. “This man’s life is at stake,” he said to the Coroner, “‘and 1 will not allow him to | go on the stand unless I am allowed to ask him questions.”” i ““You can certainly do so,” replied the | Coroner, **but they must be asked through me, as is done in the case of the other attorneys. 1f I think they are proper I will ask them.’’ “That is all that I ask. There is nothing o conceal, and I will put this man on." On this understanding they parted. Unexpectedly to ull persons an entirely | new Wwitness came on the scene yesterday, who gave most impor.ant testimony in favor of the suspected man. This was Thomas Turnbuil of Fruitvale, who stated | that he had been on speaking terms witn | the deceased, and that on the evening of the tragedy he had seen Hoffman enter | bis place oi business as late as 6 o'clock. The importance of this te: mony will be seen when taken in connec- tion with that of a number of other wit- nesses, who have testified that Figel was 2t the San Rafael ferry at that time. That startling developments were ex- | pected by everybody was to some extent | indicated by thie presencs on the scene of all the attorneys interested in the case. | For the first time was there such a gath- | ering. Rothchild, Ach and Murphy were there in behalf of the firm of Hoffman, Rothekild & Co., while ex-Juage Louder- | back and Lioyd were there to watch mat- | ters for Figel. Chief Lees occupied hus | customary place at the left of the Coroner. | - NEW EVIDENCE. i B { Testimony That Apparently Estab- | lishes an Albi for the Sus- | pected Man. | | | { The exomination of witnesses before the | Coroner began yesterday with William J. WEW IO-DAY. BEAUTIFUL SKIN Sott, White Hands with Shapely Nails, Luxn.| riant Hair with Clean, Wholesome Scalp, pro- duced by CUTICPRA S0AP, the most effective skin purifying and beautifying soap in tho world, ds well as purest and sweetest, for toilet, bath, and nursery. The only preventive of inflammation and clogging of the PoRs. J (Uticura Souris sod throughout the world. PoTsEE Dzvo axp 2¥., Sole Props., Boston, U. 8. o Purity and Beautify the 8kin, Scalp, mailed free. | ber all of the letter 'and that it had been | murder. { matter. | the loss. For this reason tne witness de- | Ficel at the store of the firm which, the | witness represented. | without any regular place of business. He |8t 6:30 P. M. to catch the 6:45 p. M. narrow- Mr. Hoffman.” Baker, a mail collector. He stated tnat | the course that he took on that day in | on the evening of June 1 he took the mail | out of the box at the corner of Bush and | Battery streets at 15 seconds after 6:30. | He fixed the time because he hnd looked at his watch at that time to see how much | time he bad left to reach the Posicffice, at | which he was due at 6:45 He saw no | one in front of the Battery-street entrancé | to Hoffman’s place, nor did he see a veiled | woman or any other in the vicinity of the | Bush-street store. | Dr. O. C. Westehal of Belvedere rclated an incident that occurred at his home about six weeks ago. At that time Figel attempted to shoot some shaps and ex- pressed dissatisfaction with his pistol, re- | marking that it was of too small a caliber | and that he intended to purchase a larger | one. C. M. Post, the mailing clerk of Hoff- | man, Rothchild & Co., stated that he had | never heard Hoffman speak of firearms. | He added that Figel bad told him about Lis revolver, and bad shown him a smail hammerless pistol_and explained to him how it wasused. Figel, he said, had never informed him that he wanted to dispose of | it. Continuing, he testiied that there were no small bottles of ink in the siore. | He also testified to having seen Schutte, | the entry clerk, wrap up the peity cash. books for Figel to take home in the even- ing of June L. Bol Lewek of Marysville, the husband of a cousin of Hoffman’s, testified that while be was in San Francisco on Ap:il 30, Hoff- man asked him to call at his place of busi- ness. He did so, and Hoffman submitted to him some letfers, one from Mr. Simons to Mrs. Hoffman and anotber from Mrs. Hoffman to Simons. After witness had perused them, Hoff man esked: *“Don’t you think that is pretty tough?”’ The Witnesssaid he ad- mitted it was, but that he had not time then to talk about them, and invited Hoffman 16 come to Marysville and talk | the matter over. When Lewek returned bome he told his wile of the interview he | bhad with Hoffman, and she wrote to her cousin offering 1o write to Mrs. Hoffman | and endeavor to effect a complete rezon- | ciliation between Mr. and Mrs. Hoffman | and Mrs. Alexander. In response to this Mr. Hoffman wrote Mrs. Liwek a letter stating that he thought it wou!d be useless to write to his wiie as she was exceedingly obdurate on | | murder, and order to isfy himself as to the time he haa taken 1 his walk. In explaining bis appearance as a wit- ness in the case, Turnbull stated that he had read of the affair in the vapers, and that iu view of the position Fivel was in be hud thought it his duty to tell all he knew. He had, thereiore, gone to Mr. Lioyd yesterday morning and had offered 1o give his testimony. Az 1his juncture there was another call for Figel by the Coroner, and Attorney Lloyd then said he thought, in view of the fact that Figel stood in the position of | being accused, he should not be called un- til all the other witnesses had given their testimony. To this Coroner Hawkins re- plied that he was simply trying to carry out the evident wishes of Chief Lees. Fred W. Bishop, a reporter of THE CALL, testified that on the night of the tragedy he was shown the revolver with which the killing had been done, and that he had failed to notice any blood spots on it. The testimonv of the police officers had been that ihere was blood on the weapon when it was placed in their custody on the nightof June 1. Abe Hoffman, a brother of the deceased, stated that his brother was not in the babit of carrying a revolver; he bada great horror of firearms, He said he was engaged to be married, but denied that his brother had ?iven him or promised to bim a present of money in Lonor of the coming event. So far as he knew nis brother nad never made any statement to the effect that his wile had been talking | about a divorce. Hoffman, he said, was noton good terms with his mother-in-law, A. O. Alexander, a brother-in-law of Isasc Hoffman, was a: “Dia you ever make & statement that Hoffman was mur- dered and that Figel did not commit the that you knew who did i1?” said that I did not think Figel com- mitted the murder, but I did notsay I knew who did 1t.” Healso denied he had said that when the affair was over it would be known who had committed the crime. He added that he was at San Jose on the mght of the tragedy, and so was his brother. Both were seen there by the Chief of Police of San Jose. Miss Lillian Cobn was a witness whoss testimony evidently made a marked im- pression on all present. In sabstance her testimony was as follows: ROTHSCHILD WITNESS SR e \ - EX-JUDGE MYRPHY AND ATTY LLOYD,HOLDA SECRET o % CONFERENCE. o g Y thissubject. Headded he did not remem- | mislaid or had got lost. Iu the course of his conversation with Hoffman on April 30 Hoffman, referring 10 the Alexauders, had made use of this remark: “All th:y have they owe to me, and this is the thanks I get.”” “Hoffman spoke affectionately of nis ciildren,”” con- tinued the witness, “and said that if it were not for his babies thines would be different. Hoffman never spoke of suicide, | but talked of nis business in such a way as 10 indicate that he had no idea such a thing.” Joseph M. Rothchild of Rothcbild & Acn related the circumstance of his naving been called out of the theater on the eve: ing of June 1 and told that Hoffman had commitied suicide. He went into a de. taiied account oi all that was done that evening in the premises where the dying | Hoffman had been found. ln the course | of this be stated that at that time Chief | Lees, who was rhere, talked at length on the case and endeavored to impress upon those present the idea that it was & case of suicide. When the witness suggested that it might be murder and mentioned Figel in that connection the Chief said he had known Joseph Figel, the fetherof the bookkeeper, for more than forty years, and that nobody could convince him that the son of old Jue Figel cou'd commit | i ( Rothchild related the incidents con- nected wiih Figel's visit 1o him at the office of Rothehild & Ach, when Figel brought with him a ‘receipt for $9500. Figel stated that bis books were all right and wanted to zo on with the posting of them, but the witness objected. He was not satisfied that tlie receipt was genuine, and it occurred to him that it would be prudent to thoroughiy investigate the It the receipt was all right, Rothchild explained, the amount would be charged 10 the personal estate of Hoffman; if it were not, the witness’ brother, who was a memb-r of the firm of Hoffman, Roth- child & Co.. would have to stand a part of termined not tolet Figel meddle with the | books. He also told of further conversa- tions he had had with Chief Lees, in which the latter had endeavored todem- onstrate that it was a case of suicide. Draughtsman Russell of the Police Department ha | siated to witnesses that | there was no blood trail between the two offices, such as is shown on what is kuown as Cnef Lees’ diagram | P. E. Kellner of E. P. Alien & Co. testi- | tied that the pistol which Figel said e had sold to Hoffman, and with which the killing was done, had not been sold to Chief Lees had on a previous occasion testified that Figel tolu him that he had purchased the weapon at Allen’s. Then came the sensational testimony of Thomas Turnbuil of Fruitvale, who de- scribed himself as a reai-estate dealer stated that on June 1 he came 10 this City | in order tn see an attorney named Mor- xan at 14 Sansome street and have him examine a deed. He left 14 Sansome street gauge train. He went down Bush street and tien 1o Market, and got 1o the ferry in time tocatch his boat, walking leisurely a!l the way. When you were passing Bush and Bat- | tery streeis did you see anybody ?’ asked | tue Coroner. “Isaw Isaac Hoffman standing st the door of his office.” Continuing the witness said that he was acquainted with the de- ceased, and that his dauzhter had worked in Hoffman’s family. When hesaw Hoff- | man on Juve 1 lie was not over ten feet from the decea-ec. “What time was this?’ asked the Coroner. “This was about 6:32 ». M. I think it | would take me about two minutes to walk from 14 Sapsome street to where 1 saw In response to further questions he stated that he saw no woman about the store and thar the door was open. Wi ness did not speak to Hoffman, but nodded to him, and Hoffman returned the salutation. When asked about what clothes Hotfman wore at that time the witness said he did not notice them par- ticularly, but thought that he wore a dark su.t of clothes and a dark bat. Ling and sealy, instantly re- it g ) BABY HUMORS After reading of the tragedy in the | Shy { until the next day. | the | experimen | nizbt belore closing. uewspapers ihe witness said he went over ., |, “Itis not,” answered Lioyd; and so the | incident ended. | Lioyd afterward explained tnat the rea- son he paid no atrention to the provoking remark of his adversary was tLat he had been engaged in two rows in court on other occasions and did not feel that he had any right to prejudice the case of his client in 50 serious a matter by disturbing the peace of the courtroom. Unger continuing his testimony said that his watch was exact, within a minute, and that he was at the letter-box at 6:25, not & minute later, though it may have been a minute earlier. It was about 11 o’clock and the Coroner made another impatient call for Figel. He failed to respond and Ltoyd said that he would have him present at 9 o'clock this morning. “Then I guess we will take an adjourn- ment unul 9 o’clock to-morrow,” retorted the Coroner, and the session was over much to the surprise of all concerned. WHY HE REMAINED. Matthew Unger Delayed Leaving | the Store So As to Dins With His Brother. Matthew Unger, the brother of Harry ‘Ungex, who testitied yesterday, and who | willin all probability be called asa wit- | ness to-day, will simply testify to the fac | that he was with his brother on that | | eventful evening, and that the time was after 6 o’clock when they left the store in | company with Miss Cohn. He said yes- terday I was with my brother on the evening of June 1, and know that we left the | store after 6 o’clock. How long after 6 it was I am unable to state, but I know that we left later than our usual time. Idid not notice the street particalarly and can- not recall having seen any one in front of the store of Hoffman, Rothchild & Co. “My brother and I do not live together, and I waited for him on this particular evening, as I had accepted an invitation o dine with him. Miss Cohn, my brother and myself left the store together and went down Battery toward Market street.” — - THE LETTER CRANK. One of the Female Durrant Writers Offers Her Testimony to the Coroner. A letter was received by the Corcner | vesterday that bears all the earmarks of | baving been written by a cran The | Coroner places no credence in the infor- | mation conveyed, ana the Chief of Police, when showed a copy of the letter and | hearing the name ot the writer, sai | “IIem not mistaken I have a letter | written by the same person offering to | | | | MISS Conen WiTNEess “I am a stenographer, employed with Heyneman & Co., at 33 and 35 Battery street, On tbe evening of Junell ieit the store later than usual with Harry ant Matthew Unger, who are also employed there. It was cousiderably later than 6 o’clock—our usual time of closing We walked down Battery street as far as Bush together, where Ileft the Ungers and proceeded along the norih side of Bush street toward my home. 1had pone about seventy-five feet along Bush street | when I turned to see if the Ungers put some letters in the mailbox at th- corner of Bush and Battery streets. As I turned | I saw Isaac Hoffman on the other side ot the street, walking with another gentle- man slowly toward Sansome street. 1did not recognize the oiher man, but my im- pression is that it was not Theodore Figel, whom I know. They were very near the corner of Battery street, The Ungers continued along Battery street toward Market. Hoftman was walking on the outsiae.” In response to the question of the Coroner she said she could not describe the man who was with Hoffman, and added 11 Hoffman at that place and at that time. did not know anything of the tragedy tae 2d of June, when she reached the office, one of the Ungers remarked, “That thing must have happened immediately after we parted.” “I asked, ‘What thing?"” continued | the witness, “and when he told me of the death of Hoffman I said that I had seen Hoffmaa that evening. I said 1o some one in talking of the | affair that if one of those men had been Figei I would have recognized him.” She said she went to Mr. Lioyd on the | suzgestion of Alexander Heyneman, an attorney and a brother of her employer, and told him what she knew. At the request of Mr. Lioyd she had re- peaied all the proceedings of that evening in order to determine at what time she bad seen Mr., Hoffman. The experiment «howed that it must have been about 6:25 r.a. It was 6:15 wnen Harry Unger looked at his waich on the evening of Junel. They had just finished copying some letters. They put away the conying materials, she walked to the remote end of the store, washed her hands, covered vpewriters, cleared away some papers, locked the safe, put on her coat, locked the siore and walked to the point where she had turned and seen Hoffman. In concluding her story she said: “We did exactly these same thines in maXing the t was the usu.l routine each Hurry Unger confirmed her testimony in every particular, addinz that ne had looked at his watch ou Juae 1 to see if he would have time to get back to the store to keep appointment with a drammer, whom he was to meet at 7 o’clock. He | saw, be sid, that hs would not be able to | keep the appointment, and told Special Officer Ferrenback to ask the drammer to wait for him. He and his brother, after leaving Miss Cohn, proceeded along Mar- | ket street and out O'Farrell street home. | In passing Hoffman, Rothchild & Co.'s | place he saw no one in iront of it, nor he see anv one on Bush street, as his bac was turned, in the act of mailing some letters, At tnis point Mr. Llo:d suggested & Question to the Coroner, a1d Mr. Ach ob- jected. The latrer claimed thut the sus- pected party had no right to bs reprs sented at the Coroner's inguest by counsel. This brought from L'oyd the =ngrily uttered remark, ““You are tryinz ¢ ®ip- pressthe truth. “I am not” quickly rejoined Ach. “That is an 1niamous faisehood.”” t she had never beiore see. | On _the morning of | give the same testimony in favor of Theo- dore Durrant. She appears to be a crank | of the first water. I hearl of the letter to- | day. but dia not consiaer it of sufficient | imporiance to even procure a copy of it. | I certainly ‘will pay no attention to it.”" The text of the letter is.as foliows: San Francisco, June 21. Coroner Hawkins, Dear Sir—Theodore Figel did not kill Sam Sm Ma Haffmon. 1w ent on same eve to the boat with Mr. Figel. We went down early, 6:15. Then Mr. Figel haa forgot something at the store and had 10 go back, and when he got to boat last time ke was a littie lale as it was :32, but the boat was late and he made it all right. isaw him by his Ticket this was June the 1ih tuesdsy as that was the day i went to | the city. Mr. ‘Figel had plenty money as he paid me the woman dressed in black did not 80 to see Mr. Hoffman but to see Mr. Figel as 1 alway went there first of every month to see him Mr. Figel told me he was afraid sometning would happen to Mr | Hoffman as he was alway having troub e with | some of the men, and he told me he saw a bad looking man hanging round the door that me and he was afraii he would kil Mr. Hoffman and if the volice would to they could find the | man they just seen like they woulid try to find | that man Mr Hawkins please dont arrest Mr Figel has paid a lot of money to keep his self out of this trouble and { know he did not do it perhaps that policeman who found him killed him he hud some trouble with him some few days vefore Mr Figel said he was mean enuff to do any thing 1 will come as & witness if Mr Figel get in trouble over this and Ican | prove him tanocent. M1ss MaMIE W ATD iU e ACH UNCONVINCED. Declares That His Faith In the Murder Theory Is Not Shaken by Yesterday’s Testimony. | “The testimony given at the inque:t | does not change my opinion,” said At- torney Ach yesterday afternoon. “Miss | Cohn says that she does not know what time it was. She says that she saw Mr. Hoffman turn the corner with some gentleman. Mr. Unger did not see any- body at all when he posted his letters. He says he mailed his letters at 6:25. “Pat all these people togetuer, that Chiet Lees has got, at the time they say they were at the corner of Bush and Bat- tery streets and you would have a mob. The letier-carrier saw no one at 6:30. Officer Colen was there and saw no one at 6:30, and this young girl, if she saw any- | body with Mr. Hoffman, saw Mr. fried- man, to a certainty. *If Mr. Hoffman was murdered, as he unquestionably was, he was murdered with that pistol. 1f it were not dcne by Fige! Mr. Hoffman must have given the | vistol to some oneto murder him witb, ana that somebody must hi then bor- rowed Mr. Hoffman's keys, gone outside and locked the door and then gone in | again and put the kevs on the shelf, and | then gone out azain and locked the door with something in the shape of key. The only other per:ons who had a key to the place besides Figel and Hoffman were | Schuite and E. S. Hoffman, and the latter | was i ew York at the time of the | tragedy and, of course, Do one suspects | the entry clerk for a moment. | ““When it comes 10 & question of time— | of five or ten minutes—1 think it is getting pretty close, it is u pretty shakv defense if 4 Iman 1s charged with any crime. MORTON SPECIAL DELIVERY. | Brggage iransferrod 10 trains, steamers, etc. Also moved in the city. Furniture moved; estimates furnished. Freignt transterred and shipped. 408 Taylor street and 650 Market street. “Jelephone Main 46. * CAUGHT IN THEIR OWN THAP The Fair Heirs’ Attorneys Find Themselves in an Awkward Place. LEFT A LOOPHOLE FOR THE DEFENSE. in Consequence Mrs Craven Is Telling Her Whole Story. HOW THE COMPROMISE FELL THROUGH. Wheeler Avow d That He Would L ave the Profession if He Stould Deceive th: Lady. The counsel for the Fair heirs found much in yesterday’s session of the litiza- tion over the disputed deeds held by Mrs. Craven to give them worry and tribula- tion. The lady defendant is stili un the wit- ness-stand, under cross-examination by her own legal champion, Mr. Delmas. When the opposing side essayed its great coup, over a weex ago, by unexpectedly calling her to the stand and subjecting ber to what was intended to be a wither- ing fire of questions, as their own witness, they resorted to exireme care not to let slip any query that might open the way for the aefense to take advantage of well- |known rules of evidence and return the attack on cross-examination. By making her their witness they were, under the law, bound by her statements, and it therefore behooved them to proceed cau- tiously and scan the ground for pitfalls. But despite their shrewdness they per- mitted themselves to be carried away over the prospect of proving out of Mrs. Cravea’s own mouth that, by not record- ing bher deeds until many months atter she had received them, she confessed to a neeligence that was certain to cast grave suspicion on the genuineness of those documents. True, the lady did admit this delay, and her torturers feit secure in the belief that she could not be given an opportunity on cross-examination to ex- plain why she was dilatory, and ihus leave the jury prejudiced against her. But that is just where they made their mistake. It developed at yesterday’s ~ession that they had not blocked the v as effectively as they thought. his became apparent when Mr. Delmas direcied his client to give in detail her reasons for not havinz bawked her deeds about among the attorneys for the Fair children. Strenuous objections welied up irom the throats of the agitated barristers. It was not cross-examination, they roared, and was palpably an attempt on the part of the defense to break into the plaintiffs’ case and interject matter calculated to help its own cause before the cther side bad finisbed. Judge Slack ruled, however, that they had let the bars down themselves ana | would therefore have to abide by the con- sequences, 1t was a “'solar plexus’ biow, 50 to speak, and staggered them. Mrs. Craven proceeded to relate that it was the attorneys for the Fair children them-elves who, by their promises to pur- chase her claims, caused berto withold her deeds so long from the Recorder. And 10 demonstrate that she spoke the iruth in this regard she referred to a letter received at Monterey by her in July, 1895, from ber iriend J. O'Hara Cosgrave, who had interested himself in her behalf. Mr. Delmas immediately called for the production of the letter, and in so doing elicited another chorus of objections from nis opponents. A long argument fol- owed tha! lasted over info the afternoon session. Mr, Deimas took the simple ground that the letter was intended to en- lighten the jury very materialiy as to the Iady’s reasons for keeping secret the fact that she had the deeds in her possession. Negotiations were under way at that time 10 compromise with her in regard to the “‘pencil'’ will. She had a right to mis- trust those with whom she was dealing, and on that score acted wisely in not letting them know that sbe had the deeds as weil as the then much-desired will, In- asmuch as the Cosgrave letter would 1o a degree support this theory, it wouid cer- tainly be material evidence—particularly in view of the fact that the other side had opened the way for the introduciion of testimony on this very point. Attorney Mitchell replied in opposition toMr. Delmas’ argument. He started off by saying that if Mrs. Craven should be per- mitted to give evidence regarding the written instrument, or, if that paper ware introduced. as being a showing of her re. sons for not exhibiting the disputed deeds to the Fair heirs, there would be nothing 10 prevent following out that line of testi- mony to unlimited extent. There would be nothing to prevent the lady, be said, from tesiiiying that some time in the spring of 1895 she poked her head out of a window, and, finding that it was raining, announced that circumstance as one of her reasons for not showing her deeds to the heirs or attorneys. Mr, Mitchell* also claimed that a state- menf, written or oral, made by Mrs, Craven's agent was clearly hearsay evi- dence. He thought the court, in rejecting testimony regarding Mrs. Craven’s con- versations with Attorneys Wheeler, Lioyd, Wilson and others connected with the estate, had laid down a rule that covered the present issue. Judge Slack said this was quite a differ- ent case from that which brought out the previous ruling. He,was satisfied, he said, that Mrs. Craven’s reasons for not exhibiting the deeds were, under the pres- ent circumstances, quite admissible. While the document might be cla<sed as wearsay evidence still the fact that the lady might e based her reasons on this very class of evidence would make it ad- missible. Then it was that Mr. Delmas fac+d the jnry and read in deliberate tone and sig- nificant emphas:s how Attorney Wheeler had promised so faithiully to ‘stand by Mrs. Craven througb thick and thin and see that she would get the money prom- ised her. The letter was a follows: Dear Mrs. Craven: I had a positive talk with Wheeler on Saturday. Told him how you felt bout a certain matier, and received an assur- ce that they iuiended to play absoiutely fair. It was impossibie, he said, to go back on your wiil. They did not propose.io iry. He would siake his reputation thereon. They hoped and were negotiating to make matters as pleasant as pos:ible for you, and believe if the trust clause can be invalidated thai the last will can be put through hands down. 1 e | {eliciting the present evidence irom the 8aid to him: “Now, Wheeler, between you and me, are you going to look after Mrs. Cra- ven and seeshe is properly and fairly treated?” He sald: ‘“We are going to be here ifor 8 long time—vou and 1. Now if sheis not treated absolutely dead square, I'll retire from the profession. Take my word for it.” I was convinced of his sinceritly, and am sure they canuot try any tricks. Charley Ackerman gives me {0 understand that they cannot res treat from the position they are in. and, how- ever the case goes, will have o stand by your will. So I'think you may possess your soul in patience. 1shali certainly come to Del Monte Friaay or Saturday unles. s cataclysm 0 curs. You kuow I have not beei out of town in an age, and I certainly want a change. Sincerely yours, J. O’H. COSGRAVE. That ended the talk about the Cosgrave letter. It was a relief to_the counsel for the heirs, too, when it did stop. Mr. Delmas now produced a subpena which commanded Mrs. Craven to appear in the Superior Court on April 2, 1895, and give testimony required 10 settie up the Fair estate, and it was formally intro- duced in evidence. This subpena shows that Mre. Craven was considered a valuabie witness for the other side at that time, Resuming the questioning of Mrs. Craven, Attorney Deimas asked her if she ever received any information from the attorneys for the heirs aiter getting that letter from Mr. Cosgrave which had a tendency to operate upon her mind as a further reason for withholding her deeds. “Yes, I called on Mr. Wheeler again aiter that,” said the ladv. *‘He reiterated to me almost word for word the statement Mr. Cosgrave said he made to him. He said: ‘My dear Mrs. Craven, I am a young man, and propose to stay here. I Wwould never think of practicing law again if I should deceive you In this matter. My honor is at stake in this, and I pro- pose tostand by yoa. We provose to pro- bate the pencil will and none other.” "’ “‘Was that a reason for not exhibiting your deeds?"" “It certainly w “Was there anybody else present at that int rview?” Mr. Lioyd came in and my daugh- ter was there, too. " ‘Did Mr. Lloyd have anything to say 2’ Yes, sir. He vouched for everything Mr. Wheeler said. He tola me that there was nointention of probating anything but the pencil wili—the last will. It suited them exactly, he said, and they wanted it to go through.” “Now, did you ever see any other at- torneys representing the Fair children besides Messrs. Wheeler and Lloya in re- gard to this same matter?” “Yes, I also saw Messrs. Knight and Heggerty. They also told me that every- thing was all right. Mr. Knight told me Isbould not worry. He said: ‘Whenever you feel anxious about this, Mrs. Craven, just come to us and we will cheer you upn ‘He would cheer you up?” *“Yes, that is what he said.” Continuing, Mrs. Craven eaid that sub- sequent to these interviews she saw Gov- ernor Budd at the California Hotel. He seemed to be considerably worked upover having heard that the other atiorneys for the heirs were contemplating pressing the “trust” will to probate instead of tne “‘pencil” will. He said that his contract with Charley Fair had all to do with the | probate of the latter wili, and he pro- posed to see those attorneys rigkt away and ascertain what they meant. “Did you bave any further converaation with his Excellency after thaton the same subject ?”? | “He telephoned to me that he had seen | the lawyers and that everything was all right.” Mrs. Craven went on to say that when Judge Slack rendered his decision ““knock- ing out,” as the attorneys always refer to it, the trust clause in Senutor Fair’s first will, the attorneys for the heirs withdrew their objection to the trust will. She 1m- mediately suspected that a movement was on foot to repudiate her contract with the attorneys for the purchase of her claims. She was about to continue her narrative further when Attorney McEnerney inter- rupted with an objection involving the materiality of the evidence. This brought on an argument. Delmas took the initiative. He said: 1f your Honor please, it is already in evi- dence that assurauces were given (o the wit- ness upon the siand that her claims had been compromised—her claims against the Fuir esiate—for the sum of $300,000, which would be paid 1o ber and which she was assured was s 200 as 50 much money already in her pocket. That assurence was so cogent and stringent that she was supposed to be war- ranted in going upon the stana and testifying that she had no further claims against the es- tate. She demurred to thaton the ground that she could not do so nor consider that that was her attitude until the money had been actually paid to her. She learned afterward that a condition was imposed upon the payment ot the compromise amount of the 500,000, which condition was the admission to probate of the pencil will of the 24ih of Sepiember, Now there had been already offered for pro- bate before that time & will of earlier date. In that will was & trust clause wnich covered the whnole of the estate and permitted the children to have merely such usufruct of itasmight re- sult during their lifetime. Aftershe had been assured that the will of the 24th must be pro- bated belore she could receive her motiey she goesupon a tour of inquiry from those who have that matter in charge to ascertain, as was natural and proper, how far that condi- tion endangered or put 'in doubt the payment to her of this sum of money, and she_was as sured that while that was & conaitiou in point of law, in point of fact it amounted to nothing, | because the pencil will would surely be pro- ated within a very few weeks, and she was actually subpenaed to come into courtand to give her testimony in support of the heirs and childrea and their attorneys’ petition for the probate of that pencil will. Now then, that quieted her mind. She was told thatshe could go nome and need not worry, but by and by she learned that these same ildren whose attorneys had assured her tnat they would probte the will of the 4th, and that on that ground that will of the 21st, earlier in date, wasof no value whatever, were proceeding to ‘attack the trust clause of the wili of the 21st. In other words they were proceeding to attack a part of & will which they had assured her had no validity either in | partorin whole. That excited again her sus- | picions and she goes again on a tour of infor- mation and she is told whut? She1s told: “This attempt to get rid of the trust clause of the will of the 215t is not made by us in order to abaudon our efforts to probate the will of the 24th, the pencil will, but is simply to re- move from our path an obnoxious trusiee, Mr. Goodfellow, who stands in our way of probat- ing the will of the 24th, but that is our object. | ive point. The other three trustees we can | handle—we can take care of them—but Mr. Goodfellow is stubborn. We have got to gt rid of him througn legal proceedings. - It we invalidate the trust clause, there is no longer any trust, there 1s no louger any trus- tee. Mr. Goodfellow goes overboard, and we ean probate the pencil will hands down; the other three trustees will not oppose us.” She is satisfied with these assurances that come to her from every quarter—irom every one of the attorneys for these children, and she goes home in peace until February in the following year, when your Honor on the 34 of that monih announces that the trust cieuse is in. valid. She then saye, “Now is the time when | the pencil will is going to be probated. Now the hope of bringing this action is ubout to be realized. They have got the trust ciause in- validated, they have got rid of Mr. Goodfellow, and surely they are going to probate thi neil will and I am going to receive my 500,000. At this point Judge Slack interrupted Mr. Delmas and said: “I understood that | there was no evidence that the trust clause was invalidated.” hat I propose to show if your Honor pleases,” suid Mr. Delmas. ~“They told her they were zoing 10 invalidate the trust clause for the purpose of geiting rid of Mr. Geodfellow,” The other side then took a trick at tne wheel and set up the claim that the ques- | tion asked by Mr. Delmas, which was Mr. witness, was improver in form. Rather tiian let the afternoon be con- samed by the debate, as the drift indi- cated, Mr. Delmas withdrew his orizinal question and reframed it in such a manner | that Mrs. Craven couid proceed. | Ars. Craven said she went to Mr. Liovd and to Mr. Wheeler to find out what was iniended 1o be done with her will now | that the trust clause in the other will had been attacked. Both of them, she said, assured her solemniy that the movement with the irust will was simpiy a strate- gical move (o get rid of Goodfellow, w o ‘was one of the trustees. Goodlelio said. was stubborn, bui they int is on every wrappev of CASTORIA. outgeneral him. After the trust had been invalidated his occupation woula be gone and then all hands could proceed unham- pered with the pencil will. Short'y before Mrs. Craven filed her deeds, she said, she bad a talk with Ruse sell J. Wilson.' He, too, told her that it was still intended to probate the “‘pencil’’ yill, but that there was a hitch in to the payment of the $500,000. He that Charles L. Fair was not acting sigpp having refused to pay his promised third of the amount. He was doing this, said Mr. Wilson, because the trust clause had been invalidated and Charles was of the opinion that now one will was as good as the otner. Mr. Wilson, continuved the witness, told her that Le could get her $300000' for her claims, but could not suarantee to get more hecause of Charles Fair's attitude. He advised her to take theamount—that half a loat was better than none *I told him I would not take $300,000," said Mrs. Craven. “I said that unless they paid me whet they agreed to pay me I would withdraw from the negotiations and file my papers.” Mr. Wilson said he was afraid that that was tne best he could do and said she had probably better file the papers. Mrs. Craven was asked how long these negotiations were under way and the question aroused another argument. The point was still under discussion when court adjourned. In every schoot in Paris there is a res. taurant where free meals are served to tie children who are too poor to pay for them. — NEW TO-DAY. ————— e DLOBERR — e s BOWE & CO. SPECIAL SAVING SALE Monday—Tuesday— Wednesday When buying the goods quoted below (as of course you will at such prices) look at our Window-Screens, Refrigerators, Ice Cream Freezers, Garden Hose and Sprinklers. Whiskey 52:.&; ourbon) gallon $3 regularly $4 gallon, 3 bottles $2 $1 botile. Sweet mash, mellow, 6 years old. Tomato Catsup bot. 15¢ regularly 20c. Our own bottling—sweet or sour. (““Our Choice’ Oysters O Shaiee” 5 2 1or 25¢ Large Baltimore, natural 28 fiavor. 25 ,..20c Especially for campers. Shrimps ®arataria 3 cans 25¢ Delicious for salads and quick lunch. Toil et Paper eivedere) roll 10c Large medicated shests. doz. $1.10 doz. 37ic Toilet Soap (eisa) Pure, made by Kirk « Co. Fruit Jars and Jelly Glasses—covered or uncovered—big or little—the price is the same—35c per dozen. Country and camping orders solicited. Goods shipped 100 miles free. Philadelphia Shoe Co. No. 10 Thio S, —— . STAMPED ON A SHOE MEANS STANDARD OF MERIT Ox-Blood Oxfords 7E HAVE JUST RECEIVED A BIG shipment of Ladies’ Ox- Blood Oxfords, with cloth tops to match, New coin Toes and Tips and Hand-turned Soles. These rds are the vers latest and sweilest , but they have reached us too late. The season Is nearly over and we have de- cided to sacrifice them. They were bouzht to retail for $3, but to close them out we will sell them for $2 & pair. Country orders solicited. e~ Oxfords- e For Ladies, Misses and Children. Great clearing out of 0dds and ends in fadies’ Ten ana Black Oxfords in sizes 2. 2%, 8 and narrow widths. These Oxfords are wor.h from $2 L0 $4 per pair, and are in every style. But remember, while we have all siz+s in some style, we have not all sizes in every siyle. Country custom- ers should rememoer the above and uot feel hurt 1t we cannot fiil their orders, es- peciaily as the Oxfords will no doudt be snapped up by the city trade. as they are a barzain. We also have a compleie line of Ladies’, Missey' and Children’s »pring Heol Biack and Tan Oxfords which we will soll this week at 50 couts per _pair. They retail regularly for $150 and $2. We have all widths and sizes Soecial for Girls. zes1, 1gand 2. Dongo a Kid Buiton Shoes. with patent leather tips and spring heels, wiil be sacrificed at 50¢ a pair, worth 31 50. 8@ Send for New lllusirated Catalozas. adaress B. KATCHINSKI, FHILADELPHIA SHOE cCoO. 10 Third St.. San Franoleos. regard | v \ | S e