The New York herald., 1879-12-03
MINISTER HAYDEN.
Proof That He Met Mary STAN
naId in the Woods.
Susan Hawiey Supplying the Missing
Ink" OF Evidence.


object OF the days coutast Was % put ih eSiuehoo
the connecting links between Mary stAnnards preg-
nancy and Hayden's knowledge % u. II not his re-
sponsibiiity. susan nawlcy. halg.sister and conf
dant OF the murdered girl. the ~itnoss stand
throughout tho day. Al every point the defence
fnterposed objections the adInissibillfy os her
testimony and scarcely question 81 real interest
was put without giving rise 10 arguments. The
rulings SO far they made. were strongly in
favor of letting In all possible light upon the
mysterious features of the Several of Mary's
numerous declarations 10 the witness regarding her
troubles and her intense desire 10 confer with Hayden
were admitted. and finally the letter written to the
witness, enclosing for him. 60 be secretly de-
livered. This letter has been the subject of much
doubt and to whether IL was or was not
genuine. Serious were alleged and intima-
items have been made that the paper was 'doctorrd
for an object critical examination of the letter
dlscloses nothing OF the kind. The writing is uni
formly bad. the style corresponds throughout and
no evidences of erasures visible. Susan Iaw-
leys testimony to-day has created much comment.
and as it now stands is regarded damaging. The
defence however. claim that they will be enabled to
shake 1t very materially in the cross-exanination.
IMPORTANT QUESTIONS.
At the opening of the court this morning Susan
Hawley was recalled. and Mr.. Waller for the State
put. in addition to those propounded yesterday. a
further series of questions for submission to the
Court as to the admissibilty OF the evidence they
involved. This covered all the declarations OF Mary
Stannard to this witness regarding her troubles;
that Hayden the cause and that she was to meet
him at o certain hour at the place whero she was
subsequently found murdered. The questions.
which were noted by the Judges verbatim, were
follows:-
On the Tuesday of the murder did Mary stannard state
her intention to anywhere to any person TO do
anything about her troubes also when she expected to
she went from ON. home & on the prseedSs S Monday
where sho was going she going 500, and the
purpose she was going to sec him forr
afternoon where she had been in what building she
had been If who she saw, If anybody and what AR
made with that about her troubess
The witness was not required to answer. and at
this point Mr. Watrous protested against any further
questions of this character, which could not fail to
have an impression upon the jury. Mr.. Waller re-
marked that he had but single other matter. and
that in relation to the letter written by Mary
Stannard to the witness covering one for Hayden.
The witness identified the envelope and letter, and
said that she familiar with Mary's handwriting
@. In whose handwriting is that letter?
Mr.. watrous-we object.
Chief Justice Park-suppose you pass the letter
and 80 to other declarations and matters for q mo-
ment.
Mr.. Waller-I will state here. then, that the ques.
tions have put nearly the entire ground Of
Mary's declaration. At this point will withdraw
yesterdays questions to what this witness told
the Coroner and Mrs Mills about Mary's story of
her troubles IL the witness testimony is dscredited
in the crossexaminatlon then We will put these
questions on tn q redirect examination.
The Court then decided that tho letter might be
produced, and Mr. Waller remarked that the State
claimed that the letter contained a very material
declaration. The intention to identify it, and
thereby fairly get it before the Court.
Chief Justice Park-The usual way is to prove the
handwriting and then discuss the admissibility OF
the paper.
"In whose handwriting is that paper?" inquired
II took it to be my sisters MARY stannard)" re-
piled Susan Hawley she scanned the paper.
MARY's LAST LETTER.
The following is the text OF the letter which is
written in pencil
knew that am well and hope you are the M , same
ike my phase very well aud Willie is well he
and asks where and farther is give love to all
shall stay do think of 70 write SO good
DO no. let farther See this wan. you give lot
ter to Mr. hayden and don't let body it and will tell
wsht is fore day. You give IL to him self
Don't read this to farther
[The writer's appears to have been contracted.
because the right hand edge Of the sheet OF note
paper was reached.l
After objections to the interrogatories wit
stated that she received the letter at four o'clock
on the Sunday afternoon before the murders her
brother brought it from the Post Ofice the writer,
MaIy, was then at nome. havihg reached tnere sew
eral hours before the letter; the letter was in
ordinary envelope.
Envelope identihed.l
The matter OF the alleged enclosed letter for Hay
den was then entered into. and the witness testified
that letter enclosed. that 1t was in closed
velope and addressed.
q. Was there Oh that inside envelope the name of
any person?
Objected to and passed over.
q. We're you requested by your sister Mary, on
the Sunday before her DEATH to give to Mr.. Hayden.
the accused. letter from her?
Objected to and also passed over.
Mr.. Waller claimed that IL it was in proof that
such request had been made it would be coinpe-
Aurxy h.xt,
with the accused.
Mr.. watrous alleged that all this in the line of
insinuation. and only brought forward in the
stress of the State to make of showing in
support of the indictment. Certainly this request
regarding the delivery OF the letter can have MOI hing
to do with the gesd the real thing that the jury
IL investigating. the murder
Judge Harrison said that the letter was mailed in
Guilford, as shown by the envelope, on the Friday
before the murder. and on the same day, but at
later hour, than when she declared her pregnancy
to her employer, Mrs. Studley. This declaration.
followed n few hours later by the writing of letter
to the man she charged with her seduction were
certainly admissible in evidence. The of writ.
ing and sending such letter is as much act. he
Blamed as anything else she did.
Judge Sanford ruled that it immaterial
whether the letter in question sent to Hayden
direct by mail, or enclosed in another letter to the
to deliver the letter to Hayden the Court held it
peent to show it, indicating the relations between
the parties the writing to be presented Of course
II the request was IA written one
The letter was then taken by Mr.. watrous and Mr..
Jones over into the strong light by or the win
dows aud was scanned critically for two three
minutes.
THE LETTER WAS FOR HAYDEN.
Mr. waller ito witnessl-Was there any name
the envelope OF the enclosed letter? A. There was;
1t was addressed to Mr.. Hayden. (Scnsaton.)
MIR. Waller then read that part OF the letter re-
questing that the enclosed letter bc given to Mr.
Hayden and that all knowledge be concealed from
her father. On a suggestion by the defence tho
first part of the letter also read.
z. Did you open the letter when 1t was brought to
you? A. Yes, and Mary me.
q. Did she the inside of the letter. A. Yes;
and / laid it in tin box in the front room
O. What became OF 1t? A. Mary took caro- of IL;
she put 1t in the stove.
O. When she was putting 1t In tho stove did she
say why she did so?
Mr. Watrous--We object.
Mr. Waller claimed that the statement part
of the act itself and quite important, as 1t was
explanatory.
Mr. Jones argued that the whole matter was inad-
tnissible. The possibility was that the letter might
have been to Mrs. Hayden.
Mr.. Waller-Woud she have been afraid TO have
had her father letter from Mrs. Haydenp
Judge Hairison--We claim the dec laration at the