Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1885-11-26


| the case, five years ago. She further said
| that during the four years some few
clothes were given her by Mrs. Tantum,
| but their value would not BIO worth 10
| cents at regman's sale. Outside of these
garments she received nothing from DIR.
| Tantum or his family. All her recent
| interviews with DR.. Tantum were AT his
| request, and were directed towards effect
| ing settlement of the suits In reply to
| Mr.. Lore, she said she went once to meet
DIR. Tantum at the American House,
Philadelphia, at his request, TO confer
| with him about the suits. It was after
o'clock before Mrs. Valentine was per.
| mitted to leave the stand.
Thomas II. Hinkson testified that he
attended the Valentine sale, ut the Rock
land farm, in 1875. Before the sale
opened DIR. Taiitum said, publicly,
'sGentlemen, anything buy at this sale
buy for Mrs. Valentine" Witness bid
against Dr. Tantuin on o colt, and the
doctor came and told him he (tlie iloctor)
| was buying for Mrs. Valentine. Witness
replied that If he hought he was b,lying
| for himself. The doctor then said That
no gentleman wonld bid against him, and
witness gave him to understand that he
was gentleman. The only article sold
that brought its full value was horse
collar, which was bought by John Proud.
Everything else was bought by DIR
| Tantum.
On cross examination Mr.. Hinkson
said he was creditor of Valentines at
the time of the sale, and went there with
the intention of buying if he could get
any bargains. After the sale the doctor
came and apologized to him for the re-
marks made during the bidding on the
| colt.
Mrs. Sarah Royal, sister-in-law of
Mrs. Valentine frequently visited the
farm between 1875 and 1879. She testified
| that Mrs. Valentine not only did the
housework but great deal of the farm
| work. She would not do the work Mrs
Valentine did for $50 a week. 1t was
enough, she thought, for n woman TO do
her homework, and when she went out
side to do the work of a man or boy,
she ought to have double or even treble
| wages.
Constable Pritchett testified to selling
the goods of MIR. Valentine. The sale
aggregated $3.50. A horse sold for So,
and colt for $47; COWS, $15 to 1871
| they were worth more money several
tons of hay brought 81. DR.. Tantum
bought everything except one horse
collar. Plows and cultivators sold at $50
each, and fan for 81 second horse
sold for $5. John Proud's horse collar
brought So cents and the others at only
25 cents. The usual exemption, amount
ing to 5000, was allowed Valentine. On
cross-examination he said he did not
think the property brought as much as IL
should have brought at forced sale. No
one would have been hurt in buying itall
at 5000 or 300.
Thomas Husbands, who attended the
Valentine sale, said he heard DIR. Tantum
soy he was buying the articles in for Mrs.
Valentine, not to derive any benefit, but
as an act of charity. Timothy hay worth
s15 q ton brought only $l.5o. Very few
/ people bid against DIR. Tantum. In the
corn field the doctor said he hoped people
would not bid against him, as he was buy
ing for Mrs. Valentine. in his Judgment
the sale should have realized $500. One
brown mare worth 300, sold for $5, and
the colt, which brought $47, was worth
$3.50.
Samuel O. Peirce also attended the
Valentine sale, and heard DR.. Tantum an
nouuce that he was buying the things for
Mrs Valentine. Once the doctor e
angry because Charles Ewing bid again,
him on the corn fodder.
George Dyson testified to buying III
personal property of Valentine in Dacem-
Der, 1879. Tue list price of the article
he purchased was $1,072.019. 1t was
trade transaction between himself and DIR.
Tantum, and he thought he got a fair bar
gain.
AT $50 o'clock, court adjourned until
10 o'clock yesterday morning.
The superior court opened at 10 O'Clock
yesterday, Chief Justice Comegys and
Judges Wootten and Houston ON the
bench. The case of Valentine VS.. Tantum
was resumed, with George Dyson on the
stand. Under cross-examination by Mr..
Lore he detailed the stock and utensils
on the Valentine farm purchased by him
from DIR. Tantum, and the price paid for
each article. William w. Pritchett was
recalled and presented the appraisement
and execution under which the Valentine
stock and personal property was originally
sold. Everything was sold except the ex-
emption. which included one colt, wheat
J lin the ground and several other articles,
amounting in all to 5000.
Mrs. Valentine was recalled and said
l. that in addition to thearticles enumerated
by MIR. Dyson as purchased by him, she
left on the farm 900 weight of pork and
one fat COW. She left 403 chickens of
which Mr.. Dyson bought but 81. The
, property purchased by Mr.. Dyson was
: that originally bought in by DIR. Tantum,
and the natural increase, save calf, a
pig and moving machine, which were
purchased by DR.. Tantum, the latter
being procured partly by the trade of an
old machine. On dissemination she
, was asked if various other articles were
not purchased by DIR. Tantum, but re-
D piled in the negative each time, except in
regard to two whitewash brushes. which
/ she said DIR. Tantum bought, but after
. wards took away with him.
, The plaintiff here rested. Mr.. Lore
5 moved nonsuit on the ground that the
I plaintiff had submitted no actual proof
i of the counts detailed in the bill of par
4 ticulars, viz, money had and received,
r work and labor performed by the plaintiff
| for the defendant, and the difference
Q between the value of the articles pur-
0 chased by DIR. Tantum and subsequently
/ he claimed, offered by the plaintiff, was
y to the effect that the work done by her on
: the farm was for her husband and not
a
o The motion for nonsuit was denied,
/ and Mr.. Lore made his opening address
9 to the jury, in which he said he hoped to
prove that the only part DIR. Tantum had
+ in the whole transaction was to aid a man
i in distress. Mrs. Valentine pleaded with
DR.. Tantum to buy in the goods for her,
+ alleging that she had money coming tc
# her soon, and could pay him back. After.
!. wards Mr.. Valentine came and asked DR.
l. Tantum to rent the farm and allow hin
& (Valentine) to work out the claim
& In March, 1877, they had settlement
d and, after giving them credit fol
IT all the produce left at his house, DIR
I. TaItum found himself several hun
If bred dollars behind. The doctor theI
% wanted to stop, but at Mr.. Valentine'
r. solicitation, kept on another year. /
10 went on, with the same result, Valentino
l. each year giving DR.. Tantum receipt il
ID full for work and labor done on the farm
le Finally, in December 1879, DR.. Tantun
decided to close the arrangement, an,
a. Valentine said he would be id if b
D, would get off the farm. Then measure
I, were taken and Valentine was elected
III The total indebtedness incurred by Dr.
u Tantum by the entire transaction wa
ae 81, 1855, less q credit of $1,036.61 70
tz the property bought by Dyson, leaving
I'd net loss of 81, 163.07.
er DIR. ]. F. Frantz was called to the stan
y. and identified an agreement betwee
i'll Isaac Engle Valentine and DR.. Tantun
We which he had signed as witness. MI
:" Lore offered the agreement in evidence