Los Angeles daily herald., 1886-02-18

upon.l Gentlemen Of the jury, the
young lady ia too bright. too intelligent,
to go away so with Mr.. Bald
win, relying merely on prom
ise of marriage. II she were all
right and rightly brought up abe would
not do SO. Now, If she were the limo
cent they claim, do You think that any
injunction OF secrecy would prevent such
girl from rushing to her mother and
casting herself in that mothers arms
and telling the story of her engagement to
the millionaire. IAstead she came home
with the "fuming headgear" and other
habilliments Of millions. There is no
word said between the mother aud
daughter as to those coatly presents.
THE deposition was again referred TO 10
show the difference OF statements made
as to the revealing Of the engagement
Here are three stories, gentlemen Of the
jury; take your choice. Do you think
your daughter could so come home and
you not ask some questions about those
thingsl Would not the circumstances
have impressed themselves on your
mind? The testimony OF Mrs. Perkins
was then taken up, and the facts there
narrated aud the fact that Mrs Perkins
had not spoken to Baldwin on the sub.
ject Of the engagement were commented
on as unnatural. The letters from
Baldwin were then read to the jury
The counsel claimed these were not
much like the true letters Of man to
his fiancee. He also points out that the
second letter was addressed to Savan-
nah and forwarded to Cotton,
as establishing the fact that Baldwin
did not know she was going to Cotton,
whereas Louise swears he did. shall
not follow my friend Mr.. Williams by
going outside Of the evidence here. l
shall confine myself to the evidence
(rhe quarrel with Mrs. Dexter was here
brought up. counsel claiming that this
was not at all evidence Of any en-.
gagement. Here the Cotton House is
Laird's history and that Of her husbands
was gone over, including the mysterious
disappearanceo of Laird.) The Perkinses
knew the whole history of Mrs. Laird.
They were friends. Between the disap-
pearancs of Laird and her marriage to
Hunter . child appears on the scene.
Here Ia another mystery. None of them
know who Is the mother Of the child.
His fathers name was Milton. The
child's name was. Milton. His last
name NO one knew. No one knows
what has become of the child. THE tes.
timony that the hotel had the reputa-
tion Of being house of designation,
or Of ''easy virtue" and Of Louise's
doings there were commented on.) Let
me say to Mr.. Williams If this house
was not notorious place. why did he
not get men Of good character from that
town to come here and testisy to its
good reputation They have not
brought one. The testimony Of those
who said they saw Louise drink liquor
from the same bottles others drank from
was reviewed. Col. Wells here read
the list Of opprobrious terms applied by
Mr.. Williams to all who had testified
on the side of the defense. Wells said,
I do not propose to use this indisorimin-
ate abuse Of witnesses for do not think
1t comes within the proper province of
an attorney. Tom Bedford's totally dis.
interested interest in hunting up testi-
mony for the plaintiff and the attempt to
blast Phillip Williams by Toms testi-
mony was reviewed. They started out
with the theory that every witness pro-
duced by the defense was bought. They
have stuck to this story throughout. 1
defy them with all their force Of detec-
tives to find man who has been paid
any thing but his fees. Our witnesses
have ali been kept within their reach.
They would have attack ed them II it had
been possible. There never has ap.
peared before in this place so persistant
an attempt to create sentiment; to
prejudice the case. During the whole
time Of the trial every witness we have
produced has been branded as per
jured villain" We throw out Mecks,
If you please; we will throw out
Williams, because he has been
attacked. What about all the
other witnesses. They have not
been impeached. They show what the
house wss. They swear to seeing plain
tiff drink and to drinking with her.
They swear to seeing her in free conduct
with men. What if person comes on
the stand and swears to facts and the
witness is not impesched! What are
you going to do With this .cloud OF wit
nessesf' The attack on Williams was
made because be had testified to the
Stoddard episode, when he went to her
room at the Cotton House. As to the
character Of the house I think the evi.
denos conclusive. Now. did she knew
lit Is 1t possible that she was there so
long and not know anything about this'
Did she never hear Of the Shorb wo-
mani Mrs. Laird said the Shorb woman
came there intending to lead better
life. She was to be married to Shorb
BY and by. But here she was with
Shorb; not married to him. but cohabit-
ing with him.
Five O'Clock arriving. the argument
was continued until tomorrow at Q
O'Clock. Il will take all to-day for the
defeDse to finish their Argument.