New-York tribune., 1886-01-21
CERTAIN SHE VAS PUZZLED.
A wOMAN's CHARGE AGAINST Mr.. CHoATE.



wINyING HER SUIT IN SPITE OF HER TESTIMONY
MR.. CoNKLING GIVING HER ADVICE.
Mrs. Mary l.. Day, the wife of Henry Day,
Wall Street speculator living in Farvew. n. j., sued
Joseph A. jameson, James ID. Smith and Amos Cotting
constituting the firm OF jameson Smith Cotting. stock
brokers, for 50 S6l 49, balance which she claims to be
due deIo oss amounting to Sl3373 % made with the
firm by her between October 1880, and December l,
1881 Certain investments were made by her order and
others made she claims, without her order by
which nearly all the money lost The defendants In
their presented long account sho wing transac-
tons which they declared entered into by order OF
tho plaintiffs husband. acting rs her authorized agent
and exhibiting balance against her OF 5000 1O They
further stated that they held 100 shares OF the common
stock the Quicksilver Mining Company purchased for
her account They asked for nterocutory Judgment
dsmissng the complaint and for sale OF the stock ana
the application OF the proceeds the liquidation OF their
claim together with such amount to be paid by the
paintif shall any deficiency after the sale
motion for reference having been denied an appeal
was taken the General Term of the Superior Conrt
which all rmed the decision this point. Justice
OGorman in announcing the decision OF the court said
that the cardinal Issue fact to be tried by jury was
whether Mr. Day the authorized agent OF his wife,
and stipulation made that If it decided that he
wes she woud not dispute the items of the account
on this issue the tried yesterday before JUS
tice Ingraham and jury Ex-senator Roscoe Conkling
Joseph H. Choate ana Henry A. Root for the defend
ants The principal witnesses were the plainth, her
husband and her sldc and the defendants on
the other Mrs Day testified that having deposited
United states bonds and other securities with the firm
she directed them be sold and the proceeds invested
in Metropolitan Elevated Railway stock, which was
done she also authorized the purchase OF somo Robin
son mining stock. None OF the other TRANSACTIONS was
authorized by and when she found that her husband
had been speculatng with her money without her con-
sent she repud his transactions and demanded the
return Of her money. Hordrafts for small amounts were
honored and then the firm refused 10 pay her any more
and rendered tho account showing her to be In doot to
them Mrs Days cross examination by Mr.. Choate
greatly amused Judge jury counsel ann spectators she
expressed her decided belief that the lawyer was trying
to puzzle her and combatted him at every point.
Mr. Choate-Iave you been engaged In any business
Witness turning to the Judge)-oh, he knows right
Justice Tngraham--Answcr the question.
Witness-t did answer IL.
Mr.: Conkling-Well, answer IL again ior NJ S"No
Witness tafter PAUSE i have not
O. What business Is your husband engaged III - a.
Well triHng business He has had no business ihtey
bnt little agency.
A. Me! Why, it can't he possible. Why. Judge do
O-Iaye YOU operated in stocks A.-Operated IN
stocks! Why, no-no, sir Mr.. Day never was my
Odd I ark you that A Yes. you did
Mrs Day said tho money that she had invested had
been saved by her. It came from wedding presents
Christmas presents and from many sources that sho
could remember. Her parents gave her SONS oi IT,
O. Who else A.-Thcrc an uncle OF mine
0-His name A-Untortunately they're all dead;
so tnat YOU cant bring them into court reoe'od
SS0%In what conn any Al really can't remember
/ think 1t was the Mutual
Mr. Choatc asked her state particularly from what
sources she had obtained the $4,000 with which the
metropolitan stock was purchased.
WitneSs-I am under OATH but don't want you to try
20 puzzle rne. LAUGHTER. I'm woman .r.o.o,
Wiipeas%So you'rs not You're trying to puzzle
You knO you are. lLaughter'I
The witness made rambling answers 10 questions Iut
TO her and lectured Mr. Choato on the mproprety oil
asking them Finally Mr.. Conking her counsel became
| impatient and said:
Madam won't you please answer tho questions OF Mr.
Cholto lie puts them to YOU 20 opI'se me "' ~
something to do after this trial l. OVef-h hfe'
| Laughter.
Again when, after having answered a question. she
continued TO talk irrosponsvely, Mr.. Conklmg hier-
| rnpted her, saying:
Please madam, please. yon have ansWcred inc IueS
| tiOn. Shut yourself On-if yol can
Mrs Day said that on February %. s33 more than
year after the sale OF the metropolitan stock by her
order at is she first learned that the money had been
used as margin for specnations Up 10 thht ume Shc
believed that it lying with tho brokers unused sue
never gave her husband authority to use 1t as margin
Mr. Day cOrrob his wo's statement that ne was
not authorized to buy and sell stocks on margin ana
then Mr. ChOae took lin IN hand Ihc " taess Hhio
that when the Metropolitan stock was bought his wife
told him to sell II II 1t went 10 ls 1t went as hgh rs
l26 and then declined, and 1t 10 he ordered
II TO be sold aud IFS obtained for IT, When he was
asked why be had told his wo the price OF tie STOCK
| when II was 1876 he replied:
Why It was on the up II might have gone 70 l1O
and would have done II Jay Gould aud others hau Ie'
Odd you hear your wife say that she inquired inc
| price OF the stock lZ5 times A.-Oh her 10 hheS
| means about five times. - ,, . ,,,,.,,,,,,,i
| "O.-Ts she SO untruthiul Ats not untrutmu-
o.Iuer Imagination is a very lively one isn't 1t I
! A.-Yes. sir. 4, - 800 l., 80, ,,ro
IA be sale OF the stock II not A.Ics. or an OraI
order ms Mr. COnkling expresses 1t more correctly
| Mr.. Choate-Please don't draw comparisons llaush
| Mr. Conkng- Did you ever examine the account 10
sec how much money stuck TO the brokers' hngers
| Mr. Cloate-I Is there any inslnuatlOn III this
| Justice IngrahaIn-NOt yet Go on.
| MIR Choate-A suggcBtiOn and not an insinnation.
| Mr. Couk!ing-The COuIt says 90 on; 0ther"ise !
would answer you.
The wpess said that the defendant Smith had author
,zed him 70 offer his wife 5000 If she would withdraw
the suit but aftcrward withdrew the offer The jury
after brief absence gave q verdict for the planh Tor
81 G35 which the court added an extra GlO"ahco Vi
| per cent
LAWYERS AND PLUMBERS BILLS.
Rutherford Is. Clark sued Stephen Peabody
| of