Daily Republican. [volume] ([Wilmington, Del.]) 1874-1890, 1886-05-29
NEAR THE END.
TESTIMONY IN FAVOR
OF THE PLAINTIFF.
Points of Law Bubmitted-The snm
ming Up by Council Lat Night
Lengthy Arguments.

continued his argument and the citing
OF authorities against the proposition oi
Mr.. Nields to admit testimony to estah.
lish good character. Tue arg ument wa,
continued by Messrs. Bradford and
Nields for some time, and when tho
latter concluded the court decided tha,
the evidence relating to character would
not be admitted.
William I'll. Pierson, the plaintiff
was recalled and showed number o,
books, which he identified as being
those OF Pierson & Brother.
Upon making an examination he said
that he was not conversAnt with book.
keeping and his son Frank was called
10 the stand, who gave the figures o
the stock on hand January | Of eacl
year as follows: 1873, $40, 1896 4S; 1874
612, 1882; 1875, Gil, $50 98 1875. SS.-
54l as; 1877, IS, ,242 81; 1873, none taken
1879, %, 1924; 1880, $5,0S3 IA; 1881
81. 970.S6.
Frank then left the stand, and VII.
liam II. Pierson was recalled and his
attention called to the figures which
were changed in the books of 1879,
when he said that at that time he was
groubled considerable by the agents OF
asking TO see their books for the pur
pose Of making theic ratings. One day
bis brother George, who WAS in part.
neIship with him, proposed to add the
figure in front of tho stock account
for that year but the witness objected.
George urged that 1t should be done,
and the witness finally consented but
did not know whether the figure YVES
n nlnnn1 fhnrn hw IA ata Ill
day, who at the time was book keeper,
or by his brother, who attended to the
financial affairs of the firm. When the
adJusters examined his books he called
their attention to these alterations and
explained how they came to be made.
Mary A. Dawson was called to the
stand by Mr.. Nields, to testify to con-
versation she had with Mrs. Halliday
some two months ago at house on
Washington street, In reference to this
case, but AS Mr.. Bird objected her testi-
moDy was not heard.
Mr.. Nields offered to place In evidence
a paper, containing the values placed
upon the real estate belonging to Will
liam and George Pierson, but Mr.. Bird
objected, and the objection was sus-
tained.
Mrs. Dawson was recalled, and stated
that from what she had learned from
Mrs Halliday, her relations with
William II. Pierson were hostile.
Mr. Nields rested with this witness,
and Mr.. Bird commenced the exami-
nation of witnesses in surrebuttal.
h. q. Irwin was recalled and stated
that he had examined the books exhibi
ed about two weeks after the fire, and
found that the figures were changed.
Since then the figures have been changed
again, and S5.970.S5 put down In red
NIX.
George W. Pierton was recalled, to
estify 10 the fact of William II. Pier
'on having had the figures changed in
he books, but Mr.. Hields objected, and
he objection was sustained hy the
,ourt.
Counsel On both sides said they were
low done, and the Chief Justice said he
would give each side two hours for ar
,ument
Mr.. Bird replied that ne would rath.
IT submit it without any argument at
I'll, then to be limited to that short
lime, and Mr.. NielGs said that he was
willing to let the jury take the |
iviGence, as noted by the stenograph. |
ITS, without saying one word. If he was
o be confined TO two hours' argu
nent.
Mr.. Bird asked the Court IL they
would not grant them four hours each /
ide, and the Chief Justice, not under
him, asked what he said.
Mr. Bird asked bin again, Wont
'our honors allow US four hours on each |
ide, for argument?
Lord, no" said the Chief Justice, 81
Iuess not" Counsel continued to plead |
or time, and the Court finally agreed 10 |
i've each side three hours, In which to
um up the case.
The Ohiei Justice afterwards said
hat he had been In Court eight con-
ecutlve weeks, and he WAS tired and
wanted to get home.
Mr.. Nields commenced to address the
jourt on the questions of law involved
n the Gaze al. 40 o'clock, and cited
rom n number of authorities In support
I his propositions. He continued toI
peak until 3 40 O'Clock, and when bel
lobed the Jurors were discharged until II
O'Clock In the evening.
George Il. Bates, Esq, then addressed
be Court, and said that on April Both
udge Wbiteley had died, and that at a
leetihg OF the bar, bGld shortly after.
!. q. bradford, Esq, aud himself, had
cen appointed a committee to formally
his death to the Court, and
resent The resolutions adopted at thatI
leetinR.
He tnen read a short biographical
ketch OF the deceased aud followed il
nth a glowing tribute to his many
iitues, and Lila astute qualities az a I
armed j1rist. He related several in. Ii
ances TO show the honcBty of purpose {
lat governed all his actions and
losed by moving that the resolutions q
doptod by the bar be entered on theI
cords of the Court. Ia
Il. G. Bradford, Esq, seconded the n
lotion and also paid u tribute TO his s
emory, in which he eaid Judge /
lhiteley never sought popularity, but "a
Is actions were such that it was u
ways accorded to him. He was s. !.
an OF strong convictions, and WE'LL s
;rsed in the science Of the law and
ade many friends by his readiness to 9
way give Of his l.ch fund of expert h
'ce to the younger members OF the il
". h
Caief Justice Comepys responded in @
iee'lnS manner aBd SAID ne agreed tt
lth all that had been sad OF Jndoe v
nlteley, and considered him ons of the h
81 constitutional lawyers he had sver h
81. he ordered That tho resolutions b
onld be entered on the reocrds of the b
nrt,
edges Wootten Gnd Houston alRo 81
soc appropriate Isrnarks, aud ut 6 l5 a
IIocS court adjourned until o'clock Itt
re session OF corrt opened at 7.l0ia
LOCK last evening With all tha jndR Rae ri
eseIt, and Mr.. Niells commenced his W
Aunel to the jury. He said there o,
% nut two points ?or them to cou- Ii
ler; the first beinp tha valnn OF thn nl