Los Angeles daily herald., 1886-03-02


A PersonaI Explanation.
EplroR HFRALp:--As my name has
been paraded before the pubic IN an
unfayorable light by the attorneys for
the plaintiff in the case OF Perkins W.
Baldwin, and now that decision has
been rendered in favor Of the plaintiff. |
propose 10 make plain statement in
regard to NV connection with the case.
/ shall be as brief as possible.
II was diselosed during the trial that
was the second Of the four husbands
of the present Mrs. Emma Hunter, who
figured 90 conspicuously during the
trial. We were married in April, 1874.
Two children were born to us. The
oldest boy, born 10 April is.oi me
youngest girl, born IN May ns, 1911 81 We
separated in December, 1913 one soon
after began suit for divorce, alleging
cruelty, aud asking for alimony, counsel
fees, and division OF the property. 4
Immediately filed q cross complaint ior
a divorce and denied under oath her
charaes and asked for possession and
control of both Of the children. My
reasoua for declaring her unit TO raise
the cb;ldran are on file In the Clerks
office and have been briefly stated In the
H.RAIp. Roth parties wanted d.
vorce and the only contest was over the
children. Nv attorney, Col. james q.
Howard told me that it was impossible
for him 70 get me the little girl At that
time. she being under two years OF age.
then. through my attorney, Col.
Howard. entered into an agreement with
her attorney. that would not appear
AGAINST her and let her take the divorce;
ne. on the other hand, was to rslinquish
all claim for slimony, division Of prop
erty and counsel fees, and ! was to keep
the boy and she keep the girl. She
maid her own costs and paid mine. In
February, 1880, she left for Ban Fran
DISCO She left my little girl with Mrs.
Perkins, who was then living on farm
near Compton. One day / took my lit
lie boy to see his little sister. / notified
Mrs. Perkins the day before that 1 was
going to bring my little boy the next
day TO see his sister. When she saw US
coming she took the little girl and hid
In . field OF barley, and after. we
had to return without seeing the
little n girl. Mrs. Perkins went
TO her neighbors and laughed at our
grief and disappointment. A month or
30 afterward Mrs. Perkins grew tired Of
the little girl and gave her to lady
named Rush. Mrs. Rush. who 10 per-
feet lady, let Mrs. Walker have the lit
tie girl to keep. One day while the
little girl was at play Mr.. and Mrs.
Perkins drove up in spring wagon. and
Mrs. Perkins jumped out Of the wagon
and seized the little girl, and in spite OF
the protests Of Mrs. Walker drove of
with her. | then sued out 0
writ Of habeas corpus before Judge
Sepulvsda. The Perkins family came
into court with an attorney and fought
me for possession Of my child. Judge
then awarded me the
possession of both Of my children. The
mother Of my children was gone two
years and q half, and soon after her re-
turn she married Jacob Laird Of Cotton,
an old man about sixty years Of age, she
being thirty years old in July OF that
year. Laird was said TO be wealthy. NJ
disappeared some five months after his
marriage and has not been heard OF from
that day to this. Mrs. Laird, soon after
her marriage to Jacob Laird, called the
Perkins family TO her aid and went be-
fore Judge Xslney y. Howard and be
gave her back the little girl. The
Perkins family did sll In their power 10
part nv children. and finally succssded
In parting them, and consigned my little
airi TO a fate in comparison 10 which ths
grave would have been far more prefer
able. This is why / had no hssitancy,
when asked to give such facts ~ had
of, when asked to do 90. And
now propose to pay my respects TO the
attorneys who did all in their power 10
blacken me because / happened to have
been employed to ferret out the evil
dence for the defense. The first one
como to Is William I. Williams, man
whom have known for nearly 10 years,
and who has, on numberless ocoasions,
profssssd friendship for me. This man
Williams is reported to have said in his
argument before the jury. why did
they not put Collier on the stand to
contradict Bud Sweeney II they had
we would have sent him TO the peniten-
tiary. where we will send others OF their
periurers." My reply to this shall be
brief and pointed. say Il Williams
meant TO insinuate that would perjnrs
myself, he il . liar, . coward and q
seoundrel, and brand him ~ person
possessed OF every attribute OF high
wayman. covered under the garb Of an
honorable profession.
stephen NJ. White, the lawyer who 10
charged with having worked for con-
tingsnt fee, also lost no opportunity to
blaoksn me. White says that went mp
TO Ventura county aud tried TO corrupt
bud" Sweeney. 1t Is false. and l
think / shall have no more difficulty In
proving 1t false than he would have in
explaining just how 1t was that bis
friend Harry King got of with fine OF
only twenty-five dollars for shooting ct
Horace Bell, in Bells own Office, and
others guilty OF crimes OF less magni-
tude were prosecuted to the utmost of
his great ability, and had to serve terms
In the State prison.
But let US see what the dsloctabls
Bud did swear, and what his old father
swore to. But let me remark, before re-
viewing his testimony, that this same
Bud Sweeney told quite . different story
In August last from what he swors to on
tho stand. His story in August last, ~
published in the Percapine Of August 8,
1886, the Porcupiss gives Mr..
Williams, leading counsel for Miss Per-
kIns, as authority for its statement--was
to the effect that l drove up In . buggy
to whore he was at work in . Geld and
aecosted him with proposition to 60 TO
Los Angeles; that "Lucky" Baldwin
wanted to see him; for him TO keep
quiet; that there was money in 1t; that
he got into my buggy, and when well on
the way / said to him, Ibid you know
Louise Perkins, who used to live In
Ventura county, He replied in the af- |
FIR native. then told him that he WAS
engaged to her, which ne denied, etc.
Now, let AZ see what he swears TO on the
stand, and what his old father swears.
and see Just how near he came bsing
engaged to her according to his own
oath. But when he got on the stand
did he swear that he was ct work In .
field and drove up in buggy, -
stated in the Poreupine, which gives
Counsellor Williams as its authority.
Not bit oft. Itreauired but little re-
Election to see that that story would not
hold water; that it was too easy for me
TO prove that never saw him at work
In field In Ventura county, and that l
mover had . buggy in Ventura county.
] rode with . gentleman In his spring
wagon 70 and from Ventura county and
paid him for my ride. hence, ! say, II
was too easy for me to prove the falsity
Of the Porcupiae story, and something
elso had to be done. The story must
have little more truth mixed in to give
Il plansibility. Hence, when this
young man got on the stand he swore
that ! eeme 10 him one Sunday 10 the
town o. Xgeneme and took him to one
aide and N him twice that he was on
gagged p &te Perkins, and be told me
twice fp HAS not engaged TO Louise,
and I .-stfsre was money In 1t. and that
Baldwin dd not care for money. ! will
remark right here that had never seen
Baldwin 70 knew HIM up 70 that time,
and ] never saw him tor three months
Afterwards. But let us follow this
young man further He waz compelled