Omaha daily bee., 1888-03-25
A LITTLE LUXURY.
The Husband Declines 20 Pay Foe
MusiC-


A LITTLE LUXURY.
The Husband Declines 20 Pay Fog
Music.
San Francisco Chronicle: Tho ques-
ton that was raised in Judge Joachim
sens court was whether music is n
necessity in the household, or, is IN or
gan q luxury in the eyes OF the lawY
John Whyte and his wife were sued fop
$50, the price of an American organ,
which the wife purchased from l..
Morax last July, and there was consid-
cradle diversity Of opinion as to what
music by the parties engaged in the
suit.
The complaining witness, Mr.. Moras,
said that he called at Mrs. Whyte's
ouse several times regarding the pur-
chase OF the organ. She could not mako
up her mind the first time; the second
time he called she said she would con-
suit her husband; then, OF the next oc-
casion, she guessed she would take IL IL
he would make the payments light.
| About n couple of months after they re-
turned the instrument without giving
any excuse, and besides, the witness
said, it was battered almost to pieces,
and the music il gave was h~eartrendee-
ing.
The drummer then underwent n long
cross-examination by the defendants
| attorney as to how often he called at the
house and what agreement he made
with the oma
Ibid you not persistently call on Mrs.
Whyte for two weeks running and
brighten her into taking it?" asked At
torney Burns.
mo, sir; you mistake my calling crm-
pletely," replied the witness with n
| graceful smile. 81 merely enlarged on
it's qualities and pointed out the neces-
sity of her having one in the household,
as she had nc children"
"How do you know that she had no
childrenp Are you aware that she has
a childp" said the attorney in his sever
est tones,
"She hadn't when l called"
"This organ you sent her was aseconc-
hand one, was it notp You are in the
habit of sending it out to people who do
| not want it?"
"The instrument had beer in use for
n few months, that was all" the witness
replied.
John Whyte, the defendant, was Their
ctlled. He was very curt in his
swers and dignified in bearing. 81
| never ordered the box, didn't know it,
was ordered, and l didn't want the
thing" he answered in reply to his at
torney. 81 told my wife to send it
back at once, as | would not pay a cent
for it,"
you're not fond of music, Mr..
Whyte, [ fear" said the court.
mot that sort Of music. 1t was the
worst music / ever heard. The people
| living neXt door even kicked about it,"
Have you any family?n asked Attor-
ney Burns.
II have one child" replied the wit
ness.
"'Then I submit, your honor. that the
organ was a superfuous piece of furni-
ture and not even u luxury broke in
Mr.. Burns.
81 cannot answer from practical exc
perience,' - said his honor, ''but 1 would
prefer its strains to the other"
Mrs. Anna Whyte, the wife, who was
alleged to have ordered the instrument
was called in defense. She positively
denied giving the order, II said that
the man came to the house SO often that
she got tired and told him to see her
husband regarding it.
"Did you not sign this order for the
instrument?"th the organ sellers attorney
asked.
"He said he would give me a months
trial and take it back if L was not salts
fed, /" she replied.
"You were anxious to keep the organ
were you E0ttTf" querieaa the attorney for
the prosecution.
&C didn't mind; but my husband didn't
care for it,"
"He took it and pushed 1T out, too"
"He said he had heard sweeter music
from n hand organ and said it made him
mad, and he kicked it and went out;
then | sent for an express wagon and
had it returned"
You had a little tiff wei it, you and
your husband, eh?" asked the attorney,
| but he received no answer.
The court they asked the witness il
she returned the instrument, and she
replied she had, and that she did not
keep it long over a month.
His honor then said it was hard to say
who was responsible for the instrument
now, or whether the wife was justified
in ordering it, and he was OF the opin-
ion that the article was not n necessity
oven to a household without children,
and he reServed his decision until Nom