The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1888-11-21
THR EAIR mrs. HIBBARD
And Her Breach Of Promise Suit
Against Deacon Fry.
THE PLAINTIFFS DAUGHTER
Testlilcs in Her Mothers Behalc..The
Trip to Pittsburgh 40 Get Mar.
ried"--Registered ut the Hotel.
Some Amusing Episodes.

I
than yesterday. Ladies' were in tn,
majority in the front benches and seat
were at premium. The first witness
was Kate Hibbard, the seventeen.yea
old daughter OF the plaintiff. She wa
dressed in a short dress, u neat blacI
jacket and broad-brimmed, blue.linet
Gainsborough hat. She has Abroad
heavy face, with small, keen, dark eyes
She was examined by Mr.. Cunningham
for the prosecution, and was cross.
examined by Mr.. Harrah. Mrs. Hib.
bard watched her daughter with q
Roman matron cast of countenance,
while Mr.. Fry watched her with mix.
ture OF curiosity and surprise. She ties.
tilted as TO the distance from her place
OF residence to that OF Mr.. Fry, the de.
fendant. She said that he was accus-
toned to pass her home every day. He
called upon her mamma early in the fall
of 1886. Mr.. Fry called, went up stairs
and remained until after ten o'clock. He
came TO the front store door and her
mamma met him there and took him up
stairs, where they played checkers. He
came off and on for about year and a
half. II at home, he came once week.
COULD NOT ILLUSTRATE A SWEET LOOK.
Some times her mamma would be
looking for him, and then would meet
him at the door. He came at such
times about 1880 p. M, and left about IL
o'clock. One evening she was passing
through the back parlor and observed
him holding her mammals hand. When
he saw her he dropped it. Mamma
looked at her and smiled.
Upon ross-examination she said her
mother did not wear n wig when Mr..
Fry called, but wore false bangs. Refer
enCe by the witness to a Sweet look"
brought demand from Mr.. Harrah,
counsel for the defense, for demonstra-
ton OF such look. Miss Kate said she
could not illustrate such look, butsaid
Mr.. Fry doubtless could.
Mr.. Crosby, chief clerk Of the Hotel
Anderson, in Pittsburgh, was next call
ed. He said that he did not know the
whereabouts OF the first part OF the reg
lister book for November, although he
had searched for it. Several parties had
called to see it, including Mr.. Dougherty
and the plaintiff. A book was here pro-
duced, which witness said was supposed
to be an extra copy Of the last one.
George l, Reed, u newspaper reporter,
testified that be called ut the Hotel An
derson the day following the entering OF
the suit, and saw the signature OF Wm.
H. Fry aud wife. He was not familiar
With Mr.. Fry's writing, however.
The latter part OF the testimony was
ruled out. A large number Of other
witnesses were examined during the
morning, but their testimony was unim-
portant.
QUEER WITNESS.
In the afternoon Mrs. Louisa Rosen.
myer took the stand and testified that
she had never seen Mr.. Fry at Mrs. Hib-
bard's place. She did not remember
writing statement of what she was
willing to swear to at the trial. A paper
was shown her which she admitted she
had written at Mrs. Hibbard's house.
She had heard Of the suit before the pa
per was prepared at Mrs. Hibbard's
room. ~ wrote what she told me to
write"
Mrs. Rosenmyer, after acknowledging
that she had written statement OF what
she was willing to swear to. continued
as follows: "Mrs. Hibbard suggested the
matter in the paper and | wrote the
words. Mrs. Hubbard told me about
what time Mr.. Fry came and what time
he went away. / had little chance to
see what went on in Mrs. Hibbard's
rooms, owing to the location OF my
room.
Mr.. Cunningham here claimed the
counsel for the plaintiff had been mis-
lead by the witness, and requested per-
mission to read the writing OF Mrs.
Rosenmyer. There was q protest against
this, but the Judge admitted 1t, but not as
testimony against the defendant. 1t
read rs follows: ~ saw Mr.. Fry call on
Mrs. Hibbard for upwards Of year and
a half. His overcoat was frequently in
the hall. 1t was gray one. Mr.. Fry
never left until 1880 o'clock"
Several witnesses were then examined
whose testimony was corroborated re.
garding Mr.. Fry's visits to the house OF
the plaintiff.
Harriet Knapper, an employe in Mrs.
Hibbard's millinery store, said she had
seen the defendant at the plaintiffs six
times, four times in the parlor, and each
time he had his hat and coat of. The
first time he came into the store he
made smiling bow and shook hands
with Mrs. Hibbard.
Annie Rodgers, of Rochester, testified
that she came up to Pittsburgh on the
same train with Deacon Fry and Mrs.
Hubbard on the date the latter alleges she
was to get married. They occupied sep.
arate seats, but when the train arrived
in the city Mr.. Fry took MB. Hibbard's
satchel and they left the depot together.
William A. Smith, brother OF Mrs.
Hibbard, testified to being at the station
when his sister took her departure for
Pittsburgh on November 9. She told
him she was going TO get married. The
defendant was at the station also. He
was dressed better than usual, and SEEM
ed smiling and happy. The witness
thought it was unusual that he should
be so pleasant. Once before, when Mr..
Fry had met the plaintiff on the street.
the witness said he had seen him look
as he did then. On the occasion re-
ierred TO, Mr.. Fry made very profound
bow. The witness was then given plug
hat and illustrated his meaning OF a pro-
found bow, much to the amusement Of
the audience.
Upon being recalled Mrs. Hubbard,
the plaintiff, described her baggage,
which she said consisted OF a good-sized
satChel and shawl strap. "Mr. Fry
broke my satchel trying to lock It,"
The court then adjourned until to.
morrow.
There is an impression that the Fry
case will run all the rest OF the week.
The defense will consist largely Of evi.
denCe showing that Mrs. Hibbard asked
Mr.. Fry to call upon her on a matter oil
business, and that the subsequent rela;
tions OF the parties were Of nature
growing out Of this request s