Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1890-05-19
THE OTHER SIDE.
The Emerson-Heisen Case-Heisen Wins
Two Sides to Story.

The Emerson-Heisen Case-Heisen Wins
Two Sides to q Story.
Early in February Ann NJ. Emerson
sued Chas. Heisen for settlement and to
have q certain document, in the nature of
a mortgage, set aside, and for a reconvey-
ance of the property by Heisen to her. At
the time the colored womans story, as told
in her complaint, excited good deal of
sympathy for her, and corresponding exc
Grafton OF Heisen, especially as the woman
alleged that she had been deluded into
signing transfer of lot 1, E and F, Four
teenth and Fifteenth streets, and certain
confessions OF indebtedness that, she
charged, were never read to her, and the
contents of which she was ignorant as she
could not read or write.
She claimed that she had affixed her
mark to a statement of account between
her and Heisen, which, she afterwards dis
covered, was recorded as acknowledge
ing an Indebtedness of 81, l01 SO to Heisen,
and for which the document recited that
she had made a deed of the lot, Heisen
leasing it to her for $25 month
She admitted having borrowed frequent
sums of money of Heisen, but denied owing
him more than 5000 or $1,000. She made
charges of fraud and deception against
Heisen, and generally preferred charges in
her complaint that were rough" upon
him, to say the least.
Heisen loans money and on small
sums charges high rate of interest and
some of them are compounded. His ac-
count against the woman set forth all the
loans and the terms of interest charged
In some of these she claimed that as high
as five per cent. per month was charged,
and that interest was compounded monthly.
II is always well to bear in mind that in
lawsuits there are two sides, and that it is
well tc withhold judgment until both
sides are heard. 1t turns out that the
Emerson woman's story should have been
taken with broad margin of allowance,
and common justice demands that the re-
suit of the trial should be made public.
The case came TO judgment in the Su-
perior Court on Saturday, and resulted in
Heisen, the defendant, establishing every
| item of his account, the story of the
plaintiff being fatty disproyed by the
testimony. In fact, if the witnesses are to
be believed, taken in connection with the
woman's own testimony, there was nothing
| to justify her statement that she did not
owe what was claimed, and that false
swearing was INDUCED in for the plaintiff
was found by the Court. Except in one
item, as to the right to a credit for a Ger.
tain amount OF rent, Heisen's case the
Court held, was completely made out, and
the woman's case was accordingly thrown
out Of Court, though she has the right, as
originally intended, to redeem the prop.
erty.
In brief, it was shown that in 1888, q
son-in-law OF the woman borrowed 500 Of
Heisen at q per cent. month. The note
ran on until ii amounted to some 500 and
was outlawed. In the meantime Heisen
had loaned Mrs. Emerson various small
sums, from time to time. In 1889 the son.
in-law wanted 500 more. Helsen told
him that he would let him have it If he q
pay the old debt and give security. Mrs
Emerson owed Mrs. Houghton 5000, anG
had given her mortgage on the lot. L
was agreed that Heisen would lift tn,
mortgage and lend the son-in-law the SlOt
if Mrs. Emerson would make a deed fol
the property which was. by reason of tn.
agreement in the nature of mortgage
and that Heisen would rent the place L
her for SOS month.
This was done. and after that Mrs. Emer
son borrowed various sums of Heisen
Some OF these were advanced on requests
written for Mrs. Emerson by her grandson
On some of the small sums 5 per cent.
month had been charged, and interest wa.
compounded, but when the mortgage wa.
taken she complained of the interest, anG
it was reduced to q per cent.
Mrs. Emerson testified that she had moi
signed any mortgage or deed at ali that il
any one made her mark to one it was
forgery. But Deputy Clerk Scott testified
that he took the acknowledgment, ant
Mrs Emerson made her mark, and tina
she knew all about it.
The items and account of Heisen wer
proved in every detail according to tn,
Court, before Heisen himself took tn
stand to prove his claim. Heisen elaine,
that the rent of the property SIS mon.l
paid him about per cent. but the Cour
held that his interest in the property b!
the transfer was not such a one that b,
could collect more than legal interest from