The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1892-09-29

was null and void and
fraudulent aud that there was
no consideration. He then gave his at.
tention to the jury and stated the case for
the defense. He said that II was an ordi-
nary suit on promissory note and that II
did not differ from any other note with the
exception that II was larger sum. The
first legal intimation Of this claim set up
as ground work for bringing suit for
$4,000. Judge Day denied that any note
| for $40, 900 had been given TO Snyder, or a
note for any other amount Aman OF up
right conduct, said Judge Day, has cause
Of action against man who invades the
sancity of his home. Stress was laid on
| the fact that IL must be an upright man,
one who Is true to bis wife. Snyder says
! that he presented claim to Albright and
that they agreed that $4,000 would be the
right figure. Snyder stated to Albright
| that his wife made his home hell and
that he loved another woman, wish whom
he was in love. Judge Day made the
claim that Snyder did not have any regard
| for his wife but
LOVED ANOTHER WOMAN.
The defense did not deny that Albright
was acquainted with Mrs. Snyder, and
that she might have visited his
house, and that he might have
gone to Snyder's house. The
defense did deny, however, that Albright
had any criminal intimacy with Mrs.
| Snyder.
Judge Day stated that Snyder wrote let
ters to Albright, making a claim of i'm
proper relations between Albright and
Snyder's wife. The defendants counsel
alleged that Snyder wanted money and
nothing else. When Snyder sent this fret
letter Albright answered il and stated
that he would not get a cent of money,
and denouncing Snyder as a blackmailer
Judge Dsy then explained that Synder
visited Albright and insisted that the claim
of intimacy was true and Albright denied
IL. Finally Snyder came to the bank and
said that Mrs. Snyder's father heard of
the whisper against Mrs. Spyder and
Snyder wanted Albright to deny it and
state that his wife had not been intimate
with him, but was pure woman. AL
bright thereupon signed the letter to Sny
der's wife's father and also another letter
to relative in Michigan. Those were the
only papers that Albright ever signed, the
defense claims. When Snyder came to
the bank and demanded payment on a
note. Albright was amezsd and was
much more amazed when Snyder stated
that the amount of the note was $50, 900.
Albright declared 1t forgery and refused
to pay 1t. Hence this trial.
SWEARING WITNESSES.
A large number of witnesses nave been
| subpoenaed in the case and it took Dep>
uty Clerk Oberly several minutes to read
the list of witnesses, As their smes
were called they ranged themselves be-
fore the clerks desk, and it was notice
able that there were in their number some
Of the best people in Massillon.
Subpoenas have been issued for many
| more witnesses, and the case will occupy
several days at least. From the opening
statements 1t Is apparent that the case
| will be hotly contested. The claims are
| directly opposite to each other. and case
| in which the plaintiff and defendant are
| at wider variance cannot be ina gined.
| The magnitude of the law suit attracts a
large crowd In the court room, and they
were apparently we'll satisfied with being
| present after hearing Mr.. Baldwin's open.
| ing address, and Judge Days refutstion of
the charges against Albright. His attack
| upon the character of Snyder was someS
what of surprise to many.
A number OF receipts and other papers,
given TO various parties by Albright, with
his signature, were offered in evidence to
H.. 4 Al.
uote.
| DIR. MARSHAL EwELL
| OF Chicago, Dean Of the Kent law school
| OF Chicago and microscopical expert Of
the Michigan Univerity was the first wits
| ness called. He stated that he had been
| in number of celebrated cases as an ex
pert witness. He had had experince as
an expert on signatures. He bad ex-
amined the note alleged to have been
signed by Albright and had compared the
signature with the signature on number
of receipts and letters signed by Albright.
I A subscription list which Albright signed
was examined last night. The others
were examined in Chicago in his office.
| The witness stated that Mr.. Baldwin
called at his office and without telling him
which side of the case he was on or any
| thing about the case and he gave him an
| opinion after several separate examina'
tions of the signatures. The witness was
of the opinion and is now that
all of the signatures submitted to
him, including the note in controversy
were signed by the same hand. The witt
ness had made some photographs of the
signatures on the note, the alleged cons
fsssion spoken of in Mr.. Baldwin's open,
log address and number of receipts, for
the purpose of comparing them. Enlarg-
| ed signatures were also shown.
The witness was cross examined by
Judge Day, Judge Day wanted the wit
ness to say that In cases in which he bad
been an expert witness, there was differ
ence of opinion among experts. The
witness stated that he had been employed
b. Mr.. Baldwin in this case. In other
cases II was not unfrc quent that experts
| d ffered In opinion. The witness said he
had been seen in Chicago by Mr.. Baldwin
who made trip 10 Chicago for that pur-
| pose.
Court adjourned until 80 o'clock.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
DR.. Ewell was placed on the stand after
the noonday intermission. He gave fur.
ther testimony regarding the signatures
His opinion as To the handwriting had
not changed during intermission and waf
very much Of the opinion that the note
and what purported to be the confession
were signed by the same hand which
signed the receipt and subscription list