Evening journal., 1892-02-26
w11L1AMs nan rwo w1vrs.
The Man who Died From suiphuric Aci.
Married Not Wisely, hut TOO Well.

The Man who Died From Sulphuric Acid
Married Not wisely, but Too Well.
The damage suit Of Anna Maria WI
liaps VS. the Walton and Whann Com
pany was resumed In the Superior Court
yel terday afternoon
Dr. Theodore r. Wolf, the state chem.
ist and professor Of chemistry at Della
ware College, explained the manufacture
Of sulphuric acid and said that the man
ner Of cleaning the chamber was the only
way known. He knew 90 no means Of
preventing the arising Of these fumes In
his Judgment It was absolutely impossi-
BILE that one Of the men should have In
hailed gas In the chamber that when ex-
hailed should have burned holes In hand.
kerchlef
The cross examination by Lewis c.
Vandegrift, for the plaintiff, was very
searching.
Francis n Buck, a member Of the firm
said that the iron pyrites used by the
company is taken from a mine In Louisa
county, Va, and Is selected preferably to
the foreign ore. because the home ore
does not contain arsenic. The company
buried those who died with the exception
OF Williams His widow refused assist
ancs.
Mr.. Nields next called ais star witness,
Rev. Benjamin Scott, colored, Of Phila-
deiphia, aud Jane Tate, colored. He said
that Il was his purpose to show that
Joshua Williams and Jane Tate wers
married by Rev. Benjamin Scott at Balti-
more, in 1854
Mr.. Vandegrift objsc'ed TO the leading
questions asked by Mr.. Nields, as they
lead up TO the question Of the woman s
marriage with Williams.
Judge Cullen was OF the opinion that
the evidence Was admissible. Mr. Van
degrift persisted that he had authority
for mis- exception.
Mr. Prickett read decision from the
Illinois reports. A woman wanted dam.
ages fJr her husbands death. The mar
rage in 1875 was proven. The defence
set up evidence OF a prior marriage In
S67 and produced the first wife OF the
d cad man. The plaintiff objected 10 her
testimony and Il WAS ruled out on the
ground that there was q presumption In
the law that the woman or the man had
been divorced. No evidence was taken
on that point. The case was appealed
on that decision and the Supreme Court
held that 1t was proper to exclude the
evidence.
This authority produced a startling
effect upon the bench. Judge Cullen
said:
"This is doctrine that startles me out
Of everything that ever knew, We vii
adjourn the court until tomorrow morn
log TO give the counsel time TO look NJ
authorities on this very important ques
ton"
Upon Levi c. Birds application thl
case OF John E. Cook VS.. the Wilmington
City Electric Company was continued
until next Monday, aud the witnesse
we're discharged until that time
Court then adjourned until 10 o'olool
this morning.
swoRE SIR WAS HIS WIPE.
Court reconvened at 10 o'clock thl
morning. The court overruled Mr. Van
degrift Counsel for planting obi sctio
aud admitted the testimony OF Jan
Fate. She swore that she wa
married TO Williams in Baltimor
in 1854 and never was divorced.
The other witnesses called by the de
fence we're Arthur Thomas, Rev Mi
Brickhouse, Rev Edward Chlppey, D.
\ ! Will1rd Springer, DR.. Joseph P. Pyle an
i Recorder Of Deeds James T. Shallcross
/ When court adjourned for the moo
recess four witnesses for the defenc
we're still unexamined. They will
placed on the stand this afternoon.