The morning call., 1893-06-06
THE EVIDENCE IN.
The Ryer Case Submitted
for Argument.
STORIES FROM STOCKTON.
A Letter From the Doctor to His Wife
in Which lie Denies the Exist
ence OF Another Son.

After q protracted hearing, both in this
city and in Storkton, all of the evidence in
the contest over the will of DR.. Washing
ton NJ. Ryer has been taken, and the case
was finally submitted for argument yeSter-
day afternoon.
For the past week Judge Levy has held
court in Stockton by desire of both parties.
and fresh testimony has been taken from
old residents there upon the extent of DIR.
RYer's intimacy with Donna Dolores.
Among the important testimony given
was that Of the widow of c. NJ. Webber,
a once well-knOwn resident of Stockton
With whom DR.. Ryer was in the habit of
frequently taking dinner. Mrs. Webber
testified that DR.. Ryer had often spoken
in her and her husbands presence of the
Mexican woman, and of the existence of
child, whom DR.. Ryer claimed as his own.
and said that on one occasion her husband
excused himself to her, as he had an en-
gagement TO stand as godfather TO DR..
Ryer's boy, Chris.
Another witness was John Douglass, a
great personal friend of both DIR. RIVER
and his brother George. Douglass testified
that one dav when he was sitting with
DR.. Ryer, George Ryer came hurriedly
into the room and said. The woman's
got boy" and forthwith proceeded to con-
gratulate DR.. Ryer as the happy fnther.
The witness further stated that DIR. Ryer
was overcome with Joy and Immediately
invited his friends cut To drink long life
and prosperity to his son.
This ended the Stockton part of the in
vestigatiOn and the case was resumed yes
terday in Judge Levy's courtroom Mt the
City Hall 1t was only brief session, as
the time was taken up by short arguments
by the counsel representing the heirs, on
motion TO strike out the Stockton testi-
mOny as being merely hearsay, and there
fore incompetent. Then the case was
submitted.
On Saturday morning the final arguments
of counsel will b. entered upon. They will
be many and long, and will probably Oc-
cupy seven or eight days. Either Attorney
Pillsbury or Attorney Campbell will lead
on Chris Ryer's behalf. and then will
come eX-Judge Spencer of San Jose for the
respondents, then Hayes on the same side,
and by turns every attorney engaged IN
the case will have something TO say.
Among letters and documents introduced
in evidence is one letter that was the sub
ject Of a spirited dispute among the attor-
Deys. Judge Levy promised to pass upon
it at an early date, hut has not yet done
so. 1t is a letter from Dr. RIVER to his wife,
dated April p, 1882. DR.. Ryer, it appears,
never lived happily with his wife, and 1t
is said that Mrs. Ryer was of very jeal-
Gus disposition.
In response TO a communication from
his wife respecting the existence of his
alleged son, DR.. Ryer wrote fatty contra
dieting what he characterized as false
report got up by his own personal enc
mics. Dr. Ryer continued:
1t is very hard to think that you believe
what you write concerning me. In No. 6
you say that gentleman said TO an ac-
qualntance of yours that DIR. Ryer has a
son In Mexico who gives him "A great deal
of trouble If such was ever said, as you
state, L am the most surprised, for no such
thought has been once in nv mind that I
can recall since the letter you read years
ago. At that time put down such pre-
tensions so firmly that have never heard
of the person since. and for several years
L have never thought of it. [ have not
heard of any other person claiming to be
my child. l certainly have given no cause
for any such claims. No man who has
had so much visible property as l have
had for years in California has escaped
with less blackmailing attempts on them
than | have. and this style is more fre.
Quently attempted but never succeeds"
DR.. Ryer concluded by assuring his wife
Fletcher, and said: In all trouble l have
never changed my will. Beware of
jealousy; it makes the food it feeds on"
This letter was objected to by the attor-
neys for Chris or the ground that it was a
privileged communication and therefore
not admissible. The attorneys for the
heirs claim that it does not come within
the rule and that 1t is good as declara-
ton in writing. signed by DR.. RIVER, ut
terly refutlng the pretensions of the petit
toner.
Judge Levy will probably pass upon the
letter when the case is resumed on Satur-
day.