The morning call., 1894-01-23

mixed must show an observance OF all the con
| dltl0ns required by the section.
among the conditions prescribed for Iegii
MIXING an offspring is the reception of the child
| Into the fathers family. The original complaint
! pufpoSey avoids stating that this child was
! ever received into the family of Blythe. The
same omission is made in the second amended
| complaint. Ii has been purposely omitted, anC
| Is purpOSely silent as to The reception.
The complainant seems to claim that such
reception was Impossible, because OF the father
bad no family. That furnishes no legal eX-
! cuse. IL merely shows the lack of reception"
MIR. Delmas then read what constituted a fam
Iy IN me eyes OF me law spoke of the fact that
Blythe, with an income OF from $4,000 TO $4,000
month had fIOm The date of Florence'S birth.
on December Is, 1873 only contributed toward
her support an amount equivalent TO hi s in
come for six days.
blythe could have lived with mis- child as
any other father. When they thus became
united, ne treating her as his daughter. taking
her 10 his home, would any one contend that
these two living together under one roof did
not constitute family in the eyes OF the law L?
reception into the family is a condition prece-
dent Unless this be shown the complaint is
fatally defective and cannot support The judg-
meuG."
The counsel next attacked the findings of
Judge Coney. based on the impossibiiity of
Florence having been received into Blythe's
family, for she did not arrive in the State until
after Blythe's death.
In reference to the facts tending to show that
Florence Blythe was instituted an heir under
section 1887 Mr.. Delmas was very severe in
analyZing thes testimony OF ". ii. II. Hart in
reference to four letters In which Blythe re-
ferred 10 Florence as his daughter. The COM
potency OF Hart as a witness 10 testify was
questioned and Deimas sought to dlscredit his
testimony by referring to the peculiar facts
surrounding the discovery OF document pur-
porting to b. draft OF letters OF adoption
drawn up by Hart for Blythe about six weeks
before the latter's death. draft of this paper
was found III some books In Blythe's Office by
one Varney and later figured in the case.
Suppose" said Mr. Delmas, This father at
Christmas Tine should call In messenger de-
string TO send present 10 some offspring and
should write note, giving IL TO the messenger
boy TO deliver along with the present, would
that boy constitute a competent witness ?'
justice Mcfarland inquired II the other side
ought not have raised the question of COM
potency.
lii reply Mr.. Delmas said he was arguing on
the record, which did not show whether the
competency of the witness had been questioned
or not.
In the argument on the motion for a new
trial MIR. Delmas entered into an elaborate an
alysis of the testimony adduced at the trial aud
OF the rulings OF the Judge. The questions OF
FloTence's legitimacy and Institution as an heir
were exhaustIyely gone into lie again referred
To Witnesses VaTney and Gutierrez ana their
credibillty.
Foote and CARRIER of counsel for respondent
Florence questioned the accuracy OF certain
statements IN reference TO the testimony OF
these TWO witnesses, and lively fire of ques
lions followed. Delmas finally concluded his
argument in peace.
his opening MIR. Bergin referred TO the litiga-
lion, reviewing the various issues presented
MT: Bergin In the course OF his argument
claimed that the Blythe Company had no stand
Ing IN court. They are corporation with a
charter existing for fifty years. SAID Mr.. Ber-
GIN, their sole object apparently being to pro.
long the litigation as long as possible.
Furthermore | hold they have no standing
In court When they were substituted for the
various claimants of the Blythe estate the in
diVldua claims were not assigned To the cor
poration. Under finding No. 20 OF Judge
CoHey's decision they have no standing. This
matter has been thoroughly gone over in the
case OF the Williams heirs. There l. no aver
meDt In any pleading that they represent the
| helrs, nor do they represent any one who is
related 10 Blythe. They DO not present them
selves as claimants in the Blythe estate nor as
successors TO any person Interested.
10 Justice McFaTland's question, "Then how
did they get into court?" MIR. Bergln replied.
God alone knows.
IAN order of substitution is their only stand
Ing. and they have commenced no proper pro-
cesdings TO assail the record. There is no argu-
ment or suggestion in any one OF the briefs OF
the numerous counsel engaged In the case TO
snow that they are connected with Blythe.
Inelr position is TO keep up hight with Flor
ence, Keep her at bay and prevent her from
coming into the enjoyment of her estate"
MT. Bergln referred 10 the position or 'Allce
Eulth In The case, and sald mat there was
snfhelent tnducement 10 her anomalous po-
sltion to warrant her in destroying any docu
ments which might tend TO establish the neir-
ship OF Florence.
The case will be continued this morning, Mr..
GarDer continuing the arguine mt Tor Florence