The morning call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1878-1895, 1894-07-17

ness said he was firmly convinced of the
forgery, and had merely sworn to his
! convictions. He saw no reason to change
! his opinion.
After the recess Mr.. Pond was subjected
| to an examination respecting the envelopes
! in which these letters were contained.
! lie said, however, that he was unable TO
! produce these envelopes.
with this the cross-eXamination OF Mr..
Pond came to an abrupt termination. On
reulrect examination the witness was
! asked II he had any other reason for be-
llevlng the second will to be forgery
other than those already given on direct
examination.
well, there was the manner of the first
communication TO me upon the subject.
1t was letter addressed To William Mar
tin by Judge George E. Williams, at that
time attorney for Mrs. Isabella Martin.
The letter was forwarded to me by William
Martin"
Have you that letter here?"
II have" The witness produced the
| letter and handed it to Mr.. Rodgers.
Mr.. Pond was asked to step down for a
moment while George E. Williams was
called TO Identify the document as written
| by him in the capacity of Mrs. Martins
attorney. William Martin was also called
| and testified to having mailed a similar
communication from Judge Williams to
C.
Mr.. Pond was recalled to the stand, and
on notification by the witness the all
important letter was read by Mr.. Rodgers.
1t read as follows:
SAN FRANCISCO, April 90 1898.
UtUtdn Mdrtir-DEAR SIR: Enclosed you
Will md a copy OF an instrument which Will no
doubt be interesting TO you
knew Henry Martin in his lifetime, but was
not sufficiently acquainted with his handwriting
TO give an opinion as 10 The genulneness of the
Instrument of IL
but am satisfied from the statements OF cred
ible persons that it is genuine Instrument.
Inc person who has possession OF the inStrI-
menI does not tnlnk ever intend To present It
Ia the court, but being advised by me that the
instrument should not be kept from you con-
senfed That l should make and forward a copy
TO you.
The original viii be delivered to you upon
your arrival here.
If you consider the matter of sufficient I'M
portance TO come here, you had better Go so
Immediately, as administration has been
granted upon the estate.
VIII suggest, if you determine to come. that
you say nothing TO any person other than inter
eSted with you, and telegraph me when you viii
be here. Yours truly,
GEORGE E. WILLIAMS.
800 Sansome street, San Francisco, Cal.
Mr.. Rodgers then read the following let
rers addressed to Mr.. Pond by William
Martin indorsing George E. Williams let
ter, and also copy of the letter sent by
William Martin to George Z. Williams in
reply:
EASTPORT, Me-. April 81. 1898.
M POnd-DEARs SIR: MhO is George F.
Williams? have Just received a letter from
him, also copy OF VIII supposed to be made
by brother Henry February %, 1898 From
the way 1t reads l would say 1t is some OF that
woman's doingS. He also asked me 10 come 10
California. Ii you would like 10 see those
papers will SEND them 10 yOu. Yours. truly,
WILLIAM MARTIN.
The letter inclosed the following copy OF
William Martins reply:
Copy Of what have sent to Mr.. Williams:
Dear Sir: have read copy of a Will from
you supposed to be made by my brother Henry
February %, 1898. l don't think he made a
will at THAT time and don't think he would
make it III that way. There are seven heirs here
besides my sisters and myself | went to call
after my brother died 10 settle the property in
case his wife didn't get WELL AS she has re.
covered she Will do herself. Ny brother
John made Will remembering one OF my sis ers
ID II. That Will has never been presented 10
court yet, nor have heard anything about II.
These letters being duly identified, in
reply to further question from Mr..
Rodgers Mr.. Pond once more summed
up his reasons for believing the second
viii to be forgery. He said that Henry
Martin had always entertained a violent
detestation of Mrs. Isabella Martin. He
spoke of her as g bad woman, who could
initiate anybOdy's handwriting" said the
witness. Under the circumstances the
witness could not see how Henry Martin
could have executed such will, and did
not think be ever had-an expression
of opinion which was struck from the
record upon the appeal of Grove l.. john
son.
At this point. despite the objections of
the other side. MIR. Pond was asked certain