The morning call., 1894-08-14

counsel described as "the midnight floor
walker of the Palace R0tel.'
That being so" urged Mr.. DeImas.
what do all these things means? What
are we expected to believe? Is this jury
STUPID that they don't know what all this
means?" Then tie counsel quoted from
the opening statement made by Grove
Johnson, in which that eminent lawyer
promised to prove that Henry Martin was
false to his wife, his brother TO whom he
owed so much, and to the little child pro-
pOnent in this case. False in WHAT?
asked DeImas. ''if not in what has been
hinled at just noW?
Then the famous LAWYER went on to talk
about public opinion. He said that il was
impossible not to recognize that public
opinion must be listened TO with respect.
You cannot take this jury or any twelve
men, or even, with all respect, yourself,
sir, or any tribunal, indeed, in the world,
and isolate them from that irresistible in
f1uence which is found in public opinion"
This being a novel theory for counsel to
urge in a legal argument. Mr.. Delmas pro-
ceeded to justify himself by quotations.
taken from Edgar A. POe's tales, volume
of which lay handy.
Then Mr.. Delmas waXed indignant as
he spoke of the amazing assurance of the
other side. as il possible" be asked.
'that they can come here into court and
false, instil harro wing doubt in this
poor widows heart concerning the man
she loved so well; cause her to suffer
hours and days OF anxiety ana torture,
and when she comes up and faces her
enemies and says. This is not true; my
husband was never false to me, is il pos
sible that these laws to which counsel
smother agony; you must bear your pain
in silence; for, while the law permits
your adversary to drive the dagger into
your heart, it does not permit you 10
pluck ii forth and throw it away? ask
your Honor, in heavens name, is that the
law?"
The counsel claimed that be had per-
feet right to meet these propositions ad-
vaneed by the other side. Referring again
to Grove Johnson's opening statement he
said that his side had been promised a pic
ture of John Martin, picture of the old
pioneer as be was in his mountain home,
enjoying all the sweets OF domestic felicity.
Instead of this, no sucn picture having
been presented, the plans OF the other side
appeared to have been changed at me-
ment's notice. and it was quite another
picture that the opponents ofsthe child that
bore John Martins name were Invited TO
gaze upon.
After brief recess DIR. Delmas referred
to the contention made by Grove johnson
to the effect that under the law of this
State child born in lawful wedloek was
presumed TO be the legitimate offspring of
its parents. For the first time during the
progress of the trial Mr.. DelmaS actually
cast doubt upon the identity of the little
John Martin. WAS it born in wedlock ?'
he asked. "a child was born to Mrs.
Martin, we are told, but is this propon ent
that child? How do we know that, when
no Witnesses have been called to prove the
fact. not even Mrs. John Martin herself?
Cannot we say that this is not Mrs.
John Martins child at all? Cannot we
say that she never had child, and that
these deponents, the Partisan woman, Mrs.
Plows-Day. and the New York doctor,
Van Valzah. were perjured or willfully
imposed upon?
1--WE can do so. We. can say this But
whether we DO or not depends upon the
future development of this case. In the
meantime we warned you that we did not
inteOd to discuss this question, but that If
you forced us to it we should do our best
to show you these things"
Mr.. Delmas referred in very strong terms
to the letter dated February "a, 1893 the
letter in which Henry Martin is alleged to
have informed his sister-iD-law of the ex-
ecIition of the second will, and in which
he refers to John B. Martin Jr. as my
boy. +" "Our little one." and asks his sister
in-law to forgive him for the great wrong
done which mas cost me my SelT-reSpect
and your regard.
This letter only came TO light few days
ago. and while plainly stating he cast no
i'm mutations on counsel he said: BE
tween the adjournment of court on Friday,
July &c, and the meeting of court on the
following Monday this letter of February
"a. 1898, was forged. deliberately forged,
10 meet the exigeneies OF the case" Coun-
sal saId that the greatest proof OF this lay
in the fact that the letter contained state
ments which were absolutely false, and
which could never have emanaed from
Henry Martin.
In conclusion, Mr.. Delmas complained
of being told that this proposed testimony
was notin rebuttal.' ."ADd yet" he sald
"these gentlemen are clamorous for the
truth He was almost pathetic when he
referred to the ''little golden haired child. )"
VINO was the innocent cause OF all this