The morning call., 1894-11-13
HER SIMPLE PLEA.
Mrs. Cogswell Says She
Was Deceived
INTO SIGNING THAT DEED.
Didn't Know Such Valuable Land
Was Given Away.
CORROBORATED BY THE DOCTOR.
DR.. CogsweIl Says if He Had Con-
suited His Wife She Would
Not Have Signed.

Judge Hunt took up the hearing yesier-
day of the suit brought by Mrs. Caroline
E. COgswell, wife of DR.. COgswell, to set
aside the deed of trust whereby consid-
cradle amount of community property was
decided away TO the city by DR.. Cogswell
for the erection and maintenance of the
CogsweD Polytechnical School.
This suit had been hanging fire for
long time owing to the attention of the
court being taken up by the more recent
action taken by the people, or the relation
of Mayor Ebert. to compel DR.. Cogs well to
carry out the terms of his trust. But 1t
came up for trial yesterday, DR.. and Mrs.
COgswel being represented by Attorney
W. L. Baggett, while the people of tue city
were represented by ex-Justics Van r.
Paterson.
Mrs. Cogswell was the principal witness
on her own side. She stated that at the
time the project of building public school
was discussed between herself and her
husband she had no idea that such vast
amount Of money was to be expended.
She thought that something like 100000
would amply cover the whole expense,
and to that extent she was prepared to go,
but no further. When she found out
what had really occurred she would not
agree to the accomplishment OF the under
taking.
1t was stated by Mrs. Cogswell that her
husband had deceived her by concealing
the real facts from her. He mad induced
her 10 affix her signature to the deed of
trust under misrepresentation. II she had
been aware of the full contents of the
deed she would certainly not have signed
il. The piece of land on Broadway,
which the deed conveyed to the city, was
property in her eyes of very great value,
and she was 10th to part with il. Such
was the general tenor of Mrs. COgswelFs
examination.
DR.. Cogswell gave similar testimony.
lie admitted openly that he thought at
first the enterprise would cost about $780,
600, and lie did not intend to go to the great
expense that resulted. 81 had other OBJ
jects in view that intended to carry out"
said Dr. Cogswel.
Doctor" asked Mr.. Baggett, "why did
you not consult Mrs. CogSwell before deed.
ing away this property ?"
lit would have been fatal to my pro-
ject," was the reply. 81 knew that If l
told Mrs. COgswell she would never sign
the deed"
DR.. Cogswel stated that he believed
there was no harm in doing as he did.
Even after all this properly had been
given away and all this money expended
there was still remaining to him a suf-
fcient fortune to maintain himself and
Mrs. COgsweil in comfort for the rest of
their days. In building the school he only
desired to give something to the boys and
girls of the poorer class, to provide for
their education and to give them the power
OF making a living for themselves in the
world. He took the advice of friends on
this subject and had discussed plans with
Mrs. COgswell for years.
On the other side, Attorney T. B. Bishop
testified that the deed of trust was signed
al his Office and in the presence of DR.. and
Mrs. Cogswell.
Il met Mrs. C0Pswell for the first time
on that OCCASION" said Bishop. "She
made no objection then, and thought the
whole thing was mutual trust, mutual
purpose accomplished"
did Mrs. COgswell never at any time
object to this deed ?" asked Baggett.
Yes; once she objected at a meeting of
the trustees. She didn't know where a
certain piece of property conveyed in that
deed was situated. On hearing that it was
the Broadway property Mrs. Cogsweli
said that if she had known at the time she
would not have signed that deed"
"She admitted having signed it ?'
.'Oh. yes. l understood at the time that
the whole project had been carefully
planned by DR.. and Mrs. Cogswell to-
Eether. There was no suggestion at the
time of any reluctance on the part of Mrs.
Cogswell, and l supposed she was ac-
quainted with the contents of the deed"
Other Witnesses examined were c. B.
Stone and j. G. Langworthy. Further
evidence will be taken at l 80 o'clock TO-
day, after which the matter will be- SUBJ
mitted to Judge Hunt for his cunsidera-
tiO1.
Is YOUR cookery faulty? The fault is