The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1894-05-05
4 KENYON ESTATE.
very Of . Note II Moore
= Kenyon for $500.
vooRAPH or a $40. 900 NOTE


GDogtion OF the genutnenees Of The
5ouS.year mote which Watson W.
- alleges J. Gardner Kenyon gave
T 5une, leSs, for services rsndsred oc-
- attention Of Judge Humes eli
1eday. The dsfsnse pnt on over
= Witnesses 70 show the methodi-
= Of the dead man, and the I'm.
6o11y Of his giving = note for $40 ooo.
- n the complaint, and leaving NO
ID + among any Of his papers when
y ~ the administration. Auother
Sepodnt advanced BY the dsfsnss v,s
111 q $500 given By Watson W. Moore
0ou, while Moore was stall m New
With correspondence Of Noors's
go that he borrowed this amount in
IN In order 70 come % Seattle.
ing to return It This nots. uncsn-
- found among Ksnyon's papers
N1s Introduced "a show that Kenyon
~ hardly give . 2O.oo0-nots 70 . man
- whom he held $500 note.
ri testimony Was also introduced 70
- Tie genuinsness Of Ksnyon's al-
81 Signature 70 the nots, and Prof.
-, The expert writing master. de-
~ \ forgery. The prcsecrtion, on
1(hef hand. scored point in sxcIud.
Hohe introduction Of the enlarged pho
oAs OF the nots. Judge Humss hold
- the aid Of masnifyfng glasses was
~ Ill interested. including the jury,
umine the signatuYA
III plAtntid's character was also a.
- ~ the defense. insofar @ relstsd 20
mpeesniosity and his habits Of bor-
nG tribes from various lawyers and
ling 70 return them, and the fact
II making these loans he nevsr made
1fcn OF the existence Of the note vss
- ~ most Of. BanksTs and business
M olso terrified for the defense to the
II hat IL Moore had had the note st
i 1ins Il WAS purported 10 hare been
- ~ Kenyon that Moore would have
: rot trouble in discounting the note and
tyiaG It, full facs value, evidences BE-
II ln1Foducsd that Ksnyon's estate vas
nbls enough Ut Ill times in the last
yeafs 10 make such mote good bank
- paper.
NJ ~ evidence was al In BY 4 o'clock In
afternoon and, - the attorneys de-
- : little time In which 10 argue the
- nd prepare instructions 70 the Jury,
80 Humss agreed to let the case 70
- nntil $50 next Monday morning.
~ evidence given yesterday by the
- covered the following witnesses:
y1dscn Wilson. expert professor In pen.
onshin who declared the signature
Ruy.
jnnk Il Roche. the photographs at.
Upoed TO introduce his enlarged photos
~ note. but the matter Was excluded.
eoofss B. Adafr testified TO Ksnyon's
(hodicsl business habits.
B Burwsll had always found Kenyon
elBl and conscientious.
IRA Mary G. Palmer occupied Ksnyon's
6lng. and Kenyon roomsd with her.
knew Of Kenyon putting Moore out
- once In the fall Of 1888. not being
I'D with him. Moore owed her e8
ousd money and SIG tor room rent.
4nyon left hsr and her husband $500
Ah his win.
Wilmer Palmer corroborated his vifs's
Gnony. Kenyon had told him Moore
- poor lawyer.
kcr J. Whittlesey had made abstracts for
poyon and done other work, also coll
I'D rents. Kenyon had told him Moore
oa jack-lsg lawyer. Never knew Of the
s(sucs OF . so. 900 note.
Jshn 9. Barnes had loaned Moore small
- OF money.
Frank Pontius. one OF the administrs-
M rscounted the finding Of letters and
100 note Of Moore's among Ksnyon's
Do1en.
Angus Mcintosh considered Ksnyon's
- for so. 900 good for it. face value.
1Aso N. Hallsr. J. B. Howe, L. G. Gill;
~ Harold Preston, J. w. Corson. H.
j 4 Hastings. T. r. Blaine. testified
leksns small loans to Moore which he
v3 repaid and that when making them
nnsver mentioned anything about hav-
% 900 note In his possession.
E Z r. Shepard had been Kenyon's law
Il, but before taking his cases Kenyon
~ assursd him that he had settled with
! Ais lawyers, including Moore.
4. A. Denny said Moore had come 10
- % propose . compromise on . land
Ssaesst, because he was hard up and that
1nyon bad thrown him on. Ksnycn's
- for geo. 600 Was good.
4 II. Palmer, one OF the defendants,
moderated Pontius In all respects.