The herald., 1894-10-11
He Describes Mrs. Annie A.
Pratt's Mental Condition.
A Long and Searching Cross -Exami-
nation by Mr.. Hanl0n.
An Attempt Made to Show Contradictory
Statements by the Witness-His
Teatimony About tho Cole
brsted VIII and Codlcil.


animation by Charles I. Hanlon, as
there is not much love lost between
them, but aside from SO ne mildly irri-
table passages at arms, there were no
scenes.
General Mansfield had been asked a
few questions late Tuesday afternoon,
and the examination was taken up
again by Judge Silent upon the convsn-
ing of court.
81 am acquainted with Mrs. Pratt's
handwriting. l have seen her write
often" said the witness.
A letter was shown him dated October
10, 1885, signed by Mrs. Pratt, and it
was offered in evidence. General Mans
field testifying that he received the LETT
ter in due course OF mail.
The letter was read to the jury by
Judge Silent. 1t was with reference to
bueiness transaction about what is
known as the Fruitvale property. in
which Mrs. Pratt went into come details
about it very clearly.
A letter from Mrs. Pratt to Mr.. Col
Inns, dated November 90, 1886, was also
offered. 1t referred to the mausoleum
in which her son was buried, giving ex
preston to her wishes about the flowers
that should be planted.
Letters were also offered from Mrs.
Pratt to General Mansfield dated July
Z, 1886, and April 10, 1887, tending to
show the clearness OF Mrs. Pratt's mind
instead OF weakness, and they were read
to the jury.
The will was then handed to the wit.
ness and he stated that it WAS all in the
II Il ~
the codicl also. He also said that Ger.
tain erasures and interlineatione were in
Mira. Pratts handwriting.
The general stated that he was we'll
acquainted with Mrs. Pratt in 1881 and
1885; that he saw her in those years, in
1856 and 1887. In his opinion she was
mentally sound in 1885, baslng it on
ordinary social and business intercourse
with her. His opinion was that in June,
1885. the date OF The execution of the
codicil, Mrs. Pratt was perfectly sound
mentally. Her conversation Was cohsr-
ent and intelligent. like that of ra.
tional person. The general also based
his opinion on the conversations of Mrs.
Pratt about the erection OF the mauso.
lenm for her son at Piedmont and busi-
ness transactions which che conducted
without reference to him. This was also
the case in 1886 and 1887.
What were the relations between
Mrs. Pratt and her sistersW
VERY close and affectionate"
'How long would Mrs. Pratt remain
on her visits TO you2'
Sometimes month; sometimes two
months"
Then Mrs. Mansfield would visit
her?''
= "Yes, sir"
"Whst was the value OF Mrs. Pratt's
land in Butte county, in 1881 ?"
An objection was made and the gem
eral attempted to qualify as an expert
on the matter. He was finally allowed
to answer the question, and aaid the
land was worth in 1881, about $40 an
acre. There was something over Ii, 900
acres in Mrs. Pratt's part OF ths ranch.
Being asked further, about the value in
1885, the court Sustained an objection
that the witness was not qualified
do you remember o visit of Mrs,
Goodspeed at your office, q year or more
ago, at which Mrs. Pratt's will was men,
tioned?"
81 do. 1t was in August, 1898. No
others besides ourselves we're present."
"Did she not say that she knew of the
will and that it WAS an holographic will,
or words to that effect2"
'She did,"
This closed the direct examination OF
General Mansfield, and the cross-exam-
ination was conducted by Mr. Hanlon.
He was asked If he had any other
letters in his possession or control. writ
ten by Mrs. Pratt, other than thoae he
had produced.
He replied that he did not know that
he had any.
In response to further questions Gen
eral Mansfield said he had seen Mrs.
Pratt write; had seen her write letters.
Had never looked over her shoulder to
see what she was writing.
General Maasfield's attention was
called to the letter in which he referred
to diagram OF some Los Angeles prop.
erty, and Mr.. Hcnlon asked if he did
not try to get Mrs. Pratt to invest in
property in Los Angeles during the
boom, and tell her that he would make
her $40 000.
The general emphatically denied that
he made her any such promise.
The croGs. s.exRminatioa laeted all the
afternoon. General Mansfeld was
questioned very searchingly about his
relations with Mrs. Pratt, and the con-
dition of her mind during tho lattor
years OF her life. His answers to uuen-
tions in other proceedings in the litiga-
tion were produced BY Mr.. Hanlon in
an attempt to contradict him, and the
reference to the dispositions necessarily
made the examination tedious. Gem
eral Mansfield grew a little testy at
times. but retained his self possession
very we'll.
Mr.. Hanlon questioned the witness
cloeey about hIs statement that Mrs
Pratt was OF sound mind in 1886, and |
capable of attending to busineas inde-
pendently, and that sue had bought |
some property Independent of him or
anyone else.
He was asked il he did not afterwards
tell Mrs. Pratt that she had made a fool |
of herself and been cheated in tnis
traneaction. He replied that he told
her she had paid all the property wac
worth. but did not remember that he |
used the word cheated; he might have
done so.
The general denied that he had acted |
for Mrs. Pratt in business matters and !
in the purchase Of property excep. at
her request, or had so manipulated i
matters as to get property in his own
hands. de was still on the stand when
court adjourned.
Bucklen'a Arnica 1alve.
Z