The morning call., 1894-08-16

argument had been permitted by Judge
Coffey the night before. on the represen ia
ton of MFR. DeImas that he b ad bee n "a ken
by surprised in the .Teservtng by his adver-
sarles Of their heaviest guns for their
closing argument. r. J. III: =.
Attorney Craig preceded Mr.. Delmas
with his views upon the subject He re-
viewed the legal situation, and made fire.
quent allusiQn S to Judge Coffey's rulings
in the Mcdonald case, alIusions which
caused the Judge to remark, with some
show OF Yexati0n: 1.-THE case OF Med
aid is entirely different from this The
legitimacy=or LEGITIMACY OF the child is il
no point here, except in the. case of an a p
plication for distribution. >" :..*::. /:
CTaig's counter argument was to the
effect that the child in question was. a
legatee under the. so-caIled second will
and was presumed to be the son OF john
Martin. 1t was pr0p0sedto show that NJ
such. child was born to Mrs. John Martin.
Judge C0tfey rAtOrted that he under.
stood. this question perfectly, but" be
SAID, you cannot raise the question sot
: ilegitimacy from the mouthof the mother
her consent 70 such proceed ure not having
been glVen."' -. :: :: - +. = =.
Following Craig Delmas, who said
mat he " as we'll aware that the common
law OF the State decided that mother
could not be asked to give testimony: that
would bsstardiZe her-own child. But"
said Mr., Delmas 1--WE don't seek to do
=. THIS. We are given to understand by the
other side that Henry. Martin was the
tathero Of this child. We only ask Mrs.
John Martin to say that this;is not true.
" seek to disproVe this impression that
henry Martin is the father of the.child.
On that ground we think that. such testi-
mony IS fairly in rebuttal.''. ...*..: r. !:
Nj. Delmas urgedin very eloquent terms
that ms desired testimony should be adj
mltted' IN the end be made a most i'm
portanJ admission, so far as his side is con-
cerned. 1t was in these words tI ,et II
be established that this boy is Henry Mar.
TINS child, and 1t is DOT In the wit of man
to break that second will. The whole
ground OF his case has been permanently
shlfted. we are no longer trying a cause
Of law. although tits In fiction called So
but we are trying the question whether OF
not this is Henry Martins child. II thai
should be shown the other side will have
won their case. They know it full we'll
and so do we. In the face of such eyi.
dence there is not jury from Siskiyou &c
San Diego that would decide otherwise.
We'll, then, assuming this to be sbe
case, to say that we are barred from the
privilege of asking whether or not this il
Henry Martins child is to use the laws oil
evidence not for the purpose OF getting al
Inc truth, out 10 prevent IL,
Crittenden Thornton made short argu-
meDt in conclusion, in which he said the
questions at issue were: is the witness
competent? Is the evidence competent
is the evidence sufficient He submitted
that the testimony would not be exscted
from the witness.
Judge Coffey's ruling was short and
sweet: The ruling on this question OF
paternity of the child as heretofore given
Is aQnered to. The objection is sustained. "
mr.. Deinas was so chagrined at the i'll
success OIL his argument that he forgot to
taKe exception TO the ruling of the court.
90 Tue case went on in the presence Of the
jury. against the objection Of Grove l..
JonuSon; AIIhur Rodgers recalled ex-Sen-
atoI Z. W. Cross to the: witness-stand
Mr. cross testified, of course, as attorney
for the deceased capitalist, Andrew Craw-
ford. whom Mrs Johns Martin described
the day oelore as the best friend she had
ever had. Ia the st=place, the witness
produced letter dated July. 81, 1890, with
an lncIosure. 1t was dated from the
Tower House. and had never before benn
produced 10 court. but had been called for
by q subpoena. The witness having identi-
fed it and having stated that he found it
among other papers of Andrew Crawford
ii was marked for Identification.
The witness told how that he had taken
those papers from Crawford's Office to his
own. and thence to the Safe Deposit Com.
pany. The envelope be could not identity
being one of a nuE: Der, but he promised to
bring them all into cOnrt. Grove johnson
had no questions TO ask for the present
Expert Schmidt of the Germaa Bank
was then called by Arthur Rodgers to
Identify the Crawford letters as having