The Washington times., 1894-12-05
HE DIDN'T STEAL Her LOVE
LAWYER Lester TeStifies of His Rela-
tions with Mrs. Fulton Gordon.
DENIES HUSBANDS CHARGES
He Shows That at the Time, According to
Mr. Gordon, He Was Alternating the
Wife's Affection He Was Calling on Busi-
ness-Judge Bradleys Side Remark.

There was bigger crowd and more OPEN
mouthed interest than usual at the Gordon
Lester trial yesterday. The really important
testimony was that OF the defendant, Whar-
ton Z. Lester Mr. Lester was nervous and
twitehed and pulled through his hands a
white handkerchief. ct humorous play of
words that arose naturally in the examina-
ton he laughed heartily.
He knew Mr. Gordon by sight, he testified,
and had known Mrs Gordon since March,
1887. He saw Mrs. Gordon in her bedroom
at lie Droit Park in 1892. Mr.. Gordon was
present. On July l, 2, 3, and 4 he was at
College Park. Nd, visiting friends, and went
with them to Bay Ridge. The dates named
cover the time when the Gordon servants
testified that Lester was at Falls Church,
and Mr.. Testers contradiction was sustained
by the testimony of Mr.. and Mrs. Walker.
Continuing, Mr.. Lester said he allied on
Mrs. Gordon in July. 1898. He went about
$50 p. N. July II. Mrs. Gordon asked him
TO draw up her will. Before he could write
down the names for her will a number of la
dies came in. Four days later he called with
the will.
These are the dates upon which Mrs. How
ellis and her daughters testified that Mr.. Les
ter remained in Mrs. Gordon's bedroom sew
eral hours
Mr. Lester said he was in Mrs Gordon's
room. but understood that Mrs. Gordon
usually received company there. His testi-
mony on this point was supported by that of
Miss Richardson, one of the ladies who met
Lester at Mrs. Gordons. She said also she
understood she was to witness will.
Mr.. Lester emphatically denied the whole
Falls Church story, and declared that his
relations with Mrs. Gordon had been at all
times honorable.
He testified that in the divorce suit Cor
doRs attorney. Mr.. Emig, had proposed that
Mrs. Gordon have divorce on account OF
cruelty, Withdrawing the charge of criminal
intimacy with Sadie Orr, and suggested
1900 fee; also SIR. Gordon proposed that MIR.
Lester should advise Mrs. Gordon TO recon-
ciliation with her husband; or TO accept a
separation without a scandal. and accept
81 900 in settlement. If these proposals were
rejected Mr.. Gordon said he would prefer
criminal charges involving Mr.. Lester and
Mrs. Gordon in an amended bill for divorce.
As TO Gordon's propositions, Testers evil
dence was sustained by that OF Gen. William
Birney.
For the prosecution at the beginning of
yesterdays hearing Matthew Tighe, a re-
porter, testified that he prepared the article
of which Mr.. Lester complained, and Mr..
Gordon saw the article before it was pub
lished.
A number of other witnesses gave compar-
atively unimportant evidence.
Mrs Gordon was called by the defense, but
upon objection of the prosecution her testi-
mony was ruled out on the ground that a
wife cannot testify for or against her hus-
band.
Mr. Gordon's witness, Robey, could not be
found when wanted.
At the conclusion as the case was going to
the jury, Judge Bradley said Significantly
'What is there to give to the jury?'' Attor-
ney French noted an exception.