The morning call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1878-1895, 1894-09-25

this will. Was this the letter Of lawyer
to the executor OF a will by which that
executor was legatee TO large extent?
Mr.. Delmas read the letter In question,
showing that Judge Williams expressed a
doubt AS to this will. Was it at all easy TO
suppose that Judge Williams thought it
genuine?
Then take the answers Of William Mar
tin, contained in letters TO Judge Williams
and Mr.. Pond. at is some of that woman's
doings," said William Martin.
''As quickly, as spontaneously as the
needle turns to the pole, did William Mar
tin, as soon az he read Judge Williams'
letter. turn his thoughts to that woman.
Nov, as to who forged this will, if such
was done. Henry Martin had spoken of
his sister-in-law as forger and black
mailer. That was his opinion OF her, his
own brothers wife.
According to her own testimony she is
not IMMERSED in the acts of forgery" Mr..
Delmas referred to her testimony on re-
touching with acids. She acknowledged
she hao seen sneh experiments when
girl al school. 'Gentlemen, iG is the first
time that we have heard that the art of
forgery Is part of the curriculum of the
school education of American young
ladies'"
Mrs. John Martins visits at the County
Clerks Office were spoken OF, and her ex-
animation Of the first will. Why did she
That would not have taken five minutes.
She took copy of the will. What for?
Is it not strange that the first person to
ask for this will should be Mrs. lisa belle
Marin? Is 1t not strange that she visited
this Office FOR moro than month after,
and always unaccompanied?
Then again the first FIVE lines in both
wills were ideatical. Mr.. Rodgers had
argued from this that Henry Martin could
not have written this viii. For il he lad
the first will TO copy FROM he would have
destroyed IL so as to prevent controversy
and not returned the first will to the vaults
of the Safe Deposit Company.
The next point to be cnns idered was the
testimony regarding Henry's frequent
meetings with ana visits 10 his sister-in-
law. If Henry Martin saw her every
day, if when he didn't see her he LETT a
note tor her. If she was accustomed to go
to the Palace Hotel and wait for him, if it
Is true that he asked her to come to the
hotel and live with her child, as he felt
lonesome, then tell me how it came that
eight days before his death Mrs. John
Martin, through DR.. HerZstein, asked to be
allowed to come aud visit his wife, which
privilege Henry Martin positively refused
to grant He refused it, saying, we DO
not know her and have nothing to DO with
her."
Speaking of the Palace Hotel employees.
Delmas said: 1.-The testimony of Ernest
Turner is that of prepared witness, and
he ls man, or at least bears the form
OF such! sensation in court Counsel
asked the jury TO say TO what viler pur-
pose man could be put than To go about
the corridors of hotel, peepng through
windows for the purpose of detecting The
peccadllloes of others. Such a man should
net be believed. In the words of Addi-
son. "he would be more likely to bring
what was grateful than what was true"
Did not all remember the Forrest case,
where the great tragedian tried TO prove
his wlfe's infidelity? OF course, there was
spy In this case, who was ready 10
crafty the vindictiyeness of a husband
Just as there was spy in this case ready
TO crafty The Vlndlctlveness of woman.
Mr.. Delmas read some interesting passages
from the report of this trial for the edifica-
tioo of jury and spectators.
According to Mr.. Delnas such spies as
these were always persons of lively i'm
aglDatIOD. In Turner's case the blinds
were left conveniently open. They al
ways are" said Delmas. The light was
burning high, and the parties were talking
loud. Vi course this was so; il must be
SO for the purposes of the story. You
know this story isn't true; you know il.
gentlemen. You know it was got up to
salvage SINKING case and you would never
believe itp'
Night Clerk McDermott was communi-
Gated with by Turner. McDermo:t came
IN Tor some goOd-humored sarcasm at the
hands of Delmas. "What did McDarmott
do, gentlemen? he said. Oh, IFS all right !;
he's her brother-in-law. Let them GO on. :"
The whole story as told by Mrs. John
Martin. Prosper Reiter, William ri.
Chambliss ana Mrs. Cornwall was absurd.
Could 1t be conceived that Henry Martin
would receive the favors of a woman and
then abuse her? Or would he, If so de-
slrous of concealing his intimacy, 90 to
her room in the Palace Hotel? 1t had
been SAID that Henry Martin was afraid
Of the Palace Hotel set. What was the
hotel set? A lot of globe-trotting English
man ana dudes. Why seek TO avoid these !?
Then as to the testimony of Mrs. Corn
wall, 1t is at least strange. 1t was brought
in at the eleventh hour by the counsel.
who claimed that the case had already
been .overdelayed. We adjourned cour t
in order that mythical witness could be
interviewed before being placed on the
stand. Finally we were notified that the
proponents case was closed. and after
mat notification Mrs. Cornwall appeared. /"
Delmas spoke of the strange acquaint-
ancesbip between Mrs. Cornwall and Mrs
John Martin. There was an interval of
nearly three and half years between
their first meeting and the casual meeting
in the Palace Hotel, when Mrs. John
stretched out her hand and introduced
Mrs. Cornwall to Henry Martin. And the
next and only meeting was ON February 10,
1893, when Mrs. Cornwall. shocked al
hearing of L. l.. Ro6inson's death, went
with Mrs. John to her rooms.
ut is strange circumstance, gentlemen,
that Mrs. Cornwall should have met
Mrs. Martin on the very occasion when she
was most wanted.
as it not singular, gentlemen, that Mrs.
CornwalPs husband occupies position in
the Black Diamond Coal Company, and
yet she does not know what this position
Is? And is it not singular that 10 all these
five years mountaineering Mrs. Cornwall
never visited Mrs. Martin until that day
when she was so overcome by the tidings
OF l.. L. RobinsOn's death? Next, al
though Mrs. Martin mad been hunting for
Mrs. Cornwall all this time, she never
found her until after the proponents case
was closed. Do you believe that ?"
Then, as sto the origin OF Baby John
Martin, Johnson had not openly and
straighrforwarily claimed that this was
Henry Martins child, but he had so in
sinuated.
This child was born, il born at all to
this woman. Ia May, 1891. Therefore he
must have been conceived in July or Au.
gust, 1890. Therefore, when this mon-
strous theory was preached, it was neees-
sary to bring evidence of this And so at
this trial for the first time testimony is
gathered in respecting meeting between
Henry and his sisier-in-law in August
$780, And yet, gentlemen. in the deposi-
ton of Mrs. John Martin taken in Febru.
airy and May of this year no such meeting
| is mentioned. This shows that this mon
strcns thought had not at this time been
/