The morning call., 1894-07-26

meant. de repleu Simply tDat JOnn nau
married. ana that his life was biighted."
"Whs was with you that interview ?"
| asked johnson in cross-examinalion.
I'm not sure, but l think il was ex-
| United States Senator A. P. Williams.
| Whether l mentioned the conversation or
! not | don't know, but thiuk did on two
occasions. Now that l think of it, Senator
! Williams cams TO me Cd one occasion and
salon"
'Mr. Estee. how did you come to testify
! in this case?'
"Mr. Rodgers came to me. He didn't
ask me what l knew, but told me what he
supposed knew.
sort of a mind-reader, wasn't hep"
was the sarcastic question.
! Il don't know. He thought / knew a
whole lot didn't know.
"Well, that's all.
1t was proposed here to read the deposi-
| ton of A. P. Williams relating to this in
| terview, but as the accompanying affidavit
was missing the matter was passed for the
| present
Expert Breckenfeld, having had an un-
usually long respite, he was summarily
| recalled 10 the witDeSs-stand at this June
ture. He was asked once more TO identity
! The two Dear Belle letters of Septem Der
! S and October s, 1892 The expert said
| that the envelopes were in the handwrit-
| ing of Henry Martin. but the letters not.
| In his opinion both letters were written
! by the same hand that wrote the second
will, and TO all appearances the same ink
was used.
| Cross-examined, the expert said he had
examined the ink by aid of glasses, not
| chemicals.
| Then number of envelopes addressed
Mrs. John Martin, Weavervllle, Trinity
| County," were produced and Identified by
| The witness as having been written by
| Henry Martin. One letter, dated October
| Il. 1892, presenting Claim against the
john Martin estate. with instructions that
| ii be forwarded TO Mrs. John Martin, was
also pronounced genuine. In this letter
| the witness pleased Johnson by agreeing
! that there was au upStroked and con-
| nected ~ in the sixth line.
! Then the value OF expert testimony was
once more demonstrated. a letter from
| Deadwood, Trinity County, dated July IL,
| 1892, was produced and pronounced to be
the genuine handwriting of Henry Martin.
That's the letter which Expert Schmidt
said was a forgery, exclaimed johnson.
| gleefully.
There was a buzz of interest around the
courtroom as Mrs. Mary Z. Martin, widow
of Henry MARTIN. was called to the stand.
| She was handsomely attired in becoming
black, and her fresh, handsome face
peeped from under quite 6 fetching little
| widows bonnet She took her seat with
| the utmost compOsure.
How long have you lived here Mrs.
Martin ?" asked Rogers.
| Since 1865"
when were you marred?"
april Il, 1890. in Los Angeles"
when dld you first hear of your hus-
bands death?"
About ten days after it occurred. Dr.
! HeIzstein and Mrs. Kate Martin told me-"
Mrs. Martin was then asked TO identify
some letters handed To her by Arthur
Rodgers. She recognized her late hus-
bands handwriting in one dated from the
! Palace Hotel, February %. 1892 (the day of
the alleged execution of a second Wild. in
which Henry Martin, writing to a Mrs.
! Hanley, spoke OF his darling as being
very sick, with four nurses in attendance
| upoC her.
Another letter was identified by Mrs.
Martin in which her late husband. writing
to Fred Melton, his partner in Placerville,
| Oh August %, 1892, said ne thought he
would nave trouble with Johns wife,"
did you ever see package in your late
| husbands possession which contained
photos Of Johu Martin and his child ?"
81 saw one that was supposed to contain
such y ctures. but never saw them. re-
| member that my husband sent the package
back TO Mrs. John Martin unopened, with
the message, / have a good picture of
| John. AS we passed through the court OF
the Palace Hotel hat evening 1 saw my
husband drop The package into the United
States mail box. After John died my hus-
| band went 10 Taber's and bad a number
of pictures of his brother struck off,"
Mrs. Martin further identified a number
of letters once written by Mrs. John Mar
tin to her husband. She said she gave
them to Mr.. Rodgers last July. and they
were afterward placed in Mr.. Ponds
safe. Mrs. Martin also recognized the
copies Of answers to these letters that
United States Attorney Garter had die
tated on Henry Martins behalf
Now, Mrs. Martin, tell US about your
will. You make one. did you not?" asked
! Rodgers.
Yes, made will in the moath of
| May, 1890. After my husbands death
DESTROYED it and made another one. In
ally to nv husband. | know that my hus-
! band made similar Will after mine and
we kept them IN our common box in the
Safe Deposit Company.
"Wbat was the extent of your private
fortune at that time, Mrs. Martin ?"
Il don't know, but l guess about
! $50 000."
And your us6and'S ?"
ooh. at that time he wasn't worth more
than SIS, 600 to 100000. if that"
"You knew the contents of your hus-
bands wi!l?"
"Oh. yes. he told me OF it and showed
il 10 me-"
The will, bearing date of May 16. 1890,
was here produced and Identified by the
witness.
What else do you know about the dis
position of your husbands pr operty?"
II remember ] was going to the country
| about June l, 1890. Early in May nv hus-
Danu said he intended to make will. /
said, 'Tl do SO, too Then it was under
! stood that which ever of US died first the
other would do right by the family left.
| knew his people and he mine. l know if
/ I'd been taken first he'd have carried ont
my wishes" The last part of this answer
was struck out on JOhnson's motion.
Then Grove L. johnson displayed the
| gallantry concealed beneath his diamond
studded bosom. No questions, madam. !"
| be said, with becoming p0liteness. and
| Mrs. Martins ordeal was over.
At this point Mr.. Rodgers made the
welcome announcement that the case was
about closed. True they wanted the evil
dence of Martins former partner. Mr.
| Melton, and also that of Mr.. Hutchinson
! Both gentlemen would arrive almost i'm
medaiely, Mr.. Rodgers said. Bnt the
| deposition of ex-senator Williams was
handy if the court would allow him to
read it.
The missing affidavit was not vet forth
coming. but the Judge decided that the de-
position was admissible, and Arthnr
| Rodgers proceeded TO read il. It corrbn-
rated the testimony of Mr.. Estee concern.
! ing the conversation a. the Palace Hotel
aud spoke of divorce which Mrs Jnhn
1 NJ ri spoEa IF az nj --i'