The Columbian. [volume] (Bloomsburg, Pa.) 1866-1910, 1895-01-25
VANDERSLIOE VS.. SNYDER.
Verdict for the Plaintiff.

Our report of this case last week
ended on Thursday morning, when
DR.. P. Frazer OF Philadelphia was on
the witness stand His examination
occupied full day. He testified that
the opinion reached by him, after
several different tests, was that the
signature of 1'hos. J. Morris was
simulated. The defendants offered
to show by him that the test by com.
posite photography had also been
used, but after long legal battle the
court excluded the testimony.
Mrs. Nancy Of Berwick testified
that in conversation with Mary G..
Vanderslice, the latter had declared
that the paper in question had been
fixed up by Joseph and Samuel Adams.
Mr.. Nancy testified to similar dec
laration on the part of Mrs. Wander
slice. He also swore to declaration
of Augustus Vanderslice on the night
of his death that his father, Joseph
X. Vanderslice had brought him home
from Williamsport, and made him
forge the Snyder paper. DR.. T. c.
Harter testified to a conversation with
5. w. Adams in which the latter told
him that he and Joseph r. Wander
slice entered Mrs. Snyder's house by
the back door, and that T. J. Morris
was not present.
In rebuttal the plaintiff called
Agnes Vanderslice, who testified to
having gone with her father to Mrs.
Snyder's house, in 1879, and that her
father asked Mrs. Snyder to pay him
all or part of the guaranty paper,
and that Mrs. Snyder replied that the
agreement when she signed it was
that she would not have to pay 1t
during her lifetime. DR.. McReynolds
testified that at the time of the con-
versation spoken of by Mrs. Nancy,
Mrs. Vanderslice, his sister, was ply
sically and mentally weak. Mrs.
Nancy said on cross examination that
she did not consider Mrs. Vanderslice
responsible for all she said. DR.. Nc
Rea of Berwick testified that he at.
tended Augustus in his last illness,
and the night before he died he found
him unconscious, and he did not
think the patient would rally from it,
but that he might have Gone SO.
This is only brief outline of the
case. The cross examination of each
witness on both sides was long and
searching. On Friday afternoon argu-
ment to the jury began. Mr.. Barkley
opened for the defense, and was fol.
lowed by Fred Ikeler, Mr.. Scarlet
closing for the plaintiff. All of the
speeches were able efforts and the
interest shown by the public has not
appeared to be so great in any case
since the trial of the MollIe Maguires
in 1877. The court house was crowd.
ed at every session, and on Friday
evening during Mr. Scarlet's speech
there was scarcely standing room. On
Saturday morning Judge Rice charged
the jury in his clear, able and impair
tial manner, occupying less than one
hour, and the jury retired at ten
o'clock. In the afternoon about three
o'clock they sent word to the Judge
that they would come in, and the ses-
sion of the Agricultural Society was
interrupted for that purpose. The
clerk asked them if they had agreed,
and some one replied that they had
not. The Judge asked if they desired
further instructions, but no one seem
ed to know what they had come in
for, and SO the Judge sent them back
to their room until they could agree,
At about seven o'clock Saturday even
ing the jury came out with a sealed
verdict, which was presented in court
on Monday morning. 1t was in favor
of the plaintiff.