The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1895-04-09
WANTS BIG DAMAGES
The Notorious AtWell Scan
dial Reviewed in the
County Courts.
ONE OF THE WIVES SUES THE DOCTOR
Says She Was M%aliciously Prose-
cuted--Counsel Argue for
a Non Suit.
ONE OF THE WIVES SUES THE DOCTOR

MIS- NH,sss
u ts, a. - a oeen 80
uuits ~ Gas = -
- DaFu Ae"ei . soV'VOV " =
enises anue fspel iaio $780,
lioh fuu ialse iMpssolin Oo
loF Harvey opened ioi the na.
II snarseu Ina nus caeht 9 49,
rsoeieu u tiat oh Mahci o. lo9-' -
heeoraef McDohoush sne q pee
ehalseo Will Writing ainoyuouS ~
IN II an uay sne "as esn
Wins piaSiius ~seis,
tehuant s"oFe 10 hef "itshs tS
aenranuins MONEY anu causeu 70
AicDohough 10 issue a WARRANT ioi {
arrest. 0ne was caiieu oelote lMin ailu
in that DR.. Atweu had accused her with
ha,;.r m,rda.a5 har ars+ h,,shsnd and
ns,,a MI m ua ns r.d na ! ~ ice Of
his client. she was of respectable Jersey
cG+v naran+eee tha da,,e,lsta, of Mr. War
deli. = music teaaber' In 1874 she married
D.. r. Hamilton. He died in 1884. She
had one child nv bi,n IT ataa in tbe same
year that its father did. She was taken
i'll in 1887. and after being treated by
several nbvsscsans ca,led IN DR. ntwell.
Her illness made her blind. The defend
ant called to see her frequently. He
- -
expressed d great tondness TOT ner anu
she lor MIN. he proposed marriage 70 ner
several times. He said he was divorced,
hut was summarizing his former wife tenn
porarhy to avoid scandal. lie became
engaged to Mrs. Hamilton in December,
1855, and in May, 1890, he pretended he
had everyphihg an stra4saeened OUT. he
showed her q divorce dated December.
1889. She was married to him on Feb
- .0' ~ - ~. 80
her under the name OF Darius Rogers
Jones.
nDfHn MoDoNooeH iE,iir iise
recorder McDonough was placed on
the witness stand. He testified that on
nisint Of biackmaii gadnst the main
til. He sent Dafective Nelson and abe
| appeared before MIN in the Company of
Dr. Ra.e. Detective Nelson swore to
having notifed Mrs. Mtweii to appear.
| Mrs. AFweu was sworn as Mrs. Hamil-
ton. There was some argument on this
point, her counsel contending that she
should be sworn as Mrs. Atwell. She
was boarding with Mrs. Slater On Bloom
field street when notified by Nelson on
Recorder McDonough. She appeared be-
fore the Recorder the next morning at
eight o,c.ock; He asked her why size
was D~fdchfnaaling Dr. AtWedl he asked
her II she knew she was his prisoner,
ZONES g s9hle papers spoke OIL Dali
ana aisnllsseG ner.
PROCEEDINGS.
Judge Lloplhcot TINS morning: The court
room was roWded WIN curious people,
dnu every spare men Oh room WftnIn. the
ram was occupied by lawyers and those
NIlileHdLely lnleTesteo N me case, Dr.
AtWel was represented by ex-Mayor
Collins and ex-Judgs Hoffman, and Sen
ator Jay. MIS-: AlWeIS counsei are
Allan MeDermott and C b. Harvey.
Before placing any witnesses on the
stand. MI. Collins informed the Couri
that one Of the panel OF jurors was an
eieotaon oIncer anc ira his duties
would cSii nm away; judge Lsppineoft
could pc supplied, out added that in the
wen 81 pom siaes agfee,ng 70 proceed
Msln elesen Jurors, ne eould De REUSED
az Was a,smassed, Dr; M =. Rue was ealied q
ASKED Counsellor McDermout. the day,
April l. lS9z. When Josephine Hamilton
was called before Recorder M~cDonough?'
ing mouse, the witness, in
the spring TO see Mrs Hamilton. She
was IN a very nervous conldition." Wit
ness testifled that ne accompanied her
90 the SIatJon mouse. RECORDER McDon-
ough told her a warrant had been issued
for her arrest TOT blacknla.liEs Or. At
doctor. Inc witness could not remember
anything else rhat was said.
mrs. AIWeu was reGalled TO the stand.
She testlned that the Recorder asked Trsr
II she knew She was MS prisoner. she
answered.
II resume So" +.
why Go You the doctorE,
asked the Recorder.
Il didn't know l was doing So was
the answer.
Recorder McDcnough paroled her on
her statement that she had been married
to DR.. AtWeil.
Counsellor NcDermott asked the wit
ness when she married the defendant.
Mr.. Collins objected and a long argu-
nleipt ensued as to the relevancy of the
question. Another argument ensued aus
to whether the proceedings before Re
corder McDonough were a sufficient basis
for g suit of malicious prosecution.
DEFENSE'S OBJECTIONS OVER
RULED.
That the defendant went before Re
| corder McDonough and sWore to a COM
paint, and the arrest OF Mrs. Atwell
constituted malicious mischief. The go
ing before a magistrate and making a
complaint constituted prosecution. Ex-
Judge Hoffman, said that in this case
an affidavit had been made. She was
not arrested but merely requested to
come to court, and was discharged ait
once. The magistrate had no jurssdic-
ton. Judge Lippincott held that If there
formal discharge. there were the ele-
ments of persecution. Judge Hofnann
admitted this. but commended that there
had been no arrest. no examination, and
hnat she was not held before the Re-
corder at all. Judge L~ippincott concllld-
ed that there were sufficient grounds for
| continuing the case and the
| ION proceeded.
The testimony. adduced YESTERDAY. was