The morning call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1878-1895, 1895-01-30

"We twice tried in vain to get deposit
ton from this witness" said Delmas, ''and
since that time he has been retained as an
attorney for the other side. shall insist
upon the enforcement of this law in regard
to privileged communications. His attor-
ney had no right while Mr.. Barron was
living to reveal the condolences that had
been reposed in him.
The widow has no right now that the
husband is dead for her own pecuniary ad-
vantage to remove the seal placed upon
the lips of the attorney by the husband
who is now in his grave. For this reason
the objection that is made by Mr.. Pillsbury
himself should be respected"
Pillsbury at this point made statement
to the court which was rather startling,
and which seemed to indicate that all the
arguments in regard to the admissibility
of his testimony were useless in that court.
He said:
81 have taken advice upon this question
and with all due respect for this court
will say that I would decline to answer
any of the questions that l regard as privi-
legged until I am advised to do so by the
Supreme Court. In regard to what Mr.
Deknas says 1 will explain that l refused
to give a deposition to the proponents as
well, so that l treated both sides alike.
have not been employed as an attorney in
this case in the main, but am of counsel
in branch of it."
"In regard to what you say about not an
swering the question if you were directed
to do Sc" replied Judge Lorigan, 81 will
say that that statement does not affect this
court in the least. If it is decided to be
proper for you to answer the question the
usual means will be taken to compel you
to answer. You are to be regarded the
same as any other witnesses and have no
more privileges. Howeter, l regard the
communication as privileged and shall
sustain the objection"
The examination of Piilsbury was then
resumed by Judge CARRIER. He testified
that during his acquaintance with him he
saw Mr.. Barron sometimes in six months
and sometimes once day. The conversa-
tions were always on business.
Have you an opinion" asked CARRIER,
"as to whether or not Edward Barron was
of sound and disposing mind when he
made his will2"
hdNO Oil OpAllAOh pun OAdb O0DJCNOt
replied the witness.
"What was that opinionP"
81 refuse to answer that question upon
the grounds before stated"
Then followed more arguments by coun-
sci. Leib and CARRIER claimed that the
witness could answer this question without
betraying professional confidence. Delmas
urged that the opinion of the witness upon
soundness or unsoundness of the mind of
the testator was founded upon number of
professional communications.
II such an opinion was stated in evil
dence then it would be the right of the
court and jury to inquire into it and it
would be competent cross-examination to
bring out the details of the numerous
communications that the court had al
ready decided were privileged.
The court took this view of the case and
sustained the objection to the question.
Pillsbury then testified that there was
no communication between him and Mrs.
Barron In regard to the framing of the will.
The examination of this witness was not
concluded.
Just before adjournment there was some
discussion as to the possible length of the
trial. Leib suggested that the witness
might be recalled after he returned to Cali
fornia in February.
!. Delmas was of the opinian that the case
would be closed before that time, possibly
at the end of next week Judge 1origan
remarked that he hoped that the latter es
innate was the correct one. Pillsbury was
allowed to make rush for the 'clock
train for San Francisco and the court ad-
journed till 10 O'Clock tomorrow morning.
---
Missouri Opposed to Football.