The morning call., 1895-01-03

sex Entire isolation from such visitors
Is exceptional in the highest degree The
appellant in the case at bar appears TO
nave been an agreeable and atlrac I've
woman. we'll educated and having consid-
cradle musical and artistic tastes and capa-
Dilltles. She was living with man oil
wealth. and II the relation between tnem
mad been reputed to be that OF marriage,
II Is d lfflcult to i'm agine why she ola not
nave number of respectable women
among her associates and visitors. But
practically she had none-afler she CON-
mehced to live openly with the deceased
at his house,
The evidence OH this point. as COM
mented upon by the court, includes the
statements of old and intimate friends OF
blythe. General Andrade aud a Mr..
berri had testified that they visited the
house constantly and knew Alice Edith as
MISS Dickson and not Mrs. Blytne:
and even the appellant herself testified
That Andrade always thought she was
Blythe.s niece. The same testimony was
borne by witness named Jefers, VINO
said that he once asked Blythe, DO you
intend to marry Alice ?" and that Blythe
replied. mo, but shall make her my
legal niece" Similar was the testimony
of George s. Irish. George Eggleton and
L. ID. Varney. Blythe's business agent at
San Francisco.
In addition. there was the testimony OF
was employed by Blythe for years as
body-guard. Deasy once asked Blythe
why he had discharged a certain c9lorad
girl, and Blythe replied that he was going
TO have Miss Dickson take charge OF the
house. and up to the death OF Blythe be
knew the appellant as Miss Dlckason.
Then again number OF letters were IN
troduced in evidence written by Alice
Edith Blythe-mostly while he was in
Mexic0-in which she addressed him as
Dear Uncle" and signed herself Your
niece" or 'Devotedly your niece" AS to
Blythe himself, he usually referred to her
as Miss Dickson, my niece Alice, house
keeper or cousin. In letters to friends he
always referred to her as Miss Dickson.
"We think that the foregoing is suff1-
Gent to Indicate the general charae ter OF
| the evidence for espondent-although 1t
forms but part Of the great mass of evil
dence." SAYS the Supreme Court.
"Appellantano doubt produced evidence
more or less favorable to her side. She
| introduced q number of witnesses. mostly
| trades people who had dealt with appellant
| or delivered packages at the house, who
thought she was Mrs. Blythe. But other
witnesses of the same character, that is,
| merchants and mechanics, who furnished
| goods or labor, did not think that she was
| Mrs. Blythe. There was also some testi-
| mony of casual acquaintance that on
| few occasions Blythe recognized or intro
duced her as his wife. VIVA: credence the
court gave to this testimony we do not
know; but they were m tiers about which
witnesses might have easily been mis-
| taken; and, at least, when considered in
| connection with the evidence above noticed
this testimony raised but slight conflict.
appellant explained why she wrote to
| Mr.. Blythe as uncle and signed the let
| ters as niece by saying that he did not
want it to be known in Mexico that he
cd Rat hy6 ho w oh n
deny his marriage in Mexico? OF this
there is no plausible explanation. It. was
| shown that Blythe, about the time be hrst
| became Intimate with appellant, had some
| trouble with woman named Firnan, ana
| this is set up as some excuse for secrecy;
| but all trouble with her was settled and
| ended In the fall of 1879. 1t was shown,
also, that In the presence of the gentle
men who visited the house the conduct of
| appellant was proper and ladylike. Other
| things favorable to appellant were. no
| doubt, shown. But the position to BIZ
maintained by appellant is this: That
| the evidence so owe Whelmingy prepon-
| derates 10 the point that appellant and
| deceased lived together as man and wife
| that there was no substantial conflict on
| this point, and that the court below
| abused its discretion in finding otherwise
| Such position is Utterly untenable.
"We see no errors-lf any there are-of
decision of the case. Neither do We see
any ground for a new trial on the score Of
newly discovered evidence. Under the
| foregoing views We deem 1t unnecessary
TO notice the many positions taken by
counsel for respondent (Forence Blythe
| Hinckley) as to the requisite proof of an
| unsolemEized marriage, nor to review the
| many authorities cited by counsel for
| both Sides Those views lead us clearly
| to the conclusion that the findings OF the
| Superior Court should not be disturbed"
| Inc courts opinion. written by Justice
Mcfarland, Is concurred In by Justices
De Haven, Van Fleet. Garoutte and FitZ-
| gerald. Chief Justice Beatty and Justice
Harrison being disqualified, had not par
ticipated in the decision. SO, with the ex-
ception of few trifiing appeals that may
result from Judge Coffey's order OF distri-
button there should be little chance for the
courts to meddle with the millions left by
Thomas "a. Blythe, to which Florence
Biythe-Hinckley has been adjudged en-
titled to succeed.