The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1895-05-29
THE HOUSE OF CARL
That Note Case of the CDR" Brought
Up in Court Again.
COMES OUT LOSER THIS DAY
Schultz. the Man Who Has Been
on Trial for Some Time. Gives
a Bit of Interesting Testi-
mony-BrIef Session.

oNhhiAEs lIt HOltu European SDeCldl-
ist," on the charge of forgery, was on
trial for a short time to-day before a
jury in Judge Speer's court. but 1t
came to a sudden end and resulted in
an ignominious defeat for the house of
the Schultzes. They had an honest at
torney representing them, and as the
trial progressed and he got thoroughly
familiar with the facts in the case, he
got up. and of his own motion. and
against the protests of the Schultzes,
he dismissed the case in the midst of
the trial.
Fannie Matusewitz was plaintiff in
the case and John ORourke defendant
"A. "A. Lisker and DIR" Schultz were
also defendants, but they allowed it to
go by default. In his opening state
ment to the jury, Judge De Wolfe, one
of the plaintiffs attorneys, said that
the evidence would show that Carl
Schultz got into some trouble last year
on criminal charge and he went TO
Helena and collected some money on
note belonging to his wife. After he
secured the money he was arrested,
and the money was taken from his per-
son by Marshal McNichols Prior TO
this time the First National bank of
Butte commenced an action against
Schultz, A. A. Lisker and John
O'Rourke, to recover on the 50 500 note
executed by them, and the money in
the hands of Schultz was attached.
Schultz at first ordered the officer to
pay the note. but Mrs. Schultz pro-
tested and said the money belonged to
her and she only agreed to pay the
note as a purchaser of the instrument,
which she did, and took an assignment
go ~. 4
transferred ii to Fannie MatusewitZ.
G. r. Leonard, for the defendant,
said there was no dispute as to the exc
cution of the note, but that Schultze
sought, through Mrs. Matusewitz, to
collect the entire amount from Mr..
O'Rourke, who was willing to pay his
share of it, Mr.. Leonard said that
about a year ago something occurred
which made Carl Schultz believe that
some other climate than that of Butte
would be more agreeable to his health,
so he started on a quick search for that
salubrious climate, but the officers over
took him in Helena, in disguise. and
caught him as he was trying to hide
in a box car.
At this point of Mr.. Leonard's state
ment the attorneys for the plaintiff
made an objection and urged that the
statement was incompetent and the al
legations could not be introduced in
the case. After some argument MIR.
Leonard dropped the subject and told
about the arrest and how the money
found on Schultz was turned over TO
Deputy Sheriff Elderkin on an order
signed by Schultz and his wife. He
| said that it would be shown beyond a
doubt that the note was not purchased
| by Mrs. Schultz, but that on the con-
| tray, MIR. Davis Of the bank, had posi-
| lively refused to sell IL and had said
that the bank was not selling Mr..
~ -
by Schultz and the note was cancelled
and therefore could not have been as
signed by Schultz to his wife and by
her transferred to Mrs. MatusewitZ.
+. S. Booth was the first witness for
the plaintiff and testified he had been
consulted by Marshal McNichols in re-
gard to the money in his possession,
and accompanied him to the bank. At
torney Haldorn was there and drew
up an order. which Carl Schultz signed,
inStructing the marshal to pay over to
the bank $3,00l.1 of the money taken
from him and which he claimed be-
longed to his wife. Mr.. Booth insisted
that Mrs. Schultz should sign the or
der, which she did, and the money was
turned over to Mr.. Davis, the bank
cashier. The latter got the note and
was about to cancel IL, when Mr.. and
Mrs. Schultz cried hold on and said
they wanted the note without cancella-
ton. Mr. Davis said the bank was not
selling it's paper and kept the note, and
the deputy sheriff took a certificate of
deposit for the $3,0Ol.11, and they then
all left the bank.
Attorney Haldorn testified as to his
connection with the case and said he
represented Mrs. Schultz and tried to
get the money from the marshal for
Mrs. Schultz. The matter was carried
on for several days, and then Mrs.
Schultz insisted on paying the note and
rel nD CitaCg ha a J. 10 xKva
posed to it. but she took the note with
the banks endorsement that il had
been paid by Carl Schultz. Mr.. Hal
dorm objected to the endorsement. Mrs.
Schultz told him that she wanted to
get possession of the note and bring
suit against the other two makers. He
advised her against il. Mr.. Haldorn
said, on cross-eXamination, that he
did not understand that the note was
delivered to Mrs. Schultz and that he
told her at the time that she had put
her foot into il. He regarded the
transaction as a payment of the note.
Or" Schultz said that he was
stopping for several days in Helena
and collected $500 on a note from c.
l.. Brunun. The note belonged to and
was payable to Mrs. Schultz. When
he was arrested and the money taken
from him he told the marshal that II
belonged to Mrs. Schultz. He told
about the transactions at the bank and
denied that he paid the note.
Did you ever pay the note with
your own money!?
"Nuzzer."
Ibid you intend to pay the note?"
"Nuzzer."
on cross-eXamination by Mr.. Leon
ard the doctor" said his residence
was i'm Butte. though he had 'prac-
ticed medicine" in California the past
six or seven months. In referring to
his arrest in Helena he said he had
gone over there TO collect a note from
the man BTunun. whose name he could
not spell without referring to a note
book He said he had intended to re-
turn To Butte in a few. days. but was
arrested before he left Helena. He was
arrested on the 4th or 9Th of last June
and had arrived in Helena about the
first.
when did Brunun pay you the
note?"
"On the third"