The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-03-06
THE CLOSING ARGUMENT
Attorney Delmas' Eloquent
Plea on Behalf of the
Contestant.
THE COURTROOM THRoNGED.
An Immense Audience Listens to
the Brilliant Address of
the Lawyer.

SAN JOSE, March 5.-Attorney Delmas'
well-known reputation for eloquence drew
an audience to the Courthouse to-day such
as has never been seen here before, and the
throng that packed the courtroom and
overflowed into the lobby lost never word
of the lawyers brilliant plea 1t was the
beginning of the closing argument in the
contest over the estate of the late Million
aire Barron, and it was for the contestant,
George Barron, that the attorney spoke.
Judge CARRIER finished the concluding
argument in behalf of the proponents this
morning. He urged that portions of the
testimony Of P. J. Sullivan proved that the
claim that Edward Barron had no will of
his own was false. Sullivan admitted that
he was unable to secure from his alleged
weak employer what he (Sullivan) believed
were his rights. AS for Mrs. Barron she
had not invited the litigation, but was un-
willingly party to it in order to defend
the honor of her dead husband and her
self.
The concluding argument in the case and
the closing plea in behalf of the contestant,
George Barron, was opened at 10 40 o clock
by Mr.. Delmas. He said that after the
great storm of eloquence from three able
attorneys upon the other side it became
his duty to restore the landmarks and
beacon lights that were to guide the jury
in obtaining a verdict. The statement
made by Attorney Bowden that the pro-
ponents had desired to throw the mantle
of charity over the grave of the first Mrs.
Barron was impressively referred to by the
speaker. He spurned the aspersion upon
the memory of the dead woman, and
proved by the evidence that the contestants
had endeavored to show what was the
cause of the separation of Edward Barron
from his first wife, but the other side by
their objections had prevented this testi-
mony from being secured. Delmas de-
clared that the mother of George Barron
did not need mantle of charity over her
grave as there was nothing that was sought
to be covered up there.
At the afternoon session of the court
every available inch of sitting and stand
ing room was occupied inside and outside
the courtroom, and many were unable
even to get within the sound of Mr..
Delmas' voice,
Mr.. Delmas pointed out at length the
inconsistencies and injustice of the will of
Edward Barron, and contended that it
could not have emanated from Just and
sound mind under the meaning of the law.
He said that wrong had been done, not
only to George but also to an innocent
wife that he may ally himself with in the
future and her innocent children In case
George Barron should die, according to the
terms of the will his wife was to receive
nothing in case she was childless, and in
the event that she had children they were
to receive only one-half of their fathers
property, the other half to go to Eva Rose
Barron.
In the case of the death of the son, Viii
liam, his children were to receive all. Why
was this unjust discrimination made
against the innocent prospective children
OF the contestant? he asked. By the
terms of the will Mrs. Barron would have
absolute control over the property to the
value of over 81, SOC, 600, unanswerable to
any court for her stewardship, and in case
the will was not broken she would take
this vast amount to Ireland, where she
would spend the remainder of her days.
Mr.. Delmas did not conclude his argu-
ment to-day, but will occupy the entire
day tomorrow.