The Portland daily press., 1895-05-07

[>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~>~>~
Seventh-That the words relating to
the children" and "family" of the said
respondent, Edmand b. Malet. Jr., in
cluded within that part of the bill ex-
cepted to by said defendants as imperti-
nent in said First Exception" are there
inserted as introductory to and a basis
for several other allegations in subse-
quent parts of said bill, which are ma
terial and pertinent to the said bill, and
arc not excepted to as impertinent by
said defendants; and by the allowance
of the said " First Exception" of said de-
PENDANTS and by expunging from said
bill the words excepted to by said First
| Exception" such other allegations based
| thereon and pertinent as aforesaid would
lose their force and effect, becoming un-
meaning and immaterial, and said COM
plainant would be wholly deprived of all
benefit thereof.
Eighth-That the words relating to
! the "debts and liabilities" included with
in that part Of the said bill excepted to
| by said. defendants as impertinent in said
Second Exception" are there inserted as
introductory to and basis for several
other allegations in subsequent parts of
said bill, which are material and perth
nent to said bill, and are not excepted to
| as impertinent by said defendants, and
| by the allowance of the Second Excep-
tionn of said defendants, and by expung-
| ing from said bill the words excepted by
| snid Second Exception" such other allie
cations based thereon and pertinent as
aforesaid would lose their force and
effect. become unmeaning sand inmate
rial, and the said complainant would be
wholly deprived Of all benefit thereof,
Ninth-That the First Exception of
said defendants cannot be allowed if
any of theswords included within that
part of the sbill excepted to as imperti-
nenr by said "First Exception" are per-
tinent to said bill.
Tenth-That the Second Exceptionn
of said defendants cannot be allowed if
any of the words included swithin that
part of the bill excepted to as imperti-
nent by said "Second Exception are per-
| inent to said bill.
> Eleventh-That the said bill prays re-
| lief on account ofthe alleged fraud of the
said defendant, Edmund B. Mallet,
Junior. and that the part of said bill ex-
nent in said "First Exception" is a ma
terial part of the allegations of said bill,
proper and necessary in stating and
charging such fraud.
TwelfGh-That the said bill prays relief
on account of the alleged fraud of the
said defendant, Edmund B. Mallet,
Junior, and that the part of said bill ex-
nent in said Second Exception u is
material part of the allegations of said
bill, proper ana necessary in stating and
charging such fraud.
Mr.Gage argued that the allegations
objected to were necessary part of the
bill. and that they could not be taken
out; that the allegations relating to the
marriage of Mr.. and Mrs. MalIet must
stand as an important and necessary
part of the bill. So also the allegation
that after their marriage they lived to-
gether, each laboring for the advantage
Of the family. That Mr.. Mallet received,
as alleged by gift the sum of S7O0, 900,
that his manner Of treating Mrs Mallet
then changed and that he finally separat-
ed from her. MIR. Gage argued that all
the allegations were necessary and proper.
That IL was necessary to state that the
property owned by Mr.. Mailet was
diminished, because that led up to the
making of the very sweeping deed of as
signment by Mr.. Mallet to Judge Sy-
monds and Mr.. Cook. 1t was necessary
to show that debts existed in order that
it be shown what led to the making OF
the assignment, and the circumstances
under which Mrs. Mallet signed the deed
she now seeE S to have set aside Mr.
Gage argued that every allegation in the
bin should remain, otherwise it would
not be possible to obtain a correct idea
Master long list of citations in support
of the position taken by Mr.. Ulmer and
his firm on the above points.
The Master suggested that the cita-
tions should be left with him for exami-
nation.
Mr.Gage submitted his list of authori-
ties, and also handed to the Master his
brief given above.
1--WE have gigen clear picture of all
thee circumstances leading up to what
wee lain was the promise that led Mrs.
Mallet to sign the deed
Mr.. Cook said he did not propose to
take up much time. The only question
for the Master to consider and OH which
he WAS to report to the court, is whether
the exceptions taken by the defendant
are good or bad. He replied to the LEGAL
points raised by Mr.. Gage, and Insisted
that every allegation objected to by the
defendants was of q nature to preiudice
the case. The defence will stand on the
safe rule of Judge Peters. "If a certain
matter cannot be put in Issue it is inner
tinent."
Mr.. Cook argued that it was necessary
to show what statements were made TO
Mira. Mallet at the time she signed the
deed, not what were the relations exis-
tent between Mr.. and Mrs. Mallet seven
years or twenty years before. The allie
cations that Mr.. Mallet was worth $780,
600, an that he lost much or little of
his property is not material. The de-
fendant has objected to nothing material
to the case, but with Judge Peters will
insist that his rule is good rule and
must be enforced.
The Master took the papers in the case.