Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1895-11-19
Mr.. OLMSTEAD TESTIFIES
Important Evidence in the Big Will
Case.
A Nurse Brought Into Court by Officers
The Inst Hours of Mrs.
O1msteaI.


testimony would all be In tomorrow after
loon. and that the case would be finally
concluded by verdict not later than FRI
day.
DIR. W. K Shute was the first witness
called today, and, on behalf of Mr.. Ohm
stead, ne testified that she became gravely
i'll in March, 1889, and died the first of the
following August. She was not told that
she had Brights disease because of the
harmful effect it would have upon her. The
witness attended her for about three weeks
III JuIe, and found her very nervous. main
ly because of her anxiety to leave the city.
To Mr.. Perry the witness stated that Mrs.
Olmstead's system was more or less af-
fected at all times during her last illness
by the poison resulting from the disease.
A Legal Point.
The first husband of Mrs. Webb, Mr..
Charles A. Ball, was the next witness call
ed on behalf of Mr.. Olmstead. stating that
from 1879 to 1894 he was the husband Of
Mrs. Webb, when they were divorced.
Upon that sta tement counsel for Mrs. Webb.
Messrs r. Ross Perry and Enoch Tot
ten, objected to the testimony of Mi. Ball,
on the ground that having once been the
husband of Mrs. Webb, his testimony was
incompetent under the rule that husband
cannot testify for or against the wife.
Mr.. Henry E. Davis. on behalf of Mr..
Olmstead. commended that In the Guiteau
case Judge Cox ruled that divorce re-
moved such a disqualification, and, the
Court in General Term having sustained
that ruling in affirming the conviction OF
GEiteau, he argued that it was now the
law here
Judge Bradley concurred with Mr.. Davis,
and, overriding the objection of Mrs. Webb's
counsel. allowed the witness to proceed.
An exception was noted to the courts rul-
ipr nd fhn nd rnro
made applicable to every question asked
and answered by Mr.. Ball.
The witness then related his remembrance
of the conference between Mr.. Olmstead
of the estate of her husband Immediately
after the funeral the late Hayward NJ.
Hutchinson, contradicting several stat
ments testified to by the witness former
wife and his mother-in-law.
Mrs Webb was not present in court dur
ing the testimony of her former husband,
coming in shortly after he left the stand.
and his testimony was mainly directed to
interfere in the management of the estate
of Mr.. Hutchinson.
An Attachment.
One of the witnesses summoned on behalf
of Mr.. Olmstead was Miss Jenny Dauchy, a
professional nurse, who attended his wife
during her last illness, and this morning he
submitted an affidavit to the court to the eff
feet that Miss Dauchy had refused to obey
his summons. He stated in the affidavit that
last Thursday he called with his counsel
at 33i LIST street northeast. where Miss
Dauchy was engaged, and, although he saw
her through glass door in the house. the
servant who answered the door told him
that she was not in. Finally when he insist
ed that she was. Miss Dauchy came out. de-
claring that she would not go to court, and
saying that If she did she would do him no
good.
After filing the affidavit Mr.. Davis asked
for an attachment for Miss Dauchy, and the
court directed that it issue.
testimony regarding the affectionate re-
iationS existing between Mr.. and Mrs. Ohm
stead was given by Alfonso Jackson, and
George Douglass, colored servants. and Miss
Mary Coffey, formerly a modiste in this
city.
Mr.. John Paul Jones followed with testi-
mony to the same effect.
Nurses Testimony.
Miss Jenny Dauchy, the professional
nurse. having been brought in on an at
tachment. she was called to the witness
stand. She was so badly frightened. how
ever. that she had to be assisted to the
stand, and it was five or ten minutes be-
fore she recovered herself sufficiently to
testify. Even then, the court having told
her that there was no occasion for alarm,
she was SO disturbed that her testimony
was heard with great difficulty.
The witness, in response to the questions
of Mr.. Jere NJ. Wilson. stated that she at
tended Mrs. Olmstead during her last ILL
ness, from June 16 to her death So far as
she was able to judge, Mrs. Olmstead's
mind was perfectly clear. Mr.. Olmstead
was unusually attentive and devoted to his
wife. and seldom left the house. Mrs. Ohm
steads mother and sister often visited her,
and 1t was witness who judged of the wis
dom Of admitting them to the sick cham
Der. Mr.. Olmstead's treatment Of Mrs.
Hutchinson and Mrs. Webb appeared to
witness to be very pleasant.
Referring to the portrait of the first Mrs.
Olmstead Miss Dauchy said that the Sec
ond Mrs. Olmstead spoke admiringly of her
husbands devotion to the memory Of his
first wife. Mr.. Olmstead, she said, was al
ways gentlemanly and kind. About twenty
minutes after Mrs. Omstead'S death, at the
suggestion of Mr.. Olmstead witness tele-
phoned that fact to Mrs. Hutchinson and
Mrs. Webb.
The witness was cross-examined by Mr..
Perry, who inquired If. when Mrs. Webb
said, in answer to the telephone message,
that she and her mother would be right up.
Mr.. Olmstead directed her to tell them that
they could not come until noon of next day
Miss Dauchy could not recall that alleged
fact, but stated that in point of fact they
did not call until noon Of next day. For
four days previous to her death Mrs. Ohm
stead. said the witness, was unconscious
but she insisted that prior to that time the
mind OF the patient was perfectly clear.
Mr.. OImstcnd Testifies.
The testimony Of Miss Dauchy concluded.
Mr.. John F. Olmstead was called to the
witness stand in his own behalf. He stated
that he was born in 1S41. came here in 1861
and married his first wife in 1861 She died
in 1880. and in 1882 he married his second
wife, Miss Katie Hutchinson.
Referring to the statement of Mrs Webb
that in returning from her fathers funeral
he suggested the sale of her mothers dia.
monds, Mr.. Oimstead stated that there was
not a word of truth in it. Nor did he ever
suggest to Mrs. Hutchinson, as stated by
her. that Mr.. Hutchinson's will should be
broken. He did, however. advise her, when
she made the inquiry, that she could dis
regard the will of her husband. At his sug-
gestion she consulted Mr.. VIM. F. Mat
tingiy, his attorney, and she once remarked
that the will did not leave her as well off
as she was during her husbands life.
Referring to the statement OF Mrs. Webb
that he rudely declined Mrs. Hutchinson's
invitation to partake of oysters shortly after
Mr.. Hutchnsons death. the latter part of
May or the early part of June, Mr.. Olmstead
said he never ate oysters in May or June,
and that there was no truth in Mrs Webb's
statement. He also denied her statement
that he had assured her of an annual in
come of 10000 if she would join in an effort
to break her fathers will,