The San Francisco call., 1896-08-27

mind, for the purpose of advising her, was
/ to satisfy her that any form by which
! each party distinctly stated that he or she
| took the other was sufficient, and the
| further matter as TO whether or not q pa
per of that kind. to be effective as such,
required acknowledgment. Ny mind is
not clear now on the proposition as TO
whether the paper was or was not signed.
I couldn't say that it was; 1 can't say that
it was not"
"Did she in that connection, Judge, IN
asking you your advice and directions,
make mention of Senator Fair?"
'She did,
What did she say ?''
''Well, / knew from her statement at
that time, or at another time, or from the
paper itself, that the intended marriage
contract was TO be between her and
Senator FAIR. Whether she stated to me
that at that time or whether it was read
to me from the paper at that time do not
now recollect. OF course this matter was
over four years ago and l made no men,
orandum. / did not prepare the paper.
What intend to direct your attention
to particularly Is whether in that conver-
sation, when she showed you the paper
and spoke about an acknowledgements,
she made mention Of meeting thereafter
to be had between her and Senator Fair?"
"She did,"
s'She said that she was in hurry about
it because she had an appointment to meet
the party and had to act huTriedly."
Was that the last conversation that
you recall having had upon that subject,
touching the marriage, in the year 1892,
with Mrs. Craven"
THAT is the last conversation in that
connection, occurring during that year
that now recall. [ have an impression
- ~ oh ha
time that Mrs. Craven was actively en-
gagged In preparing public entertainment
by the children of her school. 1t was
about the time of the closing of the
schools. think the schools were closed
in the latter part of May"
This closed the direct examination by
Mr.. DeImas, who turned the witness over
to Mr.. Pierson.
Under cross-examination the witness
stated that these interviews extended over
a period of about two months, dating
from the first talk upon the subject. Wit
ness further stated that the handwriting
of the body of the marriage contract sub
mitted to him was that of Mrs. Craven,
and that no one was present except him.
self and Mrs. Craven when this paper was
shown him.
Mr.. Pierson then asked this significant
question:
ibid you understand that the paper ex-
hibited to you was some executed docu-
ment of a marriage that had been con-
summated or was only proposed mar
riage contract?'
To this the witness cautiously replied:
s'That would involve, l suppose, the
question whether or not the paper ar that
time bore the signatures of both parties.
AS to whether it was an executed contract
or not have endeavored to refresh my
recollection. have talked with counsel
about it and l have talked with Mrs.
Craven about it, to see if could fix in my
mind an impression to enable me to say
under oath just exactly what the facts
were in that connection. desire TO state the
facts as fully as | can recall them, and the
condition OF my mind on that subject is
Just exactly as l have stated it to Mr.. Del
mas I can't say that l have distinct
impression on my mind in regard to that
question-whether or not there were on
that paper the signatures of Mr. Fair and
Mrs. Craven at that time; neither can l
say that they were not there. l have an
impression on my mind that she was
about to see him and that the matter of
the acknowledgement of the paper was a
pending matter, and that she left my Of
fee intending to see him and take some