The San Francisco call., 1896-01-11


city to state under oath, AZ cannot tell whether
that is my picture or not" And she had the
audacltY TO state that she had breach in her
physical and mental system from 1874 to 1886,
and don know whether she gave birth
to child or not. She don't claim she was in
an insane asylum or ever had physician or
took medicine.
Dr. Brown told plain, straightforward
statement-the truthful statement of a man
who had The great moral courage to arrest a
woman who tried to cast scandal upon him.
Attorney Guilfoyle followed, and in the
course OF his argument said:
Counsel for the other side has stated it took
courage to have this woman arrested. l would
Ike 10 call one instance to his attention. While
the doctor was upon the stand his attorney said
he was restrained by the rules of evidence from
answering certain questions we asked him. No
sane man would have done what the doctor
did on the 22d OF November. He believed the
statement OF the defendant and knew that it
was not false. The doctor acknowledged his
guilt by paying this money.
At this thrust at the prosecuting witness,
a peculiar smile was seen to play about the
lips OF the defendant, who sat just back of
and between her two attorneys.
Continuing, Attorney Guiifoyle said:
The whole case is this. 1t is matter of
yeracity between minister of the Gospel and
this woman. claim that that man who would
lay trap for the widows and daughters OF his
congregation is not TO be believed.
Applause followed which was summar-
ily checked by the Judge, who exhibited
considerable anger at the unseemly
demonstration.
l claim that the conduct of the doctor dur
ing this case shows that he was guilty. and
claim that his conduct in parting with his
5000 was not tho courage of a man who could
prove his innocence. He afraid that the
thing would be noised abroad and that the
arrest of this woman and her conviction and
punishment would vindicate him. That is his
he XVaG he inn aanf fha
counsel claimed he would have thrown his
whole life open and would not have been
afraid to testify as to what the secret was he
was afraid OF.
Attorney Guilfoyle followed closely the
line of argument that his colleague had
Travelled. In conclusion he said
Would an honest man permit himself to be
shut OF from testifylng to the truth? Counsel
for the other side saiG he did not want to pun
ish this woman, but wanted to support a prfn-
ciple. The principle to prevent the whole
truth from coming out, to prevent an investi-
cation into the life OF this prosecuting wit
ness.
Reuben II. Lloyd made the closing argu.
ment. He said:
1t has been asserted here that Dr. Brown has
two or three lawyers. That is not true. DR..
Brown did not employ me- He had no means
10 employ me. 1t Is not necessary for me to
say who employed me. am here on behalf OF
the people. am not here to pander to the
people who come here to hear the salacious de-
tails which were expected to come out. have
an utter contempt for these people (taking in
the whole courtroom with sweep of his eyes).
That is what they are here for. They have no
interest in this case. They have no interest in
the good OF the community. | am not here to
pander to that element. We are not here to
try the doctor. There is a forum to try him.
This woman is now before her forum. am
mere TO try this woman. l am here to show
that this woman is guilty of this crime, a
crime greater than murder.
Counsel then made reference to the first
demand for $1,000, which DR.. Brown had
testified the defendant had made. This
elected from the defendant repeated utter
ances of THAT is a Iie.''
When a reference was made by Mr.
Lloyd on the value to the doctor of his
character the defendant disdainfullv IN an
undertone remarked for the evident benefit
OF the spectators, "Umph! 'Umph
characterp'
Lloyd denounced Mrs. Baddin as a myth
and claimed that the entry in the book of
Mrs. Davidson showing that Mrs. Baddin
had made purchase there on the 10th of
December, 1895, was unreliable and un-
worthy OF any consideration, as it bore
evidence of having been manufactured for
use IN this case. Continuing he said:
Defendant showed herself shrewd and in
telIgent witness. She is evidently an old hand
at the business. No one but on old hand could
nave gohe on the stand and done as she did.
Novlrgin witness could do that. She is an old
warrior, as your Honor must be aware, from
your experience with criminals.
Referring again to the question of the
doctors alleged misconduct Attorney
Lloyd plainly intimated that DR.. Brown
has decided to ask for an investigation by
ms church people when he said: There
IS proper forum for that, and it will be
heard there, too"
quite ripple of laughter was created by
the counsel's reference to the peculiar loss
of memory by the defendant in saying that
there was rush of money in her pocket
simultaneously with the rush OF blood to
her head.
Judge Campbell Immediately on the con-
c!uslon OF the argument delivered his de-
cision as follows:
In TINS case it is my duty under the code to
Aist hilu whether or not crime has been CON-
iaitted as charged in the com plant, and then,
II u !; i Inu that crime has been committed, to go
iully lhto the evidence and see whether there
the crime charged in the complaint. l have
gwen great deal of time and thought to this
case 1or don believe | have ever had a more
important case than this before me.
Inc testimony in the case shows that the
money was received by the defendant from
Ihe complalnlng witness, how defendant re-
celVeu |, and 1t IS clear to my mind that she
went deliberately to the doctor 10 extort this
money anu received the money.
Inc money that the complaining witness lost
Is u mere trlie. She comes into court TO make
Aer defense and she attempts to Ia ke his good
name. IL Is matter of record that all black