The San Francisco call., 1896-07-02

/ Mrs. Lucy W. Auzerais- Hoyte has a
| temper OF her own. So has Attorney Crit
tenden Thornton. When they clashed IN
Judge Trouut's court yesterday. the crowd
OF aliens in the back row waiting 10 be
naturaiized trem bled with fear and several
OF them glanced longingly toward the
door.
Attorney Thornton's wife is suing the
actress for $1,000 claimed to be due for dam
| ages inflicted by the latter upon the goods
OF furnished house which Mrs. Thornton
rented to Mrs. Hoyte. Mr.. Thornton is
conducting the case on behalf of his
| spouse, and consequently his zeal in the
matter is somewhat warmer than molten
metal. When Mrs. Hoyte testified he
asked her questions, some of which she
seemed unable to answer before she had
relieved her feelings by grinding her teeth.
The nerve-racking sound of their gnashing
| had hardly time to die away before the
echoes were again awakened, so fast did
the belligerent lawyer fire Objectionable
queries at the lady of the resonant jaw.
The facts in the case, as set forth in the
complaint, which was filed in Septem Der.
1895, are that Mrs. Hoyte, who was then
Mrs. Louis AuZerais, rented furnished
house on Pacific avenue, near Pierce
street, from the Thorntons, for which it
was agreed to pay $3.50 per month rent.
On September Is the attorney was in
formed by telephone that his tenants
would vacate next day. After their depar.
ture Thornton inspected the house and in
the language of the complaint found it
''foully hltny and having the appearance
OF not being cleaned or swept for months"
Much OF the furniture, it was claimed,
was also broken, burned or stained.
The case has been postponed and hung
fire on one pretext or another and cid not
come up for trial until yesterday. Even
then further delay was sought The at
torney for the defense tried to introduce a
supplemental answer wherein the name
OF Hereward Hoyte, the present husband
OF the defendant, was included. The mo-
tion was argued at length ana brought to
light legal point that will be of interest
to many people.
Mrs. Lucy w. Auzerais- Hoyte was
divorced from Louis a. Auzerais on March
Is, 1895. and married to Hereward Hoyte on
March "A, 1896. 1t was claimed that Hoyte
could not be included as defendant in
the suit as the husband of Mrs. Auzerais
because she had not been divorced from
her former husband for year.
The statutes provide that during the
twelve months following the decision of
the Superior Court in such a case the de-
feated contestant may appeal to the Su-
preme Court. Therefore person who
marries a divorcee within that period
takes chance that such proceeding be
brought and the divorce set aside. Hoyte,
IT was argued, will not be legally the hus-
band of Mrs. AuZerals until the year has
expired. Judge Trout lent some signifi-
canoe to the argument by denying the
motion to enter the amended complaint.
Mrs. Auzerais-Hoyte was the first wit
ness called, and the strained relations be-
tween her and Mr.. Thornton were at once
apparent. The attorney neglected no op-
portunity of referring to the unclean con-
dition IN which he says he found his prop
erty, and the witness overlooked no
chance to refer TO the poor quality and
general dilapidation of the goods when
she first took possession of them.
did you have the globes on the gas FIX
lures cleaned while you occupied the
placer" queried the lawyer.
Several times, but they were so COW
cred with fly specks that we found it i'm
possible to get them clean," replied the
witness.
You couldn't get fly specks off by look
ing at them," sneered Thornton.
And there were so many there when
moved IN that you conldn't remove them
with acid" said Mrs. Hoyte.
What was the condition of the Curtains
In the front room when you took posses
sion? ?" resumed the attorney.
The witness smiled wickedly. Rotten"
she replied.
Little personal illusions were plentiful
before the witness stepped down, but it
was developed that little son of the de-
fendant had removed pendulum from a
parlor clock, and had bestowed sundry
kicks and knocks upon the different pieces
OF furniture. Thornton claims TO have
counted l46 indentations made by the toes
OF shoes on one door and fifty-four on an
other. Mrs. Hoyte acknowledges that
there may be four or five in all.
Mr.. Thornton was on the stand detail
ing his troubles when court closed for the
n