The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1896-01-23

ness why he loaned Mr.. Mitchell $1,000
and what his object was. Just In
kindness to her" was Mr.. MCCORMICK
reply. "She said she could make money
in the millinery business If / would
help her along"
The note which Mr.. Mccormick had
paid at the States Savings bank was
offered I'm evidence on direct examina-
tfon, burt was objected to and ruled out.
On cross-examination, however, the
transaction was fully brought out and
Mr.. Lindsay took advantage to offer
the note in evidence again, and 1T was
admitted.
Edward ]. Mitchell, husband of the
madame, was the first witness for the
defense. He said he knew nothing
about the first $1,000 loaned his wife by
Captain Mccormick, and IL there had
been such a loan he had no knowledge
of It, He Joined Mr.. Mccormick in the
81 900 note at Murray's bank, and that
was all the money he knew or MRS.
Mitchell receiving from Mr.. Mccormick.
Mitchell said his wife left for Chicago
on April 16, the day before Mccormick
was alleged to have given her the $1,000
in currency On cross-examination py
Mr.. Lindsay, the witness said he fixed
the date by reason of the fact that he
was paid off at the mine where he was
working ON the 18th, and that his wife
had been compelled to postpone her
trip to Chicago until he got his pay, so
that she could have money enough TO
go ON. He had previously given her
800 for the trip. He had given A. r.
Bray am order for his time, and early
ON THE morning of the 18th he called at
Bray's store and got a check for the
money due him and afterwards had
the check cashed at gambling house.
G.. +. Booth, manager for A. +. Bray,
mn LODI N al that
April. 1895, Mr.. Bray was absent in
California, and during all that month
he had entire charge of the business
and no check was issued to any man
Of the name of Edward ]. Mitchell
Madame Mitchell was present at the
afternoon session of court, but kept her
face heavily yelled. The defense was
permitted to reopen the case for the
purpose of having the woman testify.
She said she had known Mr.. McCor-
mick for three years and fatty denied
that she ever had any business or
money transactions other than the
81 900 loan from Murray's bank. and
positively denied the other $1,000 loan
and said she had never asked him for
any money except the Murray loan.
She claimed to have been on the train
between Butte and st. Paul at the
time Mr. Mccormick alleged he gave
her the 81. 900 sued for. She was shown
the letter sent by her from Chicago
and she said she might have written
part of IT, but not all. Mrs. Mitchells
testimony had some difficulty in get
ting through her thick veil and Mr.
Baldwin requested her to remove the
covering. NO. sir" she said, II don't
care to; my face Is sore, and will not
show it," And she did not.
on cross-examination Mrs. Mitchell
could point out only one word in the
letter which she did not write and that
was the word bank"
did you not say to me in my office
on one occasion that If you owed Cap
tain Mccormick 81. 900 he had no proof
of it, and he could not make you pay
it," asked Mr.. Lindsay.
mo, sir; / never said that"
ION your trip east did you write to
Captain Mccormick from st. Paul."
mo sir. i did not"
The witness was shown a letter she
had written TO her husband from Du-
luth. In which she had said: II wrote
TO Mccormick from st. Paul and he
surely must have got it," Mrs. Mitch
ell then said she might have written,
but had forgotten it. She insisted she
never received money from him but
once.
Then what do you mean by this SEN
tence in your letter to him from Chica-
go asking for the money and saying, I
can pay you one thousand in a month
after my arrival and make payments
on the other as fast as possible
Mrs. Mitchell hesitated, but her veil
hid her features. Finally she said the
matter did not relate to business af-
fairs You were sane when you wrote
that letter. We're you not?" asked Mr..
Lindsay.
Yes. sir; I suppose So"
Then tell the jury what you meant
on the other as fast as possible
1T did not relate to business mat
ters." was the reply. after some hesita-
ton.
In answer TO further questions, Mrs
Mitchell said she had $500 OF her own
money when she left for Chicago: that
she remained in Chicago three months,
and was sick part of the time. She
brought no goods back to Butte with
her, and gave Mr.. Mccormick no chat
tel mortgage. but she bought a house
and lot for which she paid about $500.
paying about half cash.
At the conclusion OF Mrs. Mitchelrs
testimony the case was argued and il
took the Jury about 10 minutes TO find
a verdict for the plaintiff for the 81, 900
with interest and costs. The property
which Mrs Mitchell purchased on her
return from Chicago is under attach
ment I'm the case, but she claims il is a
homestead and exempt from execution,
and another suit will probably grow
out Of that
The partnership heretofore existing
between ID. w. Mcintyre and J. L. Car
roll and known as the firm of McIn-