The evening times., 1896-06-10
Mr.. Worthington Has no More.
Witnesses for Holt CaVeators.
HE OFFERED A FORTUNE.
Washington Holt Was willing to.
Give $4,000 for will-Admits 1t
ON the Stand-Also Told a Clerk uf
Register Wright Tint He Would He
Paid $1,000 to Find Such "a Paper.

The first witness was John c. Wilson,
formerly president of the safe deposit
company that was appointed admins
traitor OF Judge Hollis estate. He had
been on the stand earlier in the trial, and
testified again concerning the care that
had been taken with the papers gath
cred from the house on New Jersey avenue.
He said that lie remembered there was
memorandum among the papers that re-
ferred to testamentary bequests. The mem
orandum was undated and unsigned and
evidently in the handwriting of the judge.
Several charities were named on the slip,
many of which were followed by sums OF
money indicating the purpose OF the writer
to remember them in a will.
MR. HOLT CALLED.
At the conclusion of his examination
Mr.. Holt was called To the stand again.
Considerable time was spent by Major
Butterworth in trying to get the witness
| to fix and repeat an interview with Rep
| resentative Hit of Illinois, just after the
funeral of Judge Holt, in which the name
of Col. Sterrett figured largely. The at
tempt was Intellectual. =.
did you offer Col Wright, the former
register of wills, $40 600 II he would lind
will?''
II said before him would give that
| amount If will were found l did not
refer to this paper in dispute, though
Ibid you also offer his assistant $5,O0O?"
Il did -
Was your uncle easily moved to tears by
| JOY or sadness?' r-
'He was. / remember the time Grady
made his famous speech on Lincoln, in Bos-
ton. / read it TO my uncle from the paper
Tears ran down his cheeks as / Iead''
The witness testified that the judge had
told him probably thirty or forty times that
he was 10 be the executor of the will. He
could not fix the date OF any one of these
conversations.
The meeting of Mr.. DcvIin and the wit
ness at the Riggs House was referred to
again. He said he did not tell Mr.. Devlin
that he would consult with the other heirs
at-law about renting the Holt house on New
Jersey avenue. He was sure, too, that Mr..
Devln referred to the present occupants OF
the house, Judge Holt's old servants, as
.'uiggers."
WHAT HE DOES NOT BELIEVE.
Attention was next directed to tile al
legged will, when Major Butterworth handed
il to the witness and asked him to pointuut
the characteristics that caused him to say
the Will was not only forgery, but a
botch of forgery" He pointed out the
individual letters and curves in the mysteri-
GUS paper that We're not his uncle's.
Another thing" said he, Il don't be-
lieve my uncle ever referred to himself as
j. Holt in a legal paper. He always wrote
it, Joseph Holt, of the city of Washington,
District of Columbia This, say, was in
legal papers only.
The same thing is true about the figures
81 that follow the bequeathiDg phrase to
Miss ThrockmortoD. He always in legal
documents wrote figures out in full. I also
think it is an unscholarly paper and don't
think it sounds like my uncle"
You claim To be scholarly man. do you
not. Mr.. Holt" asked Major Butterworth.
mo, sir, / do not. ! got what education
l have at country schools, and afterward
from assuciating with smart men like you,
Gen. Bu;terworth.'
The witness admitted that tile will was
clear, and expressive of some intent.
though he did not believe it was the intent
Of his uncle or course it was human
nature that one should be Influenced by
prejudice in such matters.
L L.
w. T. Sherman jr., was called to sue
cced Mr.. Holt i'll the witness chair. Mr..
Darlington stated that the purpose of re-
calling Mr.. Sherman was to rebuilt the
testimony given yesterday by two wit
ncsscs for the caveatees concerning the
signature of Gen. Sherman among the wit
nesses to the alleged will.
Mr.. Worthington objected, holding that
claimed to be of rebutting nature under
any circumstances. Mr. Darlington re-
Piled, but the objection of his colleague
was sustained by Judge Bradley. An ex-
ception was reserved by Mr.. Darlington.
The ruling was a. ecided blow to the.
caveatees. and it had noticeable effect
upon the principals in the trial.
Mrs. Sterrett, the wife of Col. William
q. Sterrett- was called to the witness chair.
Mr.. Darlington promptly objected to any
questions asked her because she was the
wife of one Ct the interested parties in the
suit. and the court as promptly sustained
the objection.
'In,t,, VIII tender her to testify only
about the finding and sending Of the will,''
said Mr.. Worthiugton.
'Thatmight be the most vulnera BILE point"
said Mr.. Darlington as he again objected,
and the court sustained him.
Mrs. Washington d. Holt was rendered In
the same manner.
"Thcn We rest our case here, your honor,"
said Mt. WorthiDgton.
1t was just II :56 o'clock when this point
was reached. Mr.. Darlington asked for
recess until o'clock. and it was granted
FIGHTING EVERY INCH.
1t was very evident when the case was re-
sumed after recess that counsel for the
heirs were going to combat every available
point of the testimony with objections, and
that the task of Offering rebuttal evidence
was to be a difficult one.
Miss Mary Holt was asked by Mr. Dar-
lington to occupy the witnes So chair. She
was asked TO relate conversation she
had with Judge Holt where Col. Sterrett
formed the subject. On that occasion her
great uncle said he wondered what Col
Surrett did with all his money, because
he seemed to make plenty, but never had
much with him. The witness was excused
Mr. Darlington read deposition, over
the unsustained objection of Mr.. Worthing-
ton. of Mrs Fannie Ricketts,, widow of Gen.
Ricketts,, of San Jose, Cal.
The depoDent said that she lived in Wash
ington in 1873. In the month OF February
OF that year she and her husband attended
a dinner party at Judge Holt's home, on
New Jersey avenue.
Gems. Grant and Sherman and their wives
were all there, together with Secretary
and Mrs. Fish and others. She fixed the date
because t was within n month OF the second
Inauguration of Gen. Grant.
Luke Devlin was called hack 10 the stand.
Mr.. Darlington asked him to oexplain why he
applied for letters OF administration in the
case of william McGarrahan.
Il had been his chum since 1871, and
had reDeateflfy loaned hin, money 7 n0u