The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1896-03-23
The DAWSON CASE
Question OF Alimony to Be Ar
gued This Morning.
CORRESPONDENTS SPEAK OUT.
Tnose I'm California vigorously Deny
the Charges-Did Detectives
Shadow Mrs. Dawsone

The first Of thu legal battles In the Dav-
son divorce case will come on this morn
ing at go O'Clock before Judge Humes IN
The superior court. when the application
of Mrs Dawson for temporary alimony
during the pendency Of the litigation VII
be heard, as will also the application OF
DIR. Dawson for an order of the court CIV
ing him the custody OF the children until
the final disposition OF the case.
The application Of Mrs. Dawson Is for
the Immediate payment TO her OF sle"'
and is supported by aff'dsvits heretofore
published. and is a. posed by the afflcavit
of DR. Dawson. also published. IL Is IN
dersfood that the attorneys for Mrs. Dsw-
son will aIe additional af'idaviis on her be-
half. relating TO the pecuniary transac-
tons between the couple. setting out the
sums the husband has received from MS
wife's property during their marriage
II is also animated that affidavits will
be filed alleging that for a long time prior
20 the bringing Of the action for divorce
DR. Dawson had detectives employed
rbadowing his wife, both here and In Cali
fornia, during her visits 10 the latter state.
in the endeayor 20 secure evidence to form
the basis for divorce proceedings.
As bearing on the numerous charges ~
inndelity on the part Of the wife. made IN
the complaint the following from the San
Francisco Chronicle Of March 10 Is OF In
fereat:
Prank Carroll. a student at the Cooper
medical college. has been named as CO
RESPONDENT in a Seattle divorce case. and
ne does not like ~. l.. X. Dawson. n prom
fnent physician OF Seattle. has asked for
separation from his wife. and rs one OF
the grounds In his complaint. stated that
Carroll had been too intimate with her
u Don
ullst politician at Seattle. When he was
approached yesterday regarding the
charges he al FIRST denied that he was the
Carroll named In the complaint. but after
wards when n was shown him that he xas
known TO be the same person. he said
N Is absolutely untrue that there Sas
anything criminal or unusual In my reia-
tons with Mrs. Dawson. I met her az
ball In 1888 was introduced to her by her
husband She Was most charming wo-
man, who loved the society OF young men.
II Is absolutely untrue that she was In
sane. as every one said She told me and
believe thaf she suffered only from
hysteiis. We became very good friends.
and l will admit that ] was stuck" on
her. but saw 10 what II might lead. and
ceased my attentions. when ! found that
Dawson regarded me jealousy. I called
upon her -four times. and three of these
times her husband was present. She was
then but = years Of age. her husband as.
and notwithstanding she had everything
in her home that heart could wish longed
for the companionship OF other men. I
admit that I was smittcn. but ] saw that
her husband was Jealous Of my attentions
and stopped.
" NO did not meet her I'm San Fran
cisco. ] didn't know that she visited the
city until I returned to Seattle I'm 1895,
and heard that she had been down here.
During the time that J was at home !
saw her hut once from distance. and
there Is absolutely nothing In her hus-
bands charge.
"'I don't want 10 get mixed up I'm this
affair. for expect TO return 10 Seattle 10
practice my profession. and ! shall Ger
tainly have an encounte. with Dr. Daw
son N he makes any such false accuse
tons against me- concluded Carroll.
"A. +. Estahrook. OF Alameda. who was
also named as = co-respor dent, SAYS that
Dawson's charges agains'. him are utter
" without Foundation. He knew Mrs
Dawson as a friend only. but never was
on an intimate footing.
~ knew Mrs. Dawson said he last
night. but she was never even an init
mate friend of mine. | became acquaint-
ed with her in San Jose about four years
ago. About three years ago she and her
sister moved to Alameda from San Jose
and ] called several times at the house
perhaps half dozen times during their
stay of four months. That Is the extent
OF our acquaintance. | never went any
where with her. bu- simply called at her
house "a a friend. | have heard nothing
of her for tho last three years. and | was
utterly astounded nj seeing my namo con
nected with the divorce suit
These charges, aE far ms they refer to
me, are false from beginning TO end.
never gave any reason for them. and am
sure that they must be inspired by the
malice OF soma one
Regulate your kidneys with Hay-n's