The San Francisco call., 1897-10-09

tiers written to Gross by the fair plaintiff
that the decision of Judge Van Dyke TO-
day was against her. They tcemed with
the hre OF affection for her ''Joedy Dar-
ling Excerpts from these love missives
follow:
Proc HEIGHTS Tuesday, :O7 P. MI
August 2S, 1894 !
Dear Lore: The look in your eyes haunts me.
smiled good-by to you from the porch, but
my heart cried out to you: do not go; do
not leave me-; and you, my restless boy, did
you t>el reluctant? l fancy that you did
when you tossed your ticket down the
time.
If only they knew thing or two it would
open their eyes. l have been thinking about
the plan suggested by you to-day, and think
that TO let hlm know that we know OF that
circumstance would be against me. for if he
knew that you had suca affidsvits he would
tell Mrs. I. and she would subpoena them. and
thus turn II 10 her advantage. We will think,
dear love, of some other plan.
L intended to write a long. sweet letter, and
nave paper 10 suit Can you bear the inflic-
ton, dear?
Now, my darling I Will say good. night
Please Imagine me beside you, and that have
put my arms around your neck and that am
Kissing your dear, dear mouth many, many
lmes and whispering 10 you Dear heart of
mine, goodnight, goodnight" Think often
OF LovEY.
Wednesday, P M-wel Joedy. darling. if
member right l told you that would not
write you any loving love letters, but l
thought perhaps you might be little heart
hul cry, so have put little love in th1 one.
hm not nearly so happy to-day as l have
been lately. tell you what IL Is, Joedy GEAR,
IL helps us appreciate people when they are
gone thought that fully understood your
worth 10 me aud your part in my life but
don't think that did, for l miss you so very,
very much, my darling boy, and l am sure
the next two or three weeks will be unusually
long ones.
Wen, let come what may, so my Joedy dar-
ing does not forget TO love The rest
makes but Ii. tie difference. Heart hunger and
ipk m han,
Ing, and pray that neither may ever again
come 10 you or to your LoYEY.
An even warmer atmosphere surrounds
later letter. 1t also was dated from Pico
Heights and was indited Thursday night
Septe Der 13, 1894" 1t is addressed to
"Joedy. darling" After writing of case
which was then pending in Judge Ross
court, the woman who claimed at that
time 10 be suffering from the loss of her
husbands affection to the value of $50, 600,
wrote 10 her 'Joedy, dearie' the ese words:
mailed YOU letter to-day darling, written
after reading yours that told me OF your un-
certainty as to what 10 do. 1t is needless Joe,
deatic. for me 10 tell you write 1T with many
a heart pang. Sweetheart, l do not see how ]
would face the heart-hunger ana the loneli-
ness without you, my darling; but rather
than stand for one moment in your way,
rather than be de trimen tai to your interests
would never look on your face again. 1t is not
because do not love you, Joedy, uear, but be-
cause do love you. that say these things,
and because OF my consuming love.
1t would nearly Kill me in the future If you
should say or feel that perhaps il wonld have
been better if all had been different know
you love me, Joe, and am sure l love you
| absol utely sure, sure. miss you more than
can tell
Now, my own dear heart, am tired and
nave yet to hunt up paper l wish TO to-
morrow, so will stop and add a few lines to-
morrow. Just put your loving arms around
me, dear love, and let Inc lean against you
, and kiss my Joedy daring, for l am hesrtsore
| and weary and lonely. My dearest Joedy,
good night
Good-by, my darling. Hoping that soon you
Will be with Inc, am your LOWE
'Joedy's'' replies were rather melan-
chOly in tone. He seemed to be drifting
To destruction, with no hand to rescue or
save. or something to that effect.
Counsel for the plaintiff attempted to
exclude the letters, as having no bearing
on the case. but Attorney Stephens ex-
plalneu that 1t was their desire to show
that plaintiff within one short month
after she had sworn to the complaint that
Lille was wrecked was writing burning let
ters OF love to another man.
Ex-Judge Stephens, counsel for the de-
tense, introduced the motion for non
suit on the ground that the plaintiff had
not shown cause for action and that pre-
vious to the appearance of the defendant
on The scene there had been an estrange-
ment and alienation between The plain tiff
and her former husband.
The motion was taken under considera-
ton, and this morning Judge Van Dyke
granted it.
''There is no satisfactory evidence of
any real affection having existed between
! the two since theil breach III December
| 1891" said the court. 'Of course, any,
thing before that Is cut off by the statute
OF limitation. In regard to the alleged
reconciliation at Nashville in 1892 there is
| nothing in the evidence to point to such
fact, except the testimony of the plaintiff
and naturally the testimony of party to
| the action must be held as far inferior to
documentary evidence, which consis sted
OF letters Invariably unfrIendly.
Even if 1t be admitted she desired a
reconciliation, and in fact had strong af-
| fection for her HUSBAND, that does not
show that her husband had any affection
| for her, or desired reconciliation. The
m lotion for nonsuit is granted" "
1t is believed the plaintiff will take an
appeal. In the meantime. there is another
suit to come up against Mr.. CrandaIl,
| wherein Mrs. Mary R. Crandall asks that
Crandall be required to account for about
$50 900, alleged to have been used by him
H.,