The San Francisco call., 1897-07-20

deposition would in its entirety become
part of the evidence for the plaintiffs and
that contingent would necessarily be
bound by it.
Wheeler and McEnerney argued long
ami loud to have this stricken from the
record, and when they failed in this asked
that the jury be instructed TO the effect
That all of Mrs. Craven's deposition was
not to be considered in evidence.
r, Inc argument as 10 the scope oil Mrs.
Craven's deposition and her evidence
affirming the truth of her declarations
therein was resumed at the opening of the
afternoon session, Mr.. McEnerney plead
Ing Tor an instruction TO the jury to the
effect that all of the deposition was not in
evidence
Judge Slack finally said he would not
deliver the desired instruction, nor would
he commit himself at this time as 10 the
status of the situation. The only manner
in which the issue could be brought to
head was by questioning Mrs. Craven on
the point.
The attorneys for the heirs were not
ready to tackle that proposition, however,
doubtless preierring TO leave that for
future and more opportune occasion.
True, thew resumed the redirect exam.
ination of the lady, but they steered clear
of the rocks. Mr.. Wheeler went back 10
the old story OF Mrs. Craven's chats with
Governor Budd.
"When you had your first talk with the
Governor, did he say anything about
sending you across the bay7" be asked.
THE Governor said that L should pro-
duce the pencil will within thirty days,
and that he could send me across the bay
ii l didn't"
"Were you frighlened2"
"Well, YES; l thought from what he
said that | had done something wrong"
WAS the Governor serious about the
mattel?'
"You will have to ask the Governor him.
self about that"
Mr.. Wheeler now directed his questions
to the conversations the lady had with
Russell J Wilson regarding his proposed
com promise with the Fair heirs for
$500, 600. In regard TO these she reiterated
that Wilson had told her there was
loophole in the contract by which the
heirs could wriggle out OF their agreement,
but that, Notwithstanding this, he. as the
representative OF Mr. Oelrichs and Vir-
ginia Fair would stand by their promise,
ANYHOW. Thus she would be assured of
at least something over $500, 1000. It was
after this conversation that the witness
talked with Mr.. Wheeler and Mr.. Lloyd,
and that they told her she would have her
money in a few weeks. The witness could
not remember the dates of these confer
ences, because she had had so many of
them, but she was sure they all occurred
after her return from the East.
She did not remember that Wheeler
ever told her that the trust" will would
be probated first. The impression he
ALWAYS gave her, she said, was that the
"penci" will was the only one that could
be probated.
I'm my conversation with you did l not
tell you that l had been examining the
h
Fairs writings, and could not md the
letters 'Oe' in the name Oerichs bear
ing any similarity with those in the will ?"
asked Wheeler.
mo, you did not, replied Mrs. Craven,
positively.
"Did I not tell you that the word my
In the will was different from anything l
could find in Senator Fairs writlngs?"
"You did not"
At this point Mr.. Delmas objected to
the line Wheeler was pursuing. He said
the counsel was cross-examinlng his own
witness-a practice that was prohibited In
the trial of causes. Judge Slack acqui-
esced in this view and put the brakes on
Wheeler.
The attorney now showed Mrs. Craven
letter or note written upon telegraphic
blank, and after she had identified it as
being in her handwriting was asked if it
would serve to refresh her memory as to
the time Margaret Craven returned from
the East in 1895.
Mr.. Delmas opposed this because the
letter had not been introduced in evi-
oence, and because it had not been shown
that the document had been prepared un-
der proper circumstances In other
words, proper foundation had not been
laid for this evidence. The court sustained
the objection, and sustained several more
in rapid succession, when Wheeler sought
to get the evidence in under the courts
ruling.
This line had to be dropped, and
Wheeler went on another tack. The con-
Ysrsation she had had with Richard Dey
regarding the $500, 900 compromise was re-
ferred to. Wheeler wanted the date of
that conversation. but the witness could
not RENE mber closer than that it was
some time in 1895, after her return from
the East. She did remem ber, however,
that 1t took place in the Nevada block.
Wheeler reminded Mrs. Craven that
she had already testified .Aat she received
letter from J. O'Hara Cosgrave in July,
1895, referring to the compromise, and he
asked if the q ate of that letter would re-
fresh her memory. The witness could not
remember, however, within couple of
months of the time.
at this iuncture an adjournment was
taken until this morning.