The San Francisco call., 1897-08-12
COONEY CLINGS
TO HIS STORY
Another Day Of Cross
Examination and No
Discrepancies.
He Never Knew Mrs. Craven
Until He Met Her in
Court.
The Effort to Connect the Notary
With the Alleged Conspiracy"
Meets With No Success.

Still does ex- Notary ]. ]. Cooney stand
firm upon his evidenc tnat the late Sena-
tor Fair appeared before him in person
and acknowledged the disputed Craven
deeds.
This important witness for the defense
of the lady's documents put IN another
long and tedious session on the stand
under cross-examinatiOn yesterday, and
once more emerged from it chipper and
com pletely at ease. Try as they have, the
attorneys for the Fair heirs and estate
have so far failed to even rattle the witness,
much less draw from him any statement
which might be construed as rejecting
discredit upon his story in chief.
Traps innumerable were laid for him,
but, while he apparently had no particular
desire to evade them, and answered the
questions promptly, he came out OF it all
withouta scratch, as the sporting editor
would doubtless put IL.
Superior Judge Frank T. Nj Ion occu-
pied a seat beside Judge Slack during the
morning session and evinced deep inter-
est In the proceedings. There was socia-
bility in the jury-tox too. Juror Rosen-
baum posing as chief entertainer, assisted
by a capacious bag of marshmallows,
which were distributed among his associ-
ates in patience with lavish hand.
As was the case on the previous day,
Attorney Mitchell conducted the cross
examination OF Coonev in behalf OF the
plaintiffs, while Judge Curtis of New
YORK acted as chief guardian of the de-
tense 8 interests.
The first question asked Cooney called
for an answer as to whether or not he
showed hi. notarial record book to
Pnh ma NJ ha, hQu
called upon him in June, 1896. The Ques-
ton was met by an objection from Judge
Curtis that effectually blocked it. Mitch
ell twisted and turned, ducked and
lodged, but his every effort to get at what
took place between the witness and
Me,srs. Williams ard Roberts two years
after the acknowledgement of the Fair
deeds was III vain. Judge Curtis finally
suggested that the court instruct Mr..
Mitchell to change his tactics.
do you want me to stop asking ques-
tions ?" asked Mr.. Mitchell.
"If you love your cause best you will do
so," drolly replied Judge Curtis, and
every body in ths courtroom laughed.
Mitchell now asket the witness when
he first met Mrs. Nettie r. Craven, and
received reply that Cooney never saw
her until this trial began. The witness
said he had talked with the lady de-
feadant, but never regarding his evidence.
He never called upon her at her residence
nor took lunch with her.
"Do you know Martin Kelly?" asked
Mitchell.
The question was objected to by Judge
Curtis. The court was just saying that
the objection was good, when Judge
Curtis, after whispered conference with
Mr.. Delmas. said the defense would con-
sent to the question being answered.
II know Martin Kelly by sight," was
Cooney's reply.
Haven't you ever spoken to him2'
"No, sir; never"
This was something of a knock down
for the attorneys for the Fair side, in view
of their vaunted promise to connect
Cooney with that awful conspiracy to
loot the Fair estate
Cooney was then questioned about his
care OF the record book in which appeared
the entries showing that Fair had ac
knowledged the disputed deeds. He said
the book was placed in his fathers |. brary
after the witness term as a notary ex-
pired in the latter part of 1894. Cooney
said he did not see the book for year
after he closed up his business. The first
time he took it out was when Messrs.
Roberts and Williams called and asked to
see it. On that occasion he made a copy
of the entries and gave it either to Will
liams or Roberts.
Cooney said, in answer to other Ques-
tions. that he took his official seal home
at about the same time he removed the
record book. That was when his term as
notary expired. The rubber stamp with
which he printed the words Notary Pub
lie in and Tor the City and County of San
Francisco must have been moved about
the same time. He did not remember
what had become of tho stamp.
Notary Cooney's examination was once
more centered upon the visit OF Messrs
fn uy,fpa
house, at the opening of the afternoon
; session. Mr.. Cooney said he produced his
record-book on that occasion and at the
solicitation of his callers looked up the
entries, showing that Senator Fair had
acknowledged the two disputed deeds be-
fore him on September 27, 1894. That in
cident, he said, had the effect Of partly
refreshing his memory regarding his
transaction with Fair. He did not re-
mem bar just what that transaction was
until he had consulted the record. He
thought the two gentlemen called upon
him about two weeks before the deeds
were recorded. They brought the two
deeds with them and the witness after an
inspection Of the documents identified
them as being the ones which Fair b ad
brought to HIM.
us there anything else that causes you
to remember the transaction with Sem
ator Fair?' asked Mitchell
Yes; Inc 1act tnat senator Fair ap-
peared before me in person." was the re-
ply.
''You remember that independently ?"
"l do.''
"When did you first learn that Mrs.
Craven was interested in the Fair estateP"
Judge Curtis objected to this on the
ground that it assumed something not in
evidence-that is, that Cooney knew of
Mrs. Craven's interest in the estate. The
objection was sustained, and so were
several others directed at similar ques-
tions.
Ibid yon not read in the newspapers
about the filing OF the pencil wiIl?" was
asked.
The objection to this was that it was
not tcross-examination, and the attorneys
for the heirs INDUCED in spirited argu-
ment in the hope of bringing out the de-
sired testimony.
"Do you wish to hear from us, your