The San Francisco call., 1897-06-11
THE LAST CARDS
ARE BEING PLAYED
Mrs. Craven Called to the
Stand by the Fair
Attorneys.
The Lady Is Asked to Tell il
She Is a Party to a
Conspiracy.
No Answer Has Been E icited, as
Obi ctions, Arguments and Ad-
journment Interfered

| 1or several days, 1t Is true, put IL 'ay-
! fully avoided presenting itself until yes
terday's proceedings were about TO close.
| At that time the attorneys for the FAN
| estates executors found themselves in an
extremity-in other words, in a position
where 1t became necessary for them to
! play their last card. The card came, and
with all the dramatic preparation and
effect that such polished contractors as
| Garret McEnerney, Charles S. Wheeler
| and r. B. Mitchell are capable of. Their
last ordinary witness had left the stand.
There was a whispered conference, an
ominous changing about of seats, fol-
| lowed by an oppressive moment or two OF
! silence. Then Mr.. Wheeler spoke, and IL
was in a tone intended palpably TO i'm
press those who heard it that mine was
about 10 receive the torch.
Mrs. Nettie j.. Craven, take the stand" 4"
A buzz of expectancy arose from the
| packed lobby OF the courtroom and necks
were craning. Mrs. Craven, who, by the
way, had made her appearance at the
| first time in q fortnight, didn't seem to
| hear Mr.. Wheeler's call, for she remained
| placidly in her chair, as if expecting to
hear another long, dry and tedious story
! from some witness regarding notarial
! blanks She didn't realize what was in
!
| Margaret Craven tripped over to where
| her mother sat and spoke to her.
/ "Oh!" softly exclaimed Mrs. Craven,
and Immediately arose and went to the
witness-chair.
After the lady defendant had responded
to questions regarding her residence and
her interest in the litigation, she was
shown the disputed deed to the Mission
street property and asked If she had ever
| seen 1t before. OF course she had. But
| that was only a preliminary question,
| anyhow. Did she make trip to the East
in 1895? She did, late IN the month of
| February. Then had she not made sew
eraI trips to Sacramento just prior to the
Eastern journey and while the Legislature
| was in session?
During that session, said Mrs. Craven,
] she visited Sacramento several times-she
! thought three times, but was not certain.
Mr. Wheeler referred to the disputed
deed again and asked her ii she had it
with her and exhibited it 10 any body in
| Sacramento between Decem Der, 1894 and
! February, 1895.
Attorney Delmas said the plaintiffs had
no right TO ask a question of this kin O.
and the court sustained him in that
claim. Mr.. Wheeler was somewhat net
tied ct this. He said be would promise
| the court to connect this evidence with
! something substantial if it was permitted
! to enter, and if he failed be would con-
! sent 10 have it stricken from the record.
But Mr. Delmas said he did not propose
| TO have improper evidence reach the ears
| OF the jury and then have it stricken out
afterWard as incompetent.
The court again ruled against Mr..
! Wheeler, and despite that gentleman 8
| appeals, would not for a while alter his
mind.
! Judge Curtis took occasion to jar the
| counsel for the plaintiffs in g semi-serious
/ 10 n 2 nit fhaSr
| promises to prove certain things, and their
! equally frequent failures to fulfill these
! promises. He said Mr.. Wheeler was
simply at his old tricks again, and it was
| foregone conclusion that he could not
fulfill this new promise. But, said the
eminent New York ''wIll smasher," it was
not intended that he should be given any
more chances. The plaintif had made
Mrs. Craven their own witness and had no
right TO ask leading questions or TO launch
forth on voyage OF discovery.
Mr.. Wheeler conferred with his asso.
ciates and then tried new method. He
said now that he merely wanted to locate
the deeds during the months referred to
by Mrs. Craven in order to subsequently,
introduce proof intended to show that the
documents were not in existence at the
time the lady says they were. On this
offer the court directed that Mrs. Craven
could answer the question.
deed to Sacramento with her and did ex-
hi bit it to certain people.
Mr.. Wheeler then showed the witness
the Sansome-street deed and asked her II
she recognized it.
Mrs. Craven replied that the document
appeared to be the same one Senator Fair
gave her. but il looked as though it had
detected some erasures here and there.
The paper did not look natural.
did you ever show that deed to any
body during your visits TO Sacramento be-
tween December, 1894 and February,
1852 asked Mr.. Wheeler.
81 did. "
ITO whomr
"WeII, several / recollect having
shown the deeds 10 a Mr.. Cullen.''
Mr.. Wheeler wanted to know where the
lady showed the deeds 10 Mr.. Cullen, and
received a reply that she either showed
| them to him at the Golden Eagle Hotel
or in the State Library. She could not be
sure just where 1t was.
"Will you swear that you showed them
to him in the library?" asked Mr..
| Wheeler.
II must give TO that the same answer as
before" she replied.
"Will you swear that it was in the
Golden Gate Hotel2"
Same answer"
"Did you show them to anybody else in
Sacramento2'
81 did; l showed them to Mr.. Bon.
ner."
at this juncture Mr.. Delmas registered
a formal objection to Mr.. Wheeler's
method of examination. 1t was obvious.
he said, that the attorney was on a fishing
excursion and that his only object was to
slip into the defense's camp and get the
names of Mrs. Craven's witnesses.
Mr.. Wheeler assured the court that his
only object was to trace the custody of
the deeds, and he was not prying into the
defense's secrets. On this showing and
assurance he was allowed to proceed
Mrs. Craven said she might have shown
the deeds TO other people than Cullen and
Bonner in Sacramento, but could not re-
member, offhand, Just who they were.
After her return from Sacramento she
showed them to Judge Aiken and may
have shown them to others, but could not
remem ber.
Judge benson took the floor and OBJ
iected again on behalf of the defense to
Mr.. WheeIer's apparent plan of pump
ing" the witness. He said IL was an un-
heard-of privilege.
But Mr.. Whee.er got out from under
the falling wall by again saying that he
was only endeavoring TO trace the custody
of the deeds. The court let him go ahead
again.
Mrs. Craven reiterated that she could