The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1897-05-08
PRESUMP TONS
( AND INFERENCES
Objected To as Evidence by
the Defense in the
Fair Case.
Another Day Was Wasted by
the Attorneys for the
Executors.
Persistent but Uniformly lnefectua
Efforts Made to Introduce Hear
say Evidence.

There was another season of frantic en-
deavor on the part of the attorneys for the
executors of the Fair estate yesterday to
get evidence into the Angus-Craven case
Of hearsay and wholly inadmissible char
- acter. as ruled the court.
1t was another day OF clever parrying on
the part of the defense, although the
" counsel for Mrs. Nettie Craven openly
stated that they had no particular objsc-
ton 10 the introduction of the best evil
dence held by the other side alleged to
snow forgery of Mrs. Craven's deeds, but,
as Judge Curtis o. New York aptly put it,
they were opposed to ''be1ng morally con-
Yicted on inferences and presumptions."
Mrs. Craven was not in court yesterday
owing to a severe attack of illness, but
her charming daughter, Margaret, was
there to look after the mother interests.
She frequently conferred with the attor-
neys for the defense regarding matters OF
vital Importance to the case.
Witness Whitesides resumed the
stand to give further direct testimony re-
garding the printing of notarial blanks by
the II. S. Crocker Company in August,
1895. He said he fixed the date OF this
issue of blanks by means of his entry
book. As a rule, said Whitesides, he re-
" ceived his orders from Mr.. Stanford, but
or this particular occasion that Gentleman
was away on vacation, and the witness
was left in charge of the legal department
OF the esta bhshment.
Fred Daniels the man who locks up the
forms" in the printing department OF
Crocker's place, was the next witness. AL
though he was on the stand some time all
his evidence amounted to was an identi6-
cation OF the houses order for 5000 notar-
la blanks in August, 1895.
AS the morning session closed he was
excused from the stand.
In the afternoon S. II. Wade, another
attache OF the printing department OF the
II. :. Croker Company, was put on the
witness-stand. Mr.. McEnerney showed
him a proof of the Issue of notarial blanks
of March, 1894 and asked him if he could
identify it. Wade did, as regards the date,
and also recognized his identification
marks on 1t.
In response to question asked by the
court Mr.. McEnerney explained that this
. proof was offered for the purpose of show
2ng, in connection with other evidence,
that between March, 1894, and August,
1895, the Croker Company never printed
any notarial blanks containing the phrase
o.ogy which appears upon the Craven
deeds, so that in consequence the latter
could not have been executed in Septem-
: her, 1894 as claimed
Judge benson, for the defense, claimed
that the production OF this blank would
81 prove nothing, but after an argument the
court decided to ad nit the document, de-
spite the fact that an admission went
along with it to the effect that evidence
OF this sort was not very weighty.
The proof was shown to the jury and
then Attorney McEnerney offered the al
legged order for those 1894 blanks to the
witness for Identification.
nd q for
the first time during the trial while the
jury was present. The gentleman made
quite an impression with the clearne SIS
and conciseness of his logic. Several da VS.,
he said had been consumed by the coun-
sci for the plaintiffs IN a laborlous effor
10 squeezs in inadmissible evidence-so
ruled repeatedly by the court. Mr.. Nc
Enerney, he said, had tried the patience of
the court, and had accomplished little or
nothing. The issue that gentleman was
essaying to illegally prove was that the
deeds held by Mrs. Craven were not gen.
.une along with the acknowledgements &C
companviug them. He challenged the
other side TO produce one sound legal rea-
son for the introduction of the sort of
proof they lad been laboring to get be-
fore the Jury.
1--WE are not going to be convicted NOR
ally before the public OF this grave charge
that hangs over us-we are not going to
- be convicted, l say, and deprived OF our
property by differences and presumptions"
said Judge Curtis in conclusion. at
must be by proof and only by proof that
is admissible under the law. There is
nothing here to show that these blanks
and printers proofs, which seem to form
the basis of the plaintiffs case. were not
- printed outside of the jurisdiction OF this
court and placed in those bins by design
ing hands so that they could be found.''
Judge Slack committed himself again
as being doubtful IS to the weight of these
documents as evidence. but nevertheless
omitted the last one as possible circum-
stance going to prove something else.
The court took n short recess here in
order to give the Jurors and attorneys
breathing and smoking spell. and when
the proceedings were resumed Mr.. Delmas,
who had not reappeaTed after the noon
rest, was in attendance and took up the
reins for the defense.
A clash occurred as soon as Wade was
asked by McEnerney to identify the
package from which he is alleged to have
taken the proofs of the acknowledgment
blanks printed in 1894 and 1895. He could
not do il, and Judge Curtis. for the de-
tense, addressed the court again on the
ACCESSIBILITY of putting a stop to the plain
tiffs' methods
Judge Slack apreed with the New York
attorney, and the examination of Wade
was abandoned by counsel for the plain
tiffs.
Daniel Keefe. foreman of the printing
room OF the Crocker Company, was now
called and asked to explain what the GUS
tom was in his department in handling
and carrying out orders for the manufac-
ture OF legal blanks.
But an objection came from Mr.. Delmas
to the effect that the customs of the II. s.
C7ocker Company could in no possible
manner affect the rights OF Mrs. Craven.
This precpitated a lengthy debate in
which nearly all of the attorneys engaged
in the case took a hand.
Charles S. Wheeler led the discussion
for the plaintiffs and cited a mum Der of
NEW TO-DAY.
Eo 0~n rn0Cnn