The San Francisco call., 1897-08-18
SHE SAW THE
DISPUTED DEEDS
An Important Witness for
Mrs. Craven Gives Her
Evidence.
Mrs. Purcell Says the Documents
Had Acknowledgements At
tached to Them.
Lawyer Newburgh Essays to Break
Down the Evidence Given by Judge
John R. Aitken.

Ono OF MIS-. Nett1e n. craven most I'M
portant witnesses was put upon the stand
during yesterdays session of the suit over
| the validity of the deeds the lady defend
ant says Senator Fair gavs her not long
before his death.
This witness was Mrs. Carrie Purcell, a
widow who lives at 1880 Howard street.
She is a modiste by occupation, and testi-
hed that during the past few years she
had done great deal o. sewing for Mrs.
Craven. The point of her evidence was
| that in Decem ber 1894. while she was fit
| ting dress on Mrs. Craven, some papers
fell out of the defendants waist. Mrs.
Craven permitted the witness to see the
documents after first exacting from her a
promise that she would say nothing
about the matter to any one.
What were those papersp' asked At
torney Ruef of the defense.
"Thev were deeds, written in lead PEN
Gil, and were acknowledged.
The disputed pencil deeds were then
produced and Mrs. Purcell identified them
as being the papers she had seen.
Mr.. Wheeler conducted the cross-exam-
ination and was relentless in his hand
ling of the witness. He started in by put
ting Iher through a course of sprouts cal
culated to test her memory. He excited
the fact that the lady kept a set of books
which served to refresh her mind consid-
erably as to the dates of various uransac-
tions. She thought her accounts would
show when she did work for Mrs. Craven.
At the request of the attorneys for the
plaintiffs the court instructed Mrs. Pur-
cell to bring her books into court as soon
as convenient that they might be in
spected.
In answer to further questions asked by
Wheeler, Mrs. Purcell said that to the
best of her recollection Mrs. Craven was
living at the Occidental Hotel when she
employed by the defendant at her Suffer-
street residence, later at the California
Hotel, the Callfornia-street home, Mrs.
Haskins house and lastly at Mrs. Cra-
ven's Guerrero-street residence.
Mrs. Purcell said she mad read portions
OF Mrs Craven's deposition in the news
papers, but had not seen the document it.
self. She denied that she had been
coached by Mrs. Craven regarding her
evidence, and denied that she knew Mar
tin Kelly.
Where did you lunch to- day 9' asked
Wheeler.
"At the Grotto," she replied.
"With Mr.. Ruef and Martin Kelly?"
"I don't know Martin Kelly. If he was
there 1 did not know it."
Did you talk over your testimony with
Mr.. RuefP"
Yes, somewhat"
"What was said by you and him2''
An objection headed this off and
Wheeler took up another line. He pressed
the witness closely regarding her ability
to remember so distinctly about staying
all night with Mrs. Craven on Septem Der
%, 1894. She said sne was positive, be-
cause she sent a note out to Mrs. Craven's
school the following day.
When the cross-examinatlon closed
Ruef asked Mrs. Purcell if she knew that
she had been tracked by detectives when
she went to lunch. She said she did not.
Ruef recalled the occasion when the
witness saw the deeds and asked what
was said at that time.
Il made the remark" she said, that
the documents must be pretty valuable,
judging from the care she was taking OF
them. She said they were valuable; that
they were deeds to over 81 900, 900 worth of
property. Then she said if L would not
say anything about it she would let me
see them. l then opened the deeds and
looked at them"
Mrs. Purcell was excused and Ruef Of
fered in evidence the papers in the suit OF
Mary Kidd VS.. G. S. Bartlett. This was
for the purpose of corroborating Bartlett's
testimony that he saw Fair in Notary
Cooney's office on Septem Der 27, 1894
Bartlett said that on that day his time 10
answer in this suit was about to expire
and be went into the Office where Cooney's
desk was located in order to arrange for
an extension of time. The papers showed
that he was correct as to the date of ex-
piratlon.
Adolphus S. Newburgh, an attorney,
was the next witness. He was called for
the purpose of corroborating Mrs. Craven's
statement that she showed her deeds to
Judge John r. Aitken in February, 1895.
and also to break down the story of Ait
ken that he did not see the documents
until July of last year.
In response 10 Ruef he said he had a
desk in Aitken's Office in February and
remembered having seen Mrs. Craven
there with Aitken about the middle of
that month.
The cross-examlnation of Newburgh fur
nished lot OF amusement for the lobby.
The moment he was asked where he was
born Newburgh proceeded TO rattle off the
story of his life with such rapidity that
the narrative resem bled the explosion CT q
pack of firecrackers. He told about his
various vocations and in answer to Mr..
Wheeler admitted that he had been ar
rested once for burglary and once for lar
ceny. He explained that both OF these
arrests grew out of business transactions
and both cases were dismissed on their
preliminary hearings. The burglary
charge wss the outcome OF his advising a
client to take possession of a horse he
claimed and through assisting the client
in the act. Both OF them were arrested.
The other scrape was when he held on TO
some cloth he had undertaken to sell be.
cause his commission had not been paid.
The witness acknowledged being yerv
friendly with Attorney Ruet OF the de.
tense, but said he had not talked with
him u great deal about the evidence he
was to give in this case.
ERATE PNAJ nEDA DTNHENy-