The Portland daily press., 1897-10-04

-A1o Aou1so OlnSley Hauioy Woo "A'
ness added to the interest of today's pro-
ceedings in the Melcher- Hadley breach OF
promise case.
Court came in promptly at y O'CLOCK,
at which hour the court room was nlled to
its seating capacity.
i Mrs. Jeremiah Dingley testified on
| cross-examination, in answer to Mr. LIB
| by. Her daughter Louise was born July
| II, 1866. She was asked the nrsJ sne
knew her daughter was carrying on q cor
respondence with Mr.. Hadley, and she
| said SO far as she knew there was no cor
| respondence. Hadley did not write ietters
to Louise. She would state that POSITIVE
| ~. Louise had photograph OF nancy
also photograph of the two Hadley chill
dren.
"Had you ever known Mr.. Hadley prior
| to the 18th of June?'
4 "Yes,n
"How long?'
| six or seven years"
| 'Was he married man when you nrst
knew him?''
| No, sir, he was not
You knew that factT' 80
| Yes, sir
She came in that Saturday night and
found her daughter in the hallway with
Mr.. Melcher. The witness had been out
walking. She did not sse when he came
in. So far as she knew he did not come
in carriage. When she came IN they
were standing in the hall and he was
about to go. He expressed kindly wishes,
hoped she would be happy In her new
home in California, shook hands with her
and said: ''We part the best OF friends:
| Mr.. Libby pressed the witness for the
exact words of the conversation.
| Mrs. Dingley replied: He expressed
kindly wishes and hoped she would be
| happy in her new home in California.
They then shook hands and parted
friends She repeated the statement made
| by the plaintiff in the train going to Bos-
ton. They were married at the Boston
Highlands. She didn't know how the
newspapers got it Parker house.
| The reason the wedding announcement
wasn't made sooner was because she
didn't see reporter until Saturday. eve
ming.
why wasn't it given out to the Bos-
ton pressf''
II don't know that it was not
| "Where was the narriage?"
| AT Rev. DR.. Waldron's house in Ro1-
bury"
Mrs. Hadley, the defendant, was called
at $40. She testified to her marriage to
Mr.. Hadley and that she had come from
San Diego for the purpose of attending
the trial. She became engaged to Mr..
Melcher about June of the present year.
She had known him, his mother and his
deceased wife. Before January l, she re-
ceived q mirror from Melcher July II,
1895, and a diamond ring the first Of No
yember. He told her that it was ring
that his wife had worn great many
years and he told her it was a secret token
of engagement. He did not wish the en-
gagement made known for six months.
The engagement was made known Janu-
airy l, 1897, and the giving of another
ring and diamond stud. She was not
present the 18th Of March, when Mr.. Mel.
cher had the interview with her father.
During the life time of Mrs. Meloher she
and her mother called there several times
a year and after the death OF Mrs. ID ell
cher they called there oftener. Mrs. Han
nah Penley was i'll and lame aud WAS
confined TO the house a great deal. They
talked of being married in June, but
there was no date fixed. She expected to
| live at the Drummond street house and
| she detailed what was done in the way
of repairs and furnishings. Mr.. Melcher
told her about this mother and sister
| giving him the rent, etc. She was going
to furnish one parlor and one chamber
MIR. Melcher told her that the parlor
carpet had not been taken up for eight
years. 1t was remade for the dining room
| floor. The expense of painting and paper
| ing was to be borne by the mother and
sister, and Mr.. Meloher said he would
pay for further changes and improve
ments himself. So far as she knew the
carpets were at the house now. She was
last in the house on Friday. evening,
June 25th, before she left for Boston on
Sunday. He also gave her a comb and
brush in April, about April 1. He sent
this present to her in Boston. He gave
her one of the rings in November q
travelling bag the first of last June, the
! r.. l. tr-Il l.,
Boston, IL. D; NJ" In March; also
was so marked. 1t was about the 25th OF
the month. She went to Boston, March
| Is, and remained there two weeks and
had her wedding outfit made. She only
had one fitting and the garments were
left there unfinished.
| The witness and the plaintiff had fra
quent quarrels before and after their re-
turn from Boston. She heard the 18th OF
June the wedding Intentions had been
| published and she was wrought up about
| it. She hunted up Mr.. Melcher and asked
him why the intentions were published
without her consent. He said he dldn't
| know they were published.
The witness testified to the witness
coming Saturday night and she was cool
TO him and that she told him to CONF
Monday TO talk business. She received a
letter from the plaintiff Monday morning.
She did not call at the store as requested
but told the messenger there was nc
answer.
Did your 90 riding with him that eve
ming"
&C think we did,
what did you say?''
II toldphim that things had gone or
long enough and that the engagement
must be broken. offered him the rings
He would not have them. l asked hin
the price of the range and offered to pay
for them. AS for the carpets, he said he
didn't want them on account OF the asso'
Citations and that he rather they be takeI
up. We talked over how to get ia ane
take up the carpets. aa1i
The letter marked June 81, was handed
to the plaintiff to read and WAS then read
as follows:
| Auburn, June 20, 1897.
My dear Louise-Please to take and ex'
cept the gems as coming from one who
loved you dearly and is your best friend.
ARTHUR.
The memorandum of value from d. A.
Osgood & Co., was then read as follows
Lewiston, Me-, June 20, 1897.
Memo of value:-'s
l pair ruby drops ruby ring. l bar 49,,