The San Francisco call., 1897-04-27

the property on Sansome and Pine streets
to James g. Fair.
Mr.. Dalmas promptly objected to this
on the ground that the document had
nothing to do with the real issue of the
case.
The court thought the paper was admis-
sble, aud upon this Mr.. Delmas declared
that the only issue IN the case was whether
or not the deeds held by Mrs. Craven was
genuine. He thought that this was a
matter that should be settled at once
and not be allowed to hang fire and de-
velop into matter of serious ANNOYANCE
later on.
Judge Slack acknowledged that the is
sues to be presented to the jury should be
agreed upon as soon as possible, and he
instructed the attorneys on both sides to
be prepared 10 elucidate on this point i'm
mediately after recess.
Mr.. Delmas then objected again to the
deed. This time he argued that the
plaintiffs really had no right to introduce
any evidence at all, because the averments
IN the answer to the cross-complaint did
not constitute an equitable defense. This
was technical point, he said. and he OF
fered it for the purpose OF getting ruling
on the record.
Inc court formally overruled the oblec-
tlon and an exec ption was noted. The n
the deed was admitted, as were several
others, all of which went TO make up the
valuable parcel OF land at Pine and San
some streets claimed now by the eXecu-
tors OF the Fair estate. Then the disputed
Craven deeds were introduced and went
INTO evidence without specific objection.
These deeds were handed to the jury and
the inspection OF them consumed consid-
erable time.
This done the first witness was called to
the stand. He was Attorney Eugene w.
I kaFo h n do q
deposition on August %, 1896. Mr.. Levy
simply identified the deposition and the
sady's signature. Mrs. Craven, he said,
was i'll and IN bed when he administered
the oath to her and was similarly situated
when she signed the document.
Mr.. Pierson then announced that it was
the intention OF the plaintiffs TO call at
tention 10 some of the admissions mad e
by Mrs. Craven in giving that deposition,
and be called upon his associate, Charles
S. Wheeler, to read excerpts from the dep
osiiion.
Mr.. Wheeler began by reading that part
OF the statements that referred 10 the con-
versation between Senator Fair and Mrs.
Craven on the day when he handed hel
tie now disputed deeds. In this state
ment she said that tie Senator bad just
finished writing the pencil will and its ins
copy, when Mrs. Haskell called his atten-
tlOn to the fact that he had not provid ed
for Mrs. Craven. The Senator said he had
taken care of her in another manner, and
with that he produced the two deeds from
his pocket and handed them TO her. These
were returned to him that day, with the re-
quest that he have them properly acknowl
edged. He did this and returned them t
her later on.
At the afternoon session MIR. Wheeie
resumed his reading of Mrs. Craven's de
position. He was particular TO give sucl
emphasis as might possibly have a ten
dency to discredit the statement, and reac
in detail everything the lady had said re
garding the events surrounding and con
nected with the writing of the pencil anC
ink wills and the delivery by Senator Fai
to Mr. . Craven of the deeds.
Mr.. Wheeler finally finished, and thel
turning to the attorneys for the defens
said: Gentlemen, are you ready now t.