Worcester morning daily spy., 1898-03-27
THE WOMAN LAWYER
The Remonstrance Against Miss
Gillette's Admission.
AN ALL-DAY HEARING.
Women Testify That the Petit
tioner Has Bad Reputation.
Mrs. Hayden Tells of Her Family Troubles
The Fearing Adjourned Until
Mex. Month.

This case of the remonstrants against
the admission of Miss Addie Frances
Gillette of Fitchburg 10 the Worcester
county bar was heard by Judge Gaskil
in the superior court Saturday. The
room was filed with members of the bar
and there was a large delegation of men
and women from Fitchburg, most of
whom came as witnesses fol the re-
monstrants Miss Gillette came into the
court room accompanied by Judge Chas.
S. Hayden about AS, and taking off her
hat and coat took a seat which she oc-
cupied all through the proceedings, -ap-
parently undisturoed by the reputation
given her by her townsmen and women.
AS Judge Hayden Is to appear later as
witness for Miss Hayden, h retained
City solicitor Arthur p. Rugg to con
duct her case, and the witnesses for the
remonstrants were subjected to a sharp
cross-eXa mination by him.
The case of the remonstrants was
conducted by Charles Z. Ware of Fitcn-
burg, VINO. addressing the court, said
that it IS required for admission to the
bar that candidates must Rot only pass
the regular examination but that they
must have a good moral Character He
considered good character iGle most es-
sential qualification, and ii this is lack
ing in candidate it is Well advisable
to bar the door of admission t. the bar.
Mr.. Ware then read the following writ
ten objections to the sdmission of Miss
Gillette:
Now comes Charles E. Ware an attor-
ney of this honorable court, and presents
the following objections III writing to
the admission of Addie Frances Gillette
as an attorney at law:
First that the said petitioner, being
at the time a clerk, or student in the
office of Charles S. Hayden of Fitchburg,
in said county, an attorney at law,
brought suit upon an alleged contract
with damages in the sum of $4,000, by
writ dated the eleventh day of April, A.
D. 1895, in this court and in this county,
against said Charles S. Hayden, and
caused his, the said Hayden's properly,
real and personal, to be attached upon
the same day, as appears by return of
the officer upon said writ duly returned
into this court, said writ being dated
and said attachment being made four
days previous to the filing in this court
of a libel for divorce brought
by Mary f. Hayden, wife of
LIE sdlu NslldIlSS >. HAY QGD, at
that time having left her said hus-
band and then living apart from him,
against the said Charles S. Hayden, up
on the ground of adultery With the
Addie F. Gillette, and upon
the ground of cruel and abusive treat
ment, in which action a summons and
attachment of $40, 900 issued on the same
day.
Said action of contract being. accord
ing to information and belief. an action
brought upon a fictitious contract in
order to prevent the said Mary E. Hay
den from obtaining a good attachment
in her said libel Cor divorce,
Second, upon the ground tha4 said pc
tltloner, according to the general repute
IN the locality in Which she lives, is not
a person of good moral character, and
tnat her personal conduct and relations,
especially with said Charles S. HAYDEN.
nave been such that her SAID admission
to the bar would tend to bring reproach
upon the profession
Charles E. Ware, attorney
MI Ware before he called his witness
es outlined the case of the remonstrants.
He said the petitioner entered the office
OF Charles S. Hayden nine or ten years
ago as student or clerk, When he moved
INTO his new house she went with his
FAMILY and was given the best room in
the house, while Mr.. Hayden's wife and
mother were given back rooms In
March, 1895, Mrs, Hayden left her home
and has never returned She wrote her
husband that she should never return
While Miss Gillette remained. On the day
that this notice was sent to Mr. Hayden
an attachment was served upon his
property by Miss Gillette for $40, 900. The
divorce libel was filed by Mrs. Hayden
four days later
Mr. Ware first introduced, as evidence,
the writ of attachment made by Miss
Gillette upon the property of Charles S,
Hayden. The declaration in this action
was that the defendant was indebted to
the plaintiff in the sum Of $11, 500 in the
form of promissory notes. He then intro
duced the declaration of the hbeIlant in
the divorce case of Mary E. Hayden VS..
Charles S. Hayden.
Harrison Bailey, a Fitchburg lawyer,
testified that he had examined the title
of the property of Charles S. Hayden
and found no record of any mortgage
upon it and no record of a discharge of
the attachment Of $4,000. He said the
reputation of Miss Gillette was bad, but
he never heard it questioned except in
connection with her relations to Mr..
Hayden, and the talk involved Mr.. Hay
den quite as much as Miss Gillette.
Charles F. Baker of F'itchburg, one of
the old board of bar examiners, testified
that Miss Gillette's reputation was bad.
He had frequently seen Judge Hayden
and Miss Gillette driving together. He
admitted on cross-eXamination that he
had recommended Miss Gillette's admis-
sion to the bar. He had doubts now as
to whether he should have done so. He
had never investigated the stories
against her, and did not allow them to
influence him.
Miss Adelne Hall of Fitchburg said
that when Miss Gillette came to Fitch
burg from Vermont, she was poor and
always had been. She considered Miss
Gillette's reputation as bad
Mrs. Dolly Marble Of Fitchburg had
known Miss Gillette ever since she first
came to Fitchburg to go to school, She
was sorry to say that Miss Gillette's
reputation was not very good.
Charles K Sawyer, chairman Of the
Fitchburg board of assessors, said that
he had never taxed Miss Gillette, as he
had been told by Mr.. Hayden that the