The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1898-06-07

with them about six years and paid
Whatever your wife received for
board. did o consider that yours7"
IT did I was running the house"
Siegei said he had been running q
free boarding house pretty much ever
since he has been In Butte for the
Sym6ns family. He said he took out
30 shares OF stock. in his wife's name.
In a a Lake building and loan as
ISOLATION and borrowed money to put
into the building. He admitted that
he wrote out the application for the
loan and represented that the title was
perfect In his wife. Nothing was said
about the trust.
Then your statement was not
true?"
mo. II . not true-yes it wa. per-
fectly true. because they understood
the circumstances"
MI. Siegel produced figures to show
that the total cost Of the property was
was any of that money Mrs. Sic
gels?"
mo. sir: not q dollar"
Mr.. Siegel explained. A. one reason
for not demanding the return Of his
property sooner that after she left him
he was not allowed to see her. and had
been old that he would suffer IL he at
tempted il.
Then you did not attempt to see her
because you feared assassination"
Il was not going to take any
chances"
Mr.. Siegel said his wife never had n
cent OF her own money. but he had de-
posted various sums In her name in a
bank. A draft was submitted to him
to Indicate that Ike Symons had sent
him 81. 200 from Sal Lake. but he had
no recollection of II, as II was payable
to Goldsmith Z Co.
He said ne deposited money in his
wffe's name because Goldsmith was al
way bounding him, and he put 1t in
her name so that Goldsmith would not
know he had any money.
Mr.. Corbett asked him how Gold
smith could know IL IL the money had
been deposited In his. Siegers. wi
lame.
An objection was made to the ques-
ton and Mr.. Corbett said the witness
statement was foolish on the face Of it.
and he wanted to prove IL.
IF 1t was foolish on the face OF IL.
there is no reason why you should get
that way" said the court. mo, you
can't ask that question that way"
Siegel said he was not a member OF
the firm of Goldsmith & Co, but IL
a been the general impression thai
he was. and for that reason he con-
Quoted all his private business in his
wife's name.
Then there is some use for a wife
after all?"
That was all she was good for in
this case and much less" said the wit
ness.
On redirect examination, Mr.. Camp
bell asked Mr.. Siegel for a reason as
to why his wife left him. Mr. Corbett
was on his feet in an instant with an
objection to the attempt to go into the
family affairs Of the plaintiff and de-
PENDANT. He said IT was entirely i'm
material as to why Mrs. Siegei left.
The court overruled the objection.
Mrs. Siegel left on the 26th of De-
cember. 1896. with the understanding
and my permission to go to Salt Lake
to remain there until i came, the fol-
lowing January" said the witness. I'VE
met there. and everything was perfect
ly harmonious"
II desire to object" interposed Mr..
Corbett.
She went from there to San Fran
CISCO" continued the witness.
Il want to object" said Mr.. Corbett.
Don wander of too far" suggested
the court TO the witness.
She wrote me from San Francisco
that she would never come back to
live with me again." testified Mr.. Sieg-
Ell.
Was that the first you ever heard
that she did not intend to live with you
any longer?"
II object aid Mr.. Corbett. but his
objection received no consideration.
In the is years of our married life"
Mr.. Siegel. that was the first inti-
nation 1 had Of any trouble"
Did she give you n intimation
when she left you that she did not in
to RETURN"
Not the slightest whatever"
NJ MaCAr oaa~. ---- -
that never in all his life had
he heard anything like It. He said IL
was ridiculous to go into all the private
affairs of the family in a suit for pos
session of property, and all Of the wit
to pirate about his family
troubles.
The court got angry.
See here, Mr.. Mattison." said the
shaking his index finger at the
fine you. III not nave any OF that
kind of talk here"
Mr.. Mattison took his seat.
Now, proceed" said the Judge, ad-
the witness, and give the
reason why she left you"
II would hate to tell why" answered
Siegel.
mined to know about IL. go on, go
on" he ordered.
Mr.. Campbell asked the witness an
other question TO lead away from the
sit down. Mr.. Campbell" cried the
Judge. II want the gentleman to state
the reason why h left him."
She told me the doctor at San Fran
had advised her to-" said Mr..
Il ask you plainly again why she left
your bed and board?" demanded the
she went away with my permission"
was the witness answer. n the court
let IL go at that.
The witness testified that he paid all
The taxes on the property except the
city for one year.
Henry Siegel was then called to the
stand, and testified that In
March or April, 1886. he. made a demand
Dn Mrs. Siegel for the reconveyance OF
the property, and offered her $1,000 In
ash and $50 q month alimony for ~
months. He got no answer to his Of
Ter. A motion of defendants counsel