The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1899-02-18

hs somSf frzass her - give t@- al his
money 70 thas hls frserszs c5axa n6s bog
row srnsa hsrr~
wlfne4s sasa sha; re nevsr sez Erx-
Var Aswire after fssr marriage uns1 sne
carIss sEs "a see about starting Ter divorce
ssist Witness had fgever wrftsa FnSfe
sssan cna fefte~ 20 Nre Var Aistln@ after
her marriage Thai iestsF Vas II regard
20 lighting tie mines q Alaska D. sSsc-
srteatg Wstnexa ard .Fsssties IngEr@3si
were attempting 70 S4tse ra1re% 20 carry
ett sseh @enezxae ard w,tgssss wrote ssFs,
Van Aisffs@ attempting 20 Interest nsr
husband WEnazs rad never Done legal
business for Archie Soyes prior 70 t5s
marriage and rad ssot rrs@t Emma Norton
since h@r sisters marriage
After tbs, noon F@esss he witness con-
tinuss his testimony he caused IL rip
pie Of angwse rnsnt IL the cour, room by
1essffyfnZ shat Attorney Denring was
sasrer II TIE fyss fruits " the alleged
co1spiraey Witness stated that ou the
dag after tire marriage r. gave D@nulng
8 am his share 81 tne zee paid ty the
Rlan8Iksr. Tsenniug seemed mighty
grateful 10 get II. the witusss said THEN
witness told ln detail bis story os the
;soslBse between himself and Denniug
Witness charged that Denning nliEaI,pro-
priatsd a $40 zee coming iato tae office
NifaesS accused EtsnHing Of the aeIsu-
brought DeHHiug ana bis acctEer face to
fBcs- TSenn.ug then admitted taking the
free. bar Claimed himself entitled 10 81.
witness and Dreaming parted IN anger and
never spgks 20 one another afteFwaFd.
Denies Their Statements.
Witness vas asked whether he made
the statements attributed 10 hinn by Dem
niug and Ashley. Witness denied doing
So With vebeTpence fie had never been
F,~l e.sH 4 bsA
or any other gum for services in bringing
about the marriage OF Mr.. and Mrs. Van
Aistinss He had never done more with
regard 10 the marriage than to get the
license ard witness the ceremony The
only money he had received from Mrs
NaA Aigttne IN connection with the case
sas 1E@ for services Ia institutlng divorce
proceedings Witness denied making
statements regarding a y5.0o zee from a
kiondikers marriage. TO Attorney j. II.
Allen. Alien must be mistaken witness
said. and carried away "a confused reeel-
lection OF the statement witness had act
uaily made
Witness denied positively that he had
ever seen or talked with Miss Norton or
Archie Noy.s prior 20 Mrs Van Alstines
marriage. uF had had any knowledge of
their doIug9 the doings OF Mrs Van
Aistine last September when the Van
AlEisues were ia trouble ia New York
witness never went 10 New York or TO
san Francisco to further any OF the de-
signs 81 Mrs Van Alstlne
Made a Good witness
NiBst0ck made "a good witness for him.
self. even when crOss-exanined by Attor-
ncy Ninsor. lie vas positive in all of
AIS statements, and could not be Induced
To depart from his testimony on direct
examination. The accumulation was
Interesting. however. on account OF the
frequent Tits between the lawyer on The
stand and the lawyer who was his IN
auisii"r, Ninstock bitterly denounced
Attorney Denniug from the witness
stand as al migrate. and departed from
adherence 10 the rules ~ the court b.
doing 50 AZ every opportunity ia spite Of
Attorney WiBsoFs efforts 10 stop him
Judge Moore WAS finally constrained to
interfere. He said he did not object 10 a
feAsofable amount OF quarreling between
Witness and attorney but would hav. 10
cali bait when il took up the time OF
the court.
\ -. Fontana who was a waiter AT the
Maiaon Toftoni on the night the Van AL
slime wedding supper was served testi-
ped that the check paid by Wan Alstlne
@as less than SO Van Al$tine stated
that the spread cost him So
The last Witness OF the day was Frank
Atwood. a Seattle merchant He met
MrE- Van AlstlI,e !n New York city last
September II VAS on Broadway in the
early evening. lie stopped and spoke 10
her. They were od acquaintance. lie
Was shaking hands with her xhtr Van
Alstine suddenly appeared on th. scene
ara rideiX attempted 10 tear Their hands
apart. Airs Van AisiIne smoothed
things over by explaining who the wit
ness wRs and introduced him 10 her hus-
band as = Seattle merchant Van Alstlu.
was Modified at once. and explained that
he didn't Ike - have persons whom he
DID not know taking his wlfe's hard
1t sas plainly the intention Of Ms Van
Alstine's lawyers 20 make It appear hy
this testimony that Atwood is t.. man
" nom Van Aistine took for &oyex in New
York city. ana thtss impair the cra.lihllltv
OF the remainder OF Van Alstine's tesii.
monr
Before the court adiomrn@. :H> attor-
neys tols Judge Moore they wo,,ia f,niah
the testimony in the ease today Th.
coart wilt allow ,he lawyers all day Mon
1aT fer the argument
ihe Ncw YORK dispositions we're rsaa in
evidence as the opening OF the court YES
terday morning