The San Francisco call., 1899-05-27
HISTORY OF A BOARD BILL
DISCOVERY THAT NEARLY LED
TO A WIFE's SUICIDE.
John and Eliza Dobson Got Judgment
Against Lamond, but Now He
Sues for Money That Paid
the Minister.
Oakland Office San Francisco can.

90S Broadway, May 26.
The suit of Malcomb Lamond against
John and Eliza A. Dobson and r. Z.
Hewett, wherein the former asks for an
accounting, and the trial of which was
commenced before Judge Ogden to-day.
revealed an exceedingly spicy story OF
ante-nuptial financial embarrassment on
the part of the otherwise erstwhile hap
by groom and the attempted suicide OF a
wife temporarily unhappy.
Malcomb Lamond was a gardener at
Mountain View Cemetery, so the story
goes as related piecemeal in court to-day,
and he was on very friendly terms with
John Dobson and Eliza Ward, who had
plighted their troth. In August, 1898,
John and Eliza were married and settled
in a pretty, cozy cottage at Fitchburg,
noted for its abundant supply of artesian
water
Before their marriage. Lamond alleged
in his complaint, he had, through the
friendship, advanced to the happy couple
the sum of S210 with which to purchase
the necessary household furniture, pay
the ministers 5 fee, and the clothing the
bride and groom wore on the occasion OF
the wedding. From time TO time after
the marriage he advanced more money In
various amounts aggregaung $lOO, ana ne
moreover beautified the landscape garden
at the Dobson home in his spare mo-
mentS, planting trees and SnruDDeIy ana
rose bushes at a cost of another 800.
1t had been understood and agreed be-
tween the trio that the married couple
should repay all when they were aple,
and relying upon his friendship for them
and their promise to pay, no note passed
between them.
But the advent of plaintiffs brother,
Peter Lamond. proved the unhappy be-
ginning Of all misunderstanding In May
of 1897 Peter and his wife who was i'll,
came to the DObson dwelling for recuper-
alton. Malcomb had agreed with the
/, hF-pf har O6 n
law tarry at Fitchburg for three months
at SEQ Peter and his host and hostess
quarreled and he left, paying them moth
ing. The Dobsons then sued Malcomo
and his brother for $3.50 in Justice Law
rence's court, and although, as Malcomb
testified to-day, he believed he had con-
Vnced the DobsOns that they owed MN
much and he owed them nothing, ana
though Dobson promised most certainly
to dismiss the action, they secured Judg-
ment by default.
The bonds of friendship being thus sew
cred so rudely Malcomb determined to
explode the fact that he had paid for
Dobson's wedding and all, so he sued for
an accounting.
ined by Attorney Hewett, for the defense,
he appeared slightaly puzzled over the
meaning of a trivial question and looked
at his attorney, Mr.. Lukins. HeWett
pressed the question and shouted at wit
ness. you needn't look at your attorney,
for he can't inform you what to say. At
tOrney LuklnS vigorously oDJecleu 10 TINS
and Judge Ogden severely lectured Hew-
EFT for his disrespectful remark
Mrs Dixon. a neighbor of the Dobsons.
was next called and disclosed more of the
unhappy family skeleton. She testified
that she had been asked once by Mrs.
Dobson to go to Lamond and ask him for
SO. after which they were to be as good
friends as ever. on another occasion wit
ness had gone to Mrs. Dobson's and found
her lying on a table with a bottle of car
bolic acid by her side. Mrs. Dobson had
told witness she felt bad because her hus-
band had informed her he would no
longer live with her unless she should
dismiss the suit against the Lamonds, be-
cause they Che Dobsons) owed Malcomb,
instead of he owing them, and that
there was hardly thing about the Dob
son home that did not belong to Malcomb
LamOnd.
The trial was not concluded to-day, and
further interesting details are looked for
when the hearing is resumed.