The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1899-05-05
she found that tho company would not do

she found that tho company would not do
this
Mrs. Mabel l. Fodder, of Auburn.
denlt with the company in January, 1925.
She did not continue because the sll0
was beyond her means. Witness did not
understand that she could g.t less
amounts of flowers for less sums OF
money.
| Tho forenoon testimony was concluded
with cumulative testimony from Post
master Gould OF Skowhegan, Belle W.
Wallace of Brewer, Oliver A. johnson,
Lewiston boy. EH se#.5.
| In the afternoon the usual large audi
enoe was in attendance, the demand Tor
seats being such that some OF the most
prominent gentlemen in the audience
did not disdaip to assert the right OF
squatter sovereignty over the dock usual
ly reserved for prisoners.
The first witness of the afternoon be-
longed to the government cohort. and
was Mrs. Nj. l.. Croxtord of Pownal. she
had pursued he enterprise through the
81 stage, but did not send the $40. She
did, however. offer to secure them
against whatever loss they might sustain
| through loss of material by her. This
offer they did not accept.
;, Mrs. Sidney Jordan of Waterville said
that the company wrote her that her
| work was not quite up to the standard,
but that she had in her the making of a
good flower maker. However, she did not
have the capital to embark in the bust
ness.
Mrs Frank Sawyer of Norway, testified
that she sent 81 for an outfit, but that
she heard nothing for a long time When
! finally she did receive the outfit the post
master told her the Floral company had
been shut out of the mails.
Mrs. Lizzie England OF South Berwick,
dealt with the compsny for while. but
stopped. why did you stop?" asked the
attorney for. the government.
'Because L wanted to-" replied the
witness.
what made you want tor
II wanted to stop and stopped L
thought l had spent money enough.
! Attorney General Haines asked this
witness If tine roses on her hat were some
she got from the Floral company he
mad asked it regularly of every witness
with flowers in her hat and the audience
bad learned to await the answer with
! suppressed merriment. Miss England
sweetly denied that the flowers in her hat
wer6 got in that way.
Mrs. Grace Spring of Rookland told
how she received the beginners outfit,
and then demurred at sending the Sllo,
Thereupon they allowed her to buy a y
lot of material She made this up, but
did not send it hack.
Mrs. Jennie Stilson of Madison, an
swered the advertisement instead of
writing. She afterwards paid the SO
cents and the 81, and still has at home
the flowers she received, as her busi-
ness with the company did not prosper.
Miss Mildred B. johnson of North Ber-
wick, related the story of the loss OF
81 So; and Mrs. Sarah K. Strout OF West
BROOK. who was then called, related
similar experience. as did Mrs. Miriam
Palmer also of Westbrook.
Mr.. Peter Sorensen OF Cumberland
Mills told how he was staggered by the
proposition that he should part with Sll0
lie then began to look into the business,
and decided to get out of 1t with loss
of 81. IS and two stamps. y.
At this point the District Attorney at
tempted TO introduce a witness to con-
meet Geoge f. Terry with the advertise.
ments put out calling Mr. Decker, u
New York advertising agent. This testi-
mony was ruled out, as not being prop
er in rebuttal.
Mrs. Emma Purinton of Berlin, N. ID. +,
Mrs. Harriet Adams, and Nathan d..
Perkins young man of Jay. were next
called to testify in lines similar to the
proceeding witnesses
Other witnesses called, who testified to
practically the same things were Mrs
W f. CLANCY of Lisbon Falls; Mrs. H.
FL. Cushman of Bryant's Pond. Miss
Isabel Libby of Waldoboro. Mrs. Ella A.
Root of Desring Centre and Mrs. Charles
A Mari Of Union Thus about 80 wit
nesses were called in rebuttal. There
we're many others on District Attorney
Overs list. but they were not present
when he called them.
Postmaster j W. Black OF Searsport
oorroborated some testimony as TO Inc
-.