The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1900-04-14

MOnOtOny of the Prenty-Wachstein
Trial Broken Into.

tFAui BrOhen lhtos
The trial of the Prenty- Wachstein case,
for the possession of certain lois and i'm
provements in Crawford ward, was con-
tnued in the Superior Court yesterday
but without being productive of the in
teresting denouements that had been ex-
pected and confidently predicted. But
for an occasional animated discussion and
exchange Of pleasantries between counsel
the hearing would have been Unfortunately
duh.
The session began with the Introduction
by the plaintiff of additional witnesses TO
prove the allegation in the petition that
before ne purchased the property, Wach-
stein was in possession of facts putting
him on notice that McMuTray's title 10
the property was fraudulently defective,
and that, therefore, the tide of the prin-
cipal defendant in the pending case is
equally bad. With these witnesses the
plaintiff rested her case, and the intro
duction of evidence for the defendants
was begun.
The principal witness placed on the
stand during the day was Mr.. John Nj.
Bryan, who testified in a double capacity.
Mar. Bryan is the cashier of the OgIe-
thorpe Savings and Trust Company, one
-
Identified number of papers that are
among the companys records AS a hand
writing expert Mr.. Bryan inspected several
letters and affidavits, purporting TO be
signed by the plaintiff while she was the
wife of McMurray, and testified that the
signatures of sone of these were in her
handwriting
Most Of the afternoon session was taken
up in reading some of these identified let
ters and the record in a case instituted
by Mrs. Catherine Prenty against her
daughter, the present plaintiff, for an ac-
counting. Mrs. Mary Ann Prenty was the
trustee of her fathers estate of which
her mother was the life tenant, and the
mother claimed that she was not getting
her share of the money. The answer filed
by Mrs. Mary Ann Prenty in that case
denied that her mother was being deprived
of anything.
Col. George I. Cam was conducting the
Introduction of evidence for the defend
ants, and when he offered this record Mr..
Barrow interposed an objection. The
counsel for the plaintiff was addressing
the court on this subject, though not in
very specific or definite terms, when he
was interrupted by Col Meldrim. Col
Medrim said that if counsel wished to
object to the Introduction of the evidence,
he ought to state h's objections and give
his reasons for making them.
IF counsel" said Mr.. Barrow will de-
vote all of his great legal abilities to the
conduct of his side of the case, and per-
init me, in my own feeble way, to conduct
mine, we shall progress more rapidly"
But" retorted Col. Medrim, that is
exactly what l am here to prevent. We
hope to keep counsel from conducting his
case in his own way"
Mr. Barrow then stated that the evil
dence ought to be excluded on the same
ground that evidence offered by the
plaintiff, relating to matters transpiring
subsequently to the acquisition of the
Houston and Perry streets property by
Wachstein, had been excluded by the
court. The record sought to be introduced
was of case brought in 1897. If one piece
of evidence of this character was irrele-
want, the rest was irrelevant. However"
concluded counsel, II will withdraw my
objection to the evidence and interpose
no obstacle"
Then, Mr. Barrow" said. Judge Falli-
CANT, your objection was not so much to
| the introduction of this particular piece
of evidence as to the former action of the
court in ruling out other evidence
well, your honor" said Mr.. Barrow
II did think that we all ought to be fed
| from the same spoon"
The affidavts, purporting to be signed
! by the plaintiff and confessing her owr
| misconduct, were not introduced. Wher
| court took the recess at o clock it was
| with the understanding that the hearing
| should be resumed on Monday morning
and it Is expected that these afdavits
will be introduced on that day.
The case attracts daily quite a large
| crowd to the court room, the members
| of which watch the Introduction of the
| evidence closely. II is being fought hard
on both Sides and there is scarce a bill
| of evidence offered The admissbility OF
which is not contested. Mr. Raiford Fal-
| ligant is assisting Messrs. Barrow & Bar
row in the conduct of the case for the
| plaintiff.