The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1900-04-18
REACHING ITS CONCLUSION.
PRENTY-WACHsTE CASE WILL GO
TO THE JURY THIS AFTERNOON.


Judge FaIIfgant Excluded the Let
ters of the Plaintiff tn Her Ius-
band. offered in Evidence ny the
Defendants-The Court Excluded
Also Letters said to Have Deen
Written by Mrs. McNurray to the
Firm of saussy d saUssy-Argu-
Inent for the Plaintiff Made by Mr..
Raiford FaIIigant aud for the De-
PENDANTS by Mcssrs. J. r. Cam, J.
r.. sauSsy AID p. ". Meidrim.
The Prenty- Wachstein case is drawing
to close. The arguments will be con
Guided and the charge of the court TO the
jury made to-day and it is within the
possibilities that verdict viii be return
ed before night.
The defendants finished their evidence
yesterday morning. They CLOSED their
case with Offering in evidence dozen let
tiers written by Mrs. Prenty, the plaintiff
in the pending case, to her thea hus-
band. Patrick McAlurray, while she was
confined at his instance in the House Of
the Good Shepherd, in New York. The
matter had been argued before the recess
was taken on the preceding evening, so
nothing remained other than the decision
of the court which was promptly rem
dered.
Judge Falligant decided that the laws
of Georgia prohibited the introduction of
letters written by wife to her husband
on grounds of public policy, and conse-
quently that the letters offered mus be
excluded. Other letters, al eyed to have
been written by the plaintiff to the firm
of Saussy & Saussy, who were then her
legal advisers, We also Offered in evil
dence. Mrs. Prenty denied the authorship
of these letters. They were excluded by
Judge Faligant on the ground that even
If they were genuine they were p-ivi-
legged communications, protected by the
relation of attorney and client.
The first witness placed on the stand
by the plaintiff in rebuttal was Mr.
Charles d. Kline, who witnessed the sig
nature of Mrs. Catherine Prenty to GER
tain legal documents. The witness said
McMurray had called upon him to per-
form this service and they had gone to
the home OF Mrs Prenty in a carriage. He
remembered distinctly that he was LETT
outside the hall door and that McMurray
went alone into the room, presumably TO
prepare the old woman for the coming
of the attorney.
When he was called into the room he
presumed that McMurray had appraised
Mrs. Prenty of the nature of the papers
he wanted her to sign, and they were
not read to her. At her request he had
signed her name and witnessed the mark
she affixed. She appeared to be a trife
irritated and angry, but as he had not
known of any disagreement between her
and McMurray, he had attached no I'M
portance to this fact and had ascribed
it to her i'll temper
William Prenty, an uncle of the plant
if, living at Pittsburg Pa, was the next
witness. He testified to eXertions made
by himself in getting his niece from the
house of detention in New York, where
she was held a prisoner. On the first
OCCASION he had secured from McMurray
a promise that his wife should be sent
back to Savannah. and had left with the
conviction that this promise would be car
ried out. He afterwards received a let
ter from her stating that she was still
detained at the House of the Good Shop
herd and beseeching his further assist
ance.
He had returned to New York, and find
ing his niece still held a prisoner, had
taken her away and had her sent back
to Savannah. In the meantime he had
himself paid visit to this city and found
Mrs. Catherine Prenty neglected and i'll
in a hospital, without any of her rela-
tons TO look after or care for her wants
The witness told of a spirited contro-
versy he had had with Patrick AIcAIur-
ray in a lawyers office in New York.
when he had called McMurray a scoun-
drel and denounced in vigorous terms his
treatment of his mother-in-law and his
wife. The verbal disagreement. the wit
ness said came very near ending in a
fight
Miss Prenty, the plaintiff, was placed
on the stand to corroborate some detail 8
of her uncles testimony as to her impris-
onment in the House of the Good Shep-
herd and the manner of her escape. This
she did, saying that after her uncle's frss
visit to her there when McMurray had
made the promise to send her back to
Savannah her husband had been waiting
for her uncle 10 disappear 10 go back upon
his word and send her back to her old
place of Imprisonment. She was not al
lowed to write letters 90 her friends, but
she managed to slip a letter to her uncle
out through the kindness of visitor to
the establishment. This had resulted in
the return 40 New York of Mr.. William
Prenty and her release from imprison-
ment. Here the plaintiff closed her case.
The opening argument for the plaintiff
was made by Mr.. Raiford Falligant. Mr..
ray, from the time of his marriage to
Mary Ann Prenty down TO the present
moment, saying that the imprisonment of
the wife in the House of Refuge in New
York was but part Of a scheme to get pos
session Of her property and that of her
mother.
Mr.. J. r. Saussy made the opening ar
gument for the defendants. He said that
McMurray had been more sinned against
than SHINING, and that he had been most
lcnient and considerate in dealing with q
wife who had done much TO provoke him
Mr.. Eaussy defended the nuns of the
House Of Good Shepherd against the insin-
uation that they were in league with Nc.
Murray or anyone else for the purpose Of
perpetuating "a fraud, and declared it al
outrage that such an asperson should bt
cast upon the good women who sacrificed
their lives and themselves for the sake
OF the unfortunates among whom they la
bored.
Mr.. Saussy was followed by Capt.
Ferris Cam, Capt. Cam discussed prin.
Cin0llN the evidence q n alec