Waterbury Democrat., 1900-11-27

was himself. and that he got orders from Mir Merriman. After MT Parsons's death his widow frequently called at the bank, sometimes as often as twice a week.
 The bank continued business after MT Parsons death the same as it I'd before it. Witness paid out moneys as usual Mrs Parsons did not give him any instructions regarding the business of the bank after MT Parsons death. He heard MT Parsons say that his wife was associated with him in the bank. This was ruled out. ihe cross examination which was conduct ed by MT Williams, began with wit ness first connection with the bank. So far as witness knew Mrs Parsons gave no orders regarding the conduct of the bank either before or after her husbands death. Deposits in favor of Mrs Parsons were made in the bank by her husband. He did not recall if she ever made any. The deposits were generally in checks. principally for dividends on her Investments. Some times when she called at the bank she would be given money by her hus- band. Witness never. cashed check for her Of that he was positive.
 MT O'Neill took the witness again at this point, but on account of ob- jections to his questions regarding de- fendant's financial standing nothing further was obtained from him.
 Peter F. Malone. the printer, was the next witness, but objections were showered against the questions asked him and he left the stand without giving any information.
 Robert A. Lewis came next. Mir Lewis is the local representative of Bradstreets commercial agency. Re garding an alleged conversation he had with Mir Parsons he was not al- lowed to tell and he left the stand as Mir Malone did, without throwing any further light on the situation.
 Thomas D. Barlow. one of the plain tiff's, was then put on. He stated that when the bank was closed by the receivers he had about $S,O0O in de- poSit there. He was shown the ad- Vertisement above referred to and asked if he had seen it in the news papers. The advertisement was to the effect that the partnership of G. s. Parsons & Co had been formed Inn mediately the question was asked MT Williams piled up objections on the ground that Mrs Parsons knew noth- ing about it, and therefore did not connect her with it. The objections were sustained and the eX-mayOr left the stand with the question unanSwer- ed.
 The books of the bank swere then introduced and AIr O'Neill began to read items from it showing certain drafts made by Mrs Parsons on the bank. A warm oral tussle took place between the opposing counsel for and against admitting the items. but the court allowed them to be read and Mir O'Neill spun off columns of figures from the time she opened an account after the formation of the partnership down to the closing of the bank. When recess for lunch was taken both sides had piled up a noun tam Of objections and exceptions. The principal objection was made to Yellow printed slip which Mir Malone r was not allowed to identify with MT Parsons or the plaintiff. This slip was printed by MT Malone and. the plain tiff claims. was sent out to clients of the bank notifying them of the dis solution of the partnership of Holmes & Parsons, and of the formation of q partnership between the plaintiff and her husband.
 MT Stedman was recalled to the stand Mir O'Neill having finished with the figures. He was shown the book and the items referred to and recog- n1zed them as portions of Mrs Par sons's account. MT Stedman went through another mass of figures run ming from July. "96. to October %. '9S. showing defendants almost daily bal ance between these dates. The last record showed her balance to have been S3,OO5.47.
 w. M. Hurlburt testified to having an account of $1S.000 with the defend ants bank atsthe- time of Mir Parsons $ death. He recognized a note and a deed he gave to Mrs Parsons. The defense resumed building up fortifica- ! tions at this point by obiecting to the last statement. A conflict of legal knowledge followed and for half an hour quotations from the books were hurled across the table. MT O'Neill | had the floor and was. .delving into the depths of law when MT Williams asked that the jury be excused while he was speaking. The suggestion was carried out and MT O'Neill resumed The point in contention was this:> Was l Mrs Parsons connected with the bank at that time? Mir O'Neil held she 1 was on her own evidence to wit: When I asked if she had given her husband power to use her name in his affairs
 her reply was: "Yes, suppose I did lThen she opened an account with the bank and her checks. already pro duced. carried out her statements and l showed that he did use her name was in fact her agent
 The case is still on at press hour. I