The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1901-04-11
DEFENDS HER HUSBAND
Mrs. Everett Resents a Law
yer's Insolence During
a Trial.

You lie, you know you lie. Don't you
dare to talk that way about my husband. :"
| These words, almost inaudible by reason
| of the throat affliction of the frelazied
! speaker, were hurled at DIR. C. C. Hen
| bricks in the Circuit Court room yester-
day afternoon by Mrs Everett, wife of
DR.. John Everett, former Jersey City
police surgeon, who was the defendant
in damage suit in which the plaintiff
was Mrs Henrietta Scott, wife of Police
man Scott. of the Fourth Precinct.
AS Mrs. Everett spoke she arose excit-
edly from her seat beside her husband
Just outside the rallied enclosure of the
court rooom and grabbed a law book
which lay on the counsel's table just I'M
side the railing. She was about 10 hurl
the book at DR.. Hendrick when her hlls-s
bssnd caught her arm and ex-Judge HUH
speth, his counsel, took the volume from
the hand of the excited woman.
This incident was the climax of Mrs.
Everett's effort to control herself during
DR.. Hendricks summing up of the plain
tiffs case in which he lampooned the de-
fendant rather freely Mrs. Everett was
plainly i'll at ease at the uncomplimentary
remarks directed at her husband by the
counsel, and finally when DIR. Hendrick
referred to DIR. Everett and ex-Poicenan
Hanbury, a witness, as pair of heavenly
twins, and followed it up by calling the
defendant a green-eyed villain and IA
perjurer, the now frenzied woman could
stand it no longer and the incident told
of occurred.
During the exciting few seconds DR..
Hendricks stood with arms folded gazing
at Mrs. Everett and the friends who were
trying to disarm her. When quiet had
been restored he resumed his address and
remarked sarcastically that he was sorry
DR.. Everett was obliged to protect him
self behind a petticoat
Having such an estimable wife he
ought not to have brought her into the
case" the lawyer-physician was saying
when Mrs. Everett again jumped to her
feet and once more seized the law vol
ume in an effort to hurl it at her hus-
bands traducer Again, she was disarmed
and the plaintiffs counsel finished his adj
dress without further interruption.
AT the conclusion of the case a yerdict
for $275 in favor of the plaintiff was re-
turned by the jury.
AS previously told, Mrs Scotts suit was
for $4,000 for injuries alleged to have been
sustained through her being run down
by buggy driven by DR.. Everett when
she was riding bicycle on the Boulevard
near Boyd avenue, on September 20 of last
year.
number of medical experts testified
as to the extent of the womanS injuries,
those for the plaintiff insisting that they
were severe and lasting, while the de-
fendant's experts said they were but
trifiing and should have healed in forty
eight hours.
To prove that the plaintiff was not eeri-
ously hurt, a witness was called who
testified that on October 5, ten days after
the accident, he had seen Mrs. Scott in
Livingston's garden, a resort in the
Greenville section. The plaintiff produced
two women who swore they and not Mrs.
Scott were in the place at the time
To prove that the plaintiff had sustained
financial loss by reason of being unable
to do her housework, Mrs. Bridget Muir
ply was called who testified that she had
worked for six weeks for Mrs. Scott
did DR.. Hendricl call at the house
very often?'' asked ex-Judge Hudspeth.
'TIe did, to talk about the case," re-
piled the witness.
did he play the piano while there?"
mo, / didn't hear him.
sYou are to be congratulated, con-
cluded Judge Hudspeth, and laughter ut
the expense of the opposing counsel.