The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1902-04-19
Bachelors Hastily Brought
Together Asked to Decide
Question of Sewing
CRITICIZE THE BINDING
MOdiste Smiles Pleasantly While
Explaining Difficult Points to
BeWiIdered Arbiters, and
Secures a Verdict.

CHICAGO. April Six unmarried
men quit a game of pool and made in
quiries into fashions and modes in wear
ing apparel suited to the fastidious tastes
OF Ch1cago's feminine fashionables The
young men accompanied Constable Sheri-
dan into Justice Martins court. where
they were made jurors in the case OF
Craig VS.. Pate
Miss Clementine Craig, a dressmakcr
alleged that Mrs. Catherine Pate, wife Of
D. S. Pate, millionaire lumberman. had
bought Partisan gown from her ana
refused to pay for it after it had been
finished. She sued Mr.. Pate for 1885, OF
TINS sum $3.50 was for the gown and SIS
for waist. The payment of the latter
amount was not contested
constable Sheridan captured the pool
players in Madison street billiard hall
and gave them so cents each for deciding
the justice court dispute. Several dress
makers who acted as experts, confronted
the jurors. These experts all wanted to
talk at the same time, and the lawyers
found a hopeless task in attempting to
quiet them.
Puts 1t on for Jury to See.
Levi Sprague, attorney representing Mr..
and Mrs. Pate, said the dress was so
poorly finished that it wouldn't "go'' III
New York society
WY I410C uIGSS WOuIuu De Tolerated
even in ST. Louis he added
Miss Craig said that last summer she
went to Paris and bought several models
from the best dressmakers there She
SAID Mrs. Pate called at her establish
ment and admired one of the dresses so
much that she ordered an exact duplicate
in black silk broadcloth, for which she
agreed to pay $3.50. She says the dress
was fitted three times and when Mrs
"a fl1nf
bought the model she made objections to
her copy. Miss Craig said that Mrs. Pate
returned the dress and that it was again
sent to her at her former home in the
Auditorium annex
Miss Anna Hoffnagel, a filter for Miss
Craig, corroborated this testimony.
Then the defense had its inning. Mrs
Pate produced the dress in dispute
Go put it on and let the jury see IL it
fits" Attorney Allan A. Gilbert, Miss
Craig's lawyer, suggested
mo, I won't" Mrs. Pate replied II
have no objections to the fit or material
but it isn't finished right
Paris Gowns Made in Chicago.
Mrs. Pate turned the dress wrong side
out and showed the jurors seams that she
said were poorly finished up. She also
showed them the skirt she wore as being
correctly made. She declared that Miss
Craig had promised to sell the dress to
another customer.
Miss Wilson, a dressmaker, was called.
She testified that the binding was not
put on well.
Attorney Gilbert asked Miss Wilson il
she had ever made any dresses from
Partisan models for Chicago society wom-
en-
NO" was the reply. 'They say that
the dresses are made in Paris and are
Partisan models, but as matter of fact
they are made right here in Chicago
Mrs. ]. Moore, another dressmaker,
said the skirt was poorly made. Miss
HoHnagel took exceptions to ner state
ments and they argued to the jurors and
disputed with each other.
Miss f. L. Veder, another dressmaker,
said the dress was worth only $50. Miss
Craig couldn't let this pass without few
remarks.
Dressmaker Gets Her Bills.
Mrs. Pate was recalled to the stand.
She took the dress and again showed the
jurors the seams and the binding.
''Why, what do you think of that?"
she asked, showing the defects to the
jurors.
Miss Craig also was recalled. Attorney
Sprague objected to some of her state
ments.
Now let me tell tnem,' she pleaded,
with her most pleasant smile, and the
lawyer capitulated.
nd