Waterbury Democrat., 1902-05-17
THREE WOMEN LAWYERS
Gave Testimony Before Judge Robin . son Yesterday-.C Case Continued.

6ANe 1eStIm0nF Before Juuge AODlu~ |. son Yesterday-C Case Continued.
 All yesterday afternoon Judge Rob- inson was occupied ill the superior court hearing the motion of Mrs Mary
 D. Wright Smith to set aside the judg-
 ment for $7,5O0 fees allowed Attorney
 Susan c. o Neill and similar sum for her otheD attorney, Miss Isabel Mary Pettus of New York. It was simply a
 hearing on lawyers fees, an attempt
 to ascertain if the services rendered
 Mrs Wright were worth what she was charged. In that respect it was a pe- culiar case, for different lawyers charge q different rate of fees, and the courts or bar allow a certain sum for certain kinds of services.
 Miss Pettus testified that she is graduate of the New York university of law and is a member of the teaching faculty of that institution. Miss O'Neill and also Mrs Smith are graduates of that establishment. But Mrs Smith never practiced law, notwithstanding that she has had opportunity enough.
 According to the testimony of Miss PettuS she became acquainted with Mrs Smith when the latter became a student at the university mentioned. Mrs Smith was a most singular client. She was most communicative on every topic imaginable except that upon which she called to obtain information. Miss Pettus said that she would speak Tor hours and hours and day after day before an idea of what she desired could be obtained from her. She ap- peared to be involved in almost every conceivable entanglement that civil law would allow and in her conversations or interviews with her counsel she would mix one with the other in sucn a mess that there appeared to be no limit to her involved circumstances.
 Her father left her about $1OO 900 and her mother about $90,00O. These estates became involved in her hus- bands law suits, for, notwithstanding that she lived on apparently the most amlcaDle terms with her husband, she was everlastingly in law with him. The origin of their law suits was not told, but 1t appears to have been over her individual property and some old law regarding married women that was enacted by the legislature of 1S4S After years of conjugal life she sud denly ascertained that her husband was living on the rents and profits of her individual estate. She thereupon sued him and thus laid the foundation or thirty-three law suits involving property estimated at about $500. .OOO. She was also in the hating business and made money at it, but somehow it dwindled away. Miss Pettus testified mat she was engaged about twenty weeks constantly on Mrs Wright's law suits, exclusive of correspondence with her. consultations, interviews. prepara- ton of the suits and study. She said that she must have received at least bushel basket of letters from Mrs Wright.
 Attorney Newton nevertheless thought that Miss Pettus did not earn $9,OOO in these twenty weeks and with all the care and trouble she was put to by her client. Even though Miss Pet tus is a professor of law and considers her time very valuable. he, though a lawyer from Bridgeport, and just as good as Miss Pettus, would have done the work as good and for far less. Then arose the question what the work would have been done for by Bridge port lawyer, a New Haven lawyer. a lawyer or a New York law yer. Judge Robinson said that a. law yer's fee is not gauged by his success at the bar.
 Notwithstanding that the fair Por- tias charged Mrs Smith $9,0O0, the su- perior court cut it down to S7.5OO. Even then her lawyers would have set tied for 5000 each for cash. but Mrs Smith would not settle. She gave them each note for $7,50O, and they have loaned her cash on other notes.
 Mr O'Neill tried to show that she was an expensive manager if not a failure as one
 Did you ever pay a dolIar,' he asked her, that you did not borrow from some one else to pay it?" The question seemed to amuse her and she laughed heartily. Nothing seems to disconcert her. She laughed at the idea of losing law suits that cost her $2O.OOO. Her examination on the stand did not avail anything. Nothing of importance could be elicited from her.
 Attorney Susan O'Neill when on the stand said Mrs Smith was not crazy. but simply cute. shrewd and crooked. The hearing will be resumed Tuesday.