The Wichita daily eagle., 1904-04-01
CONTEMPT CASE DISMISSED
FATHER OF MRS. STEVENS MUST
APPEAR IN COURT NEXT.
Must Answer Why He Should Not
Turn Diamonds Over to
Receiver.

Upon the evidence introduced by the
defendant, Mrs. b. Stevens was discharged
yesterday afternoon in the probate court
and the charge of contempt against her
was dismissed upon the grounds that the
diamond rings in controversy were not in
her possession at the time the orde, was
issued by the court requiring her to
turn them over to Henry Schad, as re-
| ceiver.
The trial yesterday occupied the greater
portion of the day, and attracted a great
deal of interest. According to the evil
dence introduced by the defendant, the
rings were shown to be in the possession
OF her father at the time the order was
issued, and although the question as TO
whether the rings were exempt or not,
had already been decided by Judge
Enoch. evidence and argument were in
troduced by the defense to show that they
were exempt.
Just prior to the release of Mrs. Stevens,
the plaintiff asked that an order be issued
by the court requiring the father, C.
Hoath, to appear and answer why he
should not give up the rings which are
now in his possession. 1t is the conten-
ton of the plaintiff that, although the
rings were given TO Hoath on a verbal
chattel mortgage, the evidence introduced
yesterday showed that Mrs. Stevens did
not know when the possession of the
rings was taken by her father, and there
fore the mortgage was not valid The
plaintiff claims that, according to the
law. the mortgagor must deliver the ar
ticles, in a verbal mortgage, to the mort
gagee.
Judge Enoch then issued an order to
the effect that c. Hoath should appear
before him on April s, 1904, at o'clock
p. m., and answer concerning the prop
erty in his possession belonging TO Mrs
B. S. Stevens. After this order had been
made, the case against Mrs. Stevens was
then dismissed.
When the case was called yesterday
morning. the plaintiff was represented by
Attorneys Eckstein and Ysnkcy; the de-
fendant with her attorney, John Adams.
Accompanying Mrs. Stevens were her
father and Mr.. Stevens father.
Mrs. Stevens was the first witness
called, and the first part of her evidence
was TO show that she considered her rings
were exempt.
She said: II have three rings which
were given TO me by my husband, at diff
ferent times. and I wore them continually
l did not consider myself dressed unless
1 wore my diamonds. l wore them al
rings were not in my possession when
this suit began, and have not been since
Ny father has them. l first knew he had
the date, but ii was after the trial began.
L did not tell him to take them, and did
not give them to him. 1 did not know he
had them until he told me-
Mr.. Hoath. Mrs. Stevens father. was
then called to testify He said: II have
the rings in my possession. There are
three Of them, and l got them some time
In February. about the last day. I got
them from behind towel in the kitchen,
OF my daughters home. and took them to
my home where they have peen kept
ever since. l took them because I had
claim on them for $3.50 money that I had
loaned my daughter, and ! took the rings
as security. 1 gave them to my wife who
keeps everything that belongs TO me. and
I have the same right to keep what be-
longs to her
How long ago was it you gave them to
herr"
Il don't remember just how long; it
might be m n"
who was present at the house when
you got the rings from behind the
towel?''
Mr.. Stevens and my daughter They
were in the sitting room. She said a short
time before that the rings were in the
kitchen, and she did not know that l
went out and go, them afterwards. I did
not tell her until four or i've days after
the trial: I think four days
l got them because l held a verbal
mortgage on them. and thought / ought
to have them. l loaned the money at
different times. The first time was Aug
ust, 1891. don't remember the other
dates. but l have the receipts at home
l let her keep the rings until l was
ready TO take them. then she was TO give
them to me. took them just before
the trial was commenced. l heard you
were after the rings and I thought l ought
t. take them
How did you learn we were after the
rings?'
i don't remember. l guess I read il in
the paper Mr.. Stevers or my daughter
might have told me. bat l believe read
il in the paper
Then it was after the trial began that
YOU got them"
Yes sir. ! guess 50"
But YOU just said il was before didn't
yuu?"
You are just trying 10 make me swear
to lie. Mr Eckstein. the first l said
was right anyway"
Mr.. Eckstein said that he had no in
tention Of that whereupon Mrs. Stevens
exclaimed: Well. why do you talk to him
the way you do them
Then you got them before?' asked MI
Eckstein
Yes sir. before
You just said after didn't you?''
Did -"
Didn't you?'
"Dogged If ! know
Did You tell Mrs stevens before the
trial where they were?'
No sir.
Mr. Eckstein asked the court TO order
Mr.. Hoath TO bring the receipts into
court
Il wish 70 show that Mrs. Stevens did
not owe this man cent ne said
Mr.. Roath then said quickly DO you
doubt my word. Mr. Ecksre.n9'
Yes sir. do. answered the attorney
Continued On Sixth Page