Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1905-06-08
CONTRACT IN EVIDENCE
ADMITTED BY NOTARY IN Won
RoQUEs LAND SUIT.
Statement Of the Conditions by Coun-
sci on Both Sides-Old En-
glish Statute.


John H., Walter. formerly associate counsel
for Baroness Won Roques mother of Mrs.
FLORENCE Maybrick, In her suit against d.
w. Armstrong and others for the recovery
OF certain lands in Virginia and elsewhere,
the defense has succeeded in getting in evil
dence several letters and contract, by
which Walter and l.. d. YarrelI. attorneys.
undertook the prosecution of the case. By
this contract the attorneys were to furnish
the money required for the legal work. and
were to share in the proceeds of the suit
in the event of a favorable decision. The
proceedings yesterday were before A. H.
Gait, a notary public acting under author
ity of the chancery court of Richmond, Va.
The contract had been in the possession
of w. Mosby Williams, attorney for Wal
ter, but Williams declined to surrender it..
on the ground that 1t came to him in the
capacity of attorney. Justice Barnard of
the Supreme Court of the District of CO.
lumbia sustained Williams contention.
Application was made by counsel for
Armstrong to have Walter declared in con-
tempt by reason of his failure to respond
to subpoenas issued by Notary Gait but
action was not taken when counsel stated
his willingness to testify yesterday.
Letters Produced.
Mr. Hayden. attorney for Mrs. Maybrick.
produced certain letters. supposedly from
Mr. Walter to the baroness, which Mr..
Walter had failed to submit. They We're
: not read, and Mr.. Walter did not admit he
wrote them. All the papers submitted yes
terday are subject to the courts decision
whether or not they will be admitted as
testimony in the case.
"A member of counsel for Mr. Armstrong
stated today that the hearing yesterday was
taken up in reference to papers contracts
and letters which We're in possession of John
II. Walter. real estate dealer disclosing
correspondence between Walter and the
Baroness Won Roques in relation to the in
stitution of the chancery proceedings at
Richmond against D. w. Armstrong and
others holding the title to 100000 acres of
land.
The substance of the letters show" said
counsel, that Mr.. Walter solicited the claim
against MIR. Armstrong. The contract is
made between Mr.. Walter and Judge Var
rell, as attorneys for the baroness, for the
one part, and the baroness for the other
part.
THE purpose of securing the evidence at
yesterdays hearing was to show that the
proceedings at Richmond were instituted at
the instance of her agents, which brought
the proceedings within the purview of an
old English statute now in force in Vir-
ginia on the ground of champerty. This de-
Tense was interposed by the defendant, and
the court in considering the matter has
withheld it's decision until the coming in of
the evidence which was taken here yester-
day.
Under the English statute any party to
the suit can raise the objection, which, If
sustained, dismisses the proceedings.
Mr.. Hayden's Views.
When the attention of Mr.. Samuel ".
Hayden of counsel for Mrs. Maybrick was
called to the foregoing he said that the
contract entered into by MessTs. FARRELL
and Walter was no defense whatever on the
part of Mr.. Armstrong, and that Judge
Barnard yesterday so held and refused to
require Mr.. Williams to answer d question
as to whether not he had the contract
in his possession.
That this contract could only be pleaded
by the Baroness Won Roques in defense of
an act or an attempt of Messrs. Yarrell and
Walter to enforce it against her, and that
so far as the issues of the case between
Armstrong and Mrs. Maybrick and her
mother is concerned lit is as irrelevant as
the genealogy of the man in the moon"
Judge Barnard's decision" added Mr..
Hayden, holding the contract referred to
as Irrelevant, is supported by all the text
writers and all the leading cases on the
subject
Mr.. Hayden further stated that the Bar
oness Won Roques does not understand the
attitude of Mr.. Walter and his counsel in
this matter
There is no claim that Judge Yarrell ever
paid any part of the expense of this ltiga-
ton. 1t is admitted that Mr.. Walter did,
but since 1895 Mr.. Walter has paid no part
thereof. Mrs. Maybrick is now bearing the
entire expense of the suit, including chan
Gerry fees. and as she testified in this cause,
was from her own earnings, which by the
help of God will be sufficient to enable her.
self and her mother to recover their legal
rights in the case