The daily morning journal and courier., 1907-03-15
NORTON DIVORCE SUIT;
 ARGUMENTS YESTERDAY
COUNSEL ON BOTH SIDES MAKE
 SHARP ATTACKS.

Attorney Hamilton Said NOrtOn's Parents Were Afraid That Defend
 ant Would Eat Beans on Her Spoon if She Visited the Conway's in Bos- tOn--Mrs. Norton Again Resorts to Tears--Judge shumway Has Reserved His Decision.
 The last act in the Norton divorce melodrama was played yesterday morning when counsel for the defend ant and plaintiff made their arguments in the case, and at 2:30 the curtain was rung down in the final climax of the proceedings with the fair Josephine in tears. Neither side showed the other any mercy and the strongest and most insinuating remarks were made by both for and against. Sarcasm was plentiful and tales of a sympathetic na- tuHe were not wanting. The case has been a long one and many were heard to remark that they were glad ith was | finished.
 Attorney Frank Kenna in opening said that although the original action for divorce was brought by E. K. Nor ton, the millionaire of New York, as the nearest friend and former guardian ! of the Yale student. the real complain ant since the beginning of the trial had been young Norton. He said that the application for a decree is based upon the dual grounds of habitual intemper- ance and infdelity, as allowed by statute. He maintained that in his opinion the plaintiff had submitted an overwhelming amount of evidence to support the former claim.
 If your honor please" said Attorney Kenna, "her admitted visits to the va rious road houses, cafes, restaurants, or what you will, have been, ingeniously, you might say explained by her story that she wished to gain news of her husband Here is a woman affirming that sE } deeply loved her husband vis- iting road houses, the character of some of which is questionable, and in company eating and drinking with men, her friends her playmates, she called them.
 "Our detective work has been thor ough and honest The testimony of Detective Webb that he has seen the defendant intoxicated time after time, has been corroborated by impartial, outside witneses-Mr. Horton, for in stance. who saw her come from the Oneco and stagger toward car.'
 Again turning to her story that Jen- kins had remained in her room in Hart ford because she was nervous, he said: Where were Mrs. McIsaacs, the land lady; Mary the maid; any women bcarders? Could she not have called upon woman companion to stay with her? Why have not some of these wom- en been brought into court by these defendhnts?
 He closed by saying that In all thir- ty-one college men had been brought into the trial as having been compan- her marriage,
 Attorney Goodhart arose to open the case for the defendant He read his argument from manuscript He recall ed that divorces were not to be granted on the caprice of persons. He then read letters from Norton to his wife. the same which were made public dur ing the trial He maintained that Nor ton loved his wife during the period after his marriage until the time of the publishing of the news of it.
 He called the attention of the judge to rulings which made 1t imperative that testimony of paid detectives should be scrutinized most carefully and corrobo- rated. He commented upon persons who spy on husband or wife as "the mali cious rascals of the Webb, Iitke, Ever sen type"
 Going on Mr. Goodhart said in part:
 Mrs. Norton, deserted by her hus- band in this city, left for Hartford to live the life of a virtuous and true woman This is testified to by the facts that Mrs Norton went to Father Me- Alleney to try to get into the Young Women's Christian association or Catholic home She had been bounded here by five detectives upon her track,
 May beg your honor to invoke the principle: False in one thing, false in many; perhaps false in all. 1 call your attention to the flaw in Webbs account of the time when he says he saw Mrs, Norton near a theater with Jenkins. This testimony is given the lie by that of Jenkins parents that he was home and the fact that Mrs. Norton was at the store where she was employed
 MT. Goodhart closed with an attack on the charges of habitual intemper- ance and asked his honor to consider whether or not the sixteen times Webb testified to seeing her drunk were of more weight than that of several other witnesses who said that they had never seen her drunk. He referred to the spe- eific nights and disputed Webb's state- ment by quotations from the evidence. MT. Goodhart closed at 10:35, and MT. Hamilton took up the closing argument for Mrs. Norton.
 MT. Hamilton opened by attacking Norton's attitude on the witness stand, saying that he sat there and eompla- gently told his story and seemed to en- joy it. Tn all my twenty-five years of practice I have never seen, and I hope I will never see again, so much low down, rotten perjury as has come into this case"
 MT. Hamilton then referred to Mrs. Norton's connection with the Catholic church and her Irish descent, and said: Although, your honor although you or I do not believe in the Catholic church, we must agree that it's teachings are in direct controversy to all the charges.