The Oskaloosa herald. (Oskaloosa, Mahaska County, Iowa) 1885-1919, 1907-10-24
IN THE DISTRICT COURT
Disposition Of Various Matters BY
Judge and Jury.

nton-McNelll case, caused no little
excitement Saturday when threats
from Judge willcockson to send the
balm to quiet tho lawyers, were re
CURED to stop discussion which
arose between Attorneys McNett and
Cheshire Trouble arose over let
ter which Mr. McNett produced dur
ing the cross-examination Of the plain.
TIN. Y. E. Hamilton.
Mr.. Russell father OF Mrs. McNeill
when on the witness stand Friday re-
ferred to a letter which he had writ
ten to Mr.. Hamilton shortly before
Mrs, Hamilton secured her divorce,
and Mr.. Hamilton when asked In re,
gard to 1t Saturday. denied having
ever received a letter from Mr. Rus
sen relating to the divorce proceed.
ings and as positively denied having
answered any such letter. No sooner
had this statement been put on record
than Mr. McNett, counsel for the de-
Tense, produced letter from his
pocket with carbon copy attached,
and handed 1t to Mr.. Hamilton with
the remark, look at this and see il
it don't refresh your memory little
Is that your signaturey He was ask.
ed not to read the whole letter, but
to examine the signature only. How
ever, after heated discussion, the
court granted him the privilege OF
reading the letter before giving his
answer, in which he acknowledged
writing one of them in answer to the
other one which he had received.
The contents of the letter were not
offered as evidence and could not
therefore be brought out by the plain.
tift's attorneys in their re-examina-
ton. 1t was over this point that the
controversy arose. Mr.. Cheshire con-
tended that the presentation of the
letter had created the impression with
the Jury that 1t was that epistle which
the witness had denied writing while,
in fact, it might have been written
on some other subject entirely
than the divorce proceedings. Mr..
McNett was firm in his contention that
the contents of the letter need not be
made known and in the debate which
followed all OF the lawyers in the case
Joined. Repeated calls from the
court and the bailiff were unsuccess-
full in putting stop to the discussion
until threats OF punishment were
made. The letters were not made
public at that time, but the witness,
having been privileged to read them.
was permitted to leave the stand ana
confer with his attorneys before con-
tinuing the examination. The incl
dent excited the jury as much as all
others in the court room.
AT noon the jury was dismissed un-
til Tuesday morning at 900 a. m,
when the sensational damage suit
was continued.
After day and a half of rest the
trial of the Hamilton- Mcneil damage
suit was re-opened and more evidence
introduced for the plaintiff. Mrs.
Annie Pyle Simmons was the first wit
ness ON the stand Her knowledge of
the case had been gained while she
was working at the Crowder home,
next door to the " e. Hamilton resi-
dence Her husband, Chas. Simmons,
was the next witness and his testi-
mony was much the same as that of
his wife's. The gist of the whole story
as told by the witnesses so far, with
the exception OF the plaintiff himself,
has been in regard to the frequent Wis
its alleged to have been made by w.
A. Mcneil to the Hamilton home while
the plaintiff and his wife were yet
living together In nearly every case
1t was stated that Mr.. Mcneil was
accustomed to call at the house almost
every day and the testimony showed
that Mrs. Hamilton had many times
been seen out riding in an automobile
with Mr.. Mcneil, sometimes in the
daytime and sometimes after supper.
Mr.. Hamilton was on the stand for
two whole days and his testimony
showed the same story from a differ
ent view point He was required to
20 well into detail in regard to his
manner of life from the time he first
left home to go to school until the
granting of his wife's divorce.
The plaintiff concluded his testi
mony in the Hamilton Mcneil tria
yesterday by the introduction of Mrs
j. Milligan and Snyder Ruby, aftei
hearing the evidence given by Mr., anc
Mrs. Chas. Simons. They told OF the
conduct OF Mr.. Mcneil and Mrs. Ham
ilton when in the Green Candy Cos
store.
The defense opened their side Of
the case in the afternoon by reading
a deposition given by Mrs. Nellie
Bayer at Council Bluffs. The witness.
admitted her immoral character and
alleged criminal intimacy with tho
plaintiff
The deposition Of Mrs. Anna Fore
man set forth that Mr.. Hamilton toll
her that he was sueing Mr.. Mcneil
for $4,000 and that when he got tina
money he wanted to go away witt
her (AIrs. Foreman). The lady ties
tilted that she consented Willingly t
such arrangements, although she wa'
at that time living with Mr. Fore
man as her husband. When asked