The San Francisco call., 1907-03-06
LITTLE EDNA'S BIRTHDAY
A MATTER OF DOUBT
AS WELL is PARENTAGE
Child Can't Know When She
Was Born Until Parent
age Is Decided
STRONG TESTIMONY
Witnesses Favor Claim of
Mrs. Hall That She,
Is Mother
STRONG TESTIMONY

Was yesterday the birthday of the
winsome little tot. whose smiles and
childish prattIe have for several days
brought sunshine into the gloom of le-
gal proceedings in Judge Seawells
court, where two women. each claiming
to be the little ones mother, are bat
tling for her custody?
! 1t is a question as unsettled as that
sterner one of parentage on which the
suit is hinged. and while it did not arise
yesterday before the court it serves.
nevertheless. to add another note of
sadness TO the tragedy of this innocent
life
If the contention of Mrs. Clara Hall
that she is the mother of the child is
correct yesterday was Edna's fifth
birthday. for Mrs. Hall asserts that her
daughter was born on March 5, 1902.
/ But If, as DR.. Olive Carson declares,
Edna is her own daughter, then yester-
day was not a birthday, Tor Mrs. Car
sons testimony has been that her
daughter was born in April.
DAISY LETTER QUESTIONED
Mrs. Halls case was greatly strength
ened by the testimony adduced at the
hearing yesterday. for her claims.
which are corroborated by several i'm
/ portant witnesses. Mrs. Hall also
sprung a sensation by suggesting that
the mysterious letter signed DAISY"
purporting to have been received
through the mail by DR.. Carson, was
written by DR.. Carson herself with the
intention of yelling the real issue of the
case by bringing a third woman into
the matter as a claimant.
! Mrs. Hall declared under oath that a
! few days prior to the time the Daisy
letter was supposed to have been re-
ceived by DIR. Carson she was at the
latter's house, and wishing to mail a
letter, went to desk to secure an en-
velope There was but one envelope
there, and Mrs. Hall says she did not
take that because Of a distinct yellow
splotch on it's face. The envelope of
the Daisy" letter contains just such a
spot as that described by Mrs. Hall and
she positively identified IL as the same.
Mrs. Mary Z. Clark of 221S Webster
street, where Mrs. Hall resided, was one
Of the new witnesses yesterday who
added a strong link to the chain of
testimony She stated that on the
evening Of January % Mrs. Carson tel
ephoned to ask her If Mrs. Hall was
there, and, receiving a negative reply,
came to see her. Mrs. Carson was in
great mental distress and weeping, the
witness testified, and said that Mrs.
Hall had taken Edna away from her
and that she felt she would go crazy
without the little one, for she had
learned to love it "as a mother"
REMEMBERS BIRTHMARK
On February %, Mrs. Clark said,
Mrs. Carson visited her again, this time
in company with Attorney Frank
Schilling, who is now conducting Mrs.
Carson's case. She stated that the OBJ
ject Of the visit was to force her to say
that Mrs. Hall had been cruel to the
child, but she refused to do so, declar-
ing that she had seen Mrs. Hall slap it
on one or two occasions, but that on
the whole it was affectionately treated.
DR.. Allen z. Scott testified that he
was called by Mrs. Carson to care for
the child when it was i'll, two or three
weeks after its birth, and was told by
Mrs. Carson at the time that 1t was not
her child, but the child of some poor
people, who had left it with her.
Mrs. Hall told of birthmark she OBJ
served on her daughters abdomen the
day after her birth, and it was asserted
that the mark was still plainly visible
on Ednas body. William Hall also
was on the stand and corroborated por-
tions of his wife's testimony.
Dr. Charles H Walworth, who testi-
fed last week in behalf of Mrs. Car
son, was recalled, but gave substan-
TALLY the same facts as narrated by
him on the former occasion.
The trial continues at o'clock this
afternoon.