The Columbia herald. [volume] (Columbia, Tenn.) 18??-1935, 1908-09-11

light we have II this record tfoM 81
louis i this boy 6irh his arms low
ingly around the neck q his wife and
kissing her. This is the iasr vision
Of their life in ST. Louis
Mir. Hughes told Of the Granberys
leaving ST. Louis when the ranie
came. II this boy ala not spend his
money for his wife. said The speaker
what on earth did he 10 with il? Eie
never drank. his employer says that
He could not have gambled for he
spent his nights al home. He was
late 70 quit work and early at II
every morning.
Mr.. Hughes said thS during all this
time the defendant was getting money
from home in addition 10 his salary
and turning a large part of it over 10
his wife. If this woman had come to
Columbia without clothing and neg
Iected would not the women with
whom she lived in st. Louis have
known it? The defendant could have
explained how his wife came home
without clothing, but he had no OPP
portunity to explain. None of this
testimony came out until after the
defendant had left the stand and the
State knew that his lips were sealed.
/ He asked with emphasis, was this fair
to this young man?
Bringing the couple back TO Ten
nessee, Mr.. Hughes said that Gran
berry had voluntarily signed paper,
discharging his wife's father from all
liability as her guardian. At this time
defendant was penniless and if he had
been SO mean and penurious would
he have done this? Under these cir
cumstances this boy came back to
Tennessee without one cent and with
out employment, therefore, how could
he advance any money to his wife,
asked the speaker. This young man
is not to be blamed because his fam
lily did not advance him. money, If
ever any man needed a@vife TO stand
by him Loyalty and devotedly, it was
this man at this time of panic and
poverty? He said he was glad that
no word of complaint had ever come
from this wife, despite her scanty
wardrobe as testified to by one of the
witnesses. Mr. Hughes said that I'M
der all the circumstances existing
when the defendant returned to Ten
nessee it was the most natural thing
in the world for her to be semitic her
fathers home until her husband could
secure a home and employment.
But his wife did not stay at her
fathers; she came to Columbia; but
there is not one word to show that
she came here by reason OF any sug-
gestion from her husband you
have already heard said the speak
er, "why she was not invited to her
husbands mothers home. Mrs. Gran
berry was sick, she had no cook and
she was not able to entertain a wo-
man in the delicate condition of her
sons wife.
mo, she was not invited to spend
the holidays, for a festal occasion
with her motherin-law; because for
twenty-five years the Christmas
season at the GTanbery home had
been one Of holy grief and sorrow.
1t was the anniversary of the death
of this boys father. But is it not
strange that this wife should have
openly upbraided her husband in the
presence of her cousin, because his
family had neglected her? Could he
help this? When mans family for
sakes him that is the time when his
wife should draw near to him. This
is the only occasion in which we have
any record OLA scrap between these
young people. Now who started the
row? Not Harry. He sat silent.
speechless under the reproaches OF
his wife as she upbraided him be-
cause of the neglect Of his family and
told him that her family was opposed
to the marriage also. -.
I'm what way was this young man
responsible for this girl visiting from
house to house in Columbia, where
she was not invited? How was he to
know that she was an unwelcome
guest to the homes of her relations?
He did not accept the invitation to
the Christmas dinner, but he was not
asked for his reasons and has had no
chance to give them to the Jury"
Mr. Hughes next followed the
couple to Mt. Pleasant. Answering
the criticism that Cranberry had taken
his wife to the home of the deceased !
Mr.. Hughes quoted from the evidence
ne defendant that he never dreamed