The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1909-10-20
We're Ones Relating to Her
Former Marriages.
MIR. SEERY ON STAND.
Gives Incident Of Mr.. GOrdOn's
FOrgetfulness.
Case Is Dragging While AttOr-
neys Wrangle.

A sharp legal battle was the feature
of the Munn-Gordon trial In the district
court.
The question was whether the depo-
sitions concerning Mrs. Gordon's pre-
vious marriages used at the trial OF the
former case over the widows dover
right in the Gordon estate. which Is
now in the supreme court on appeal.
could be used at this trial
The contention was based on the MS
tory of Mrs. Gordon previous to her
marriage to G. S. Gordon. One of the
clauses in the petition in this case al
leges that Mrs. Gordon was not legally
divorced from a Mr.. Richmond and
Nj Starr, former husbands and that
she concealed the fact of these mar
r:ages from Mr.. Gordon. The same al
legation was made in the former SUIT
ard il was decided that the widow OF
Mr.. Gordon had been legally married
and legally divorced from each OF the
men, and furthermore that Mr.. starr
is now deceased.
But plaintiff desired to use the same
evidence in this case. hoping thal II
would be used to better advantage 10
the plaintiff than before. A hypothetl-
cal case OF a perfectly abominaole Wo-
man marrying man and Wltnhololhg
from him the facts of her past record,
etc, was brought to the attention OF
the court by the counsel for plaintiff
Judge Allen, in Directing to any SUCH
evidence. began reading from a report
of the supreme court an opinion ne
himself had written. He did not arrive
at his point very quickly and Mr.. ID. X
IIite for the plaintiff, took the BOOK
from him, continuing to READ ana
shortly quoted a very dangerous pas
sage for the Defense scoring d point
amid cheers
But the defense came to the rescue
with a section of the new code OF pro-
cedure adopted by the legislature ana
cited good authority to support their
contention that the dispositions should
rot be read.
Judge Dana, in giving his opinion,
stated that the plaintiff construed the
supersedeas bond to Vacate the former
Judgment and said, II don't so under
stand the law at this time. I don't so
read the last article of the legislatures
act think a careful reading of sec
tion $50 shows very plainly what the
effect of that bond was to be and READS
plainly that it shall operate to stay ex-
ecution. And 1 believe that, should the
supreme court decide that it meant to
vacate, it will establish a precedent
that never was intended in the minds
OF the legislators and the body of law
yers who advised"
He also said that the domestic rela-
tions, former marriages and past his
tory constituted a matter manifestly
unfair to go before the jury ana Inen
to be withdrawn later as it might
prejudice the case and that a failure to
disclose the womans past history and
her history as a girl or earlier mar
riages could not be calculated to ex-
press guilt.
The judge ruled that the evidence
and dispositions should not go to the
jury and the counsel for plaintiff ask
ed 10 minutes to shape an offer con-
corning their evidence with the result
that finally their dispositions which
did not bear upon the former mar
riages of Mrs. Gordon were allowed
to be read to the jury.
Mr.. Seery on the Stand.
H. w. Seery, an implement mer-
chant at the corner of Sixth and
Quincy before whose place of business
Mr.. Gordon once stopped and asked
a return of some money for returned
shingles, was placed on the stand to
show that the old man was slightly
mistaken in his bearings. The de-
Tense on DISCRIMINATION brought
out that the w. 1. Miller lumber yard
is very close to the implement house
and that Mrs. Mum was driving and
not Mr.. Gordon. Mr.. Seery, who is
not a tall man, was asked whether
Mr.. Miller looked like him and the
court room crowd laughed for Mr..
Miller is tall and slender. The de-
fence then attempted to show that
Foreman Blanchard of the lumber
company did look remarkably like Mr..
Seery.