The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1909-06-15

tations applied to the case four years
before that date?''
Il don't remember that I Thought shout
that"
aHow long had you been in the Police
Departrent?''
Thirty. eight years.
-Do you mean to say that You don't
know the statute Of hmitation'in suoh
a case is five years?'- ,..
States. I didn't give that any thought
fsYou didn't tell the District Attorney
anything about it. did your
II would II had learned anything
Peabody. who Ia fighting Tor rem
statement, said in reply to a question as
to whether he was connected with the
Police Department that the courts hadn't
Peabody said he first saw Big Hawley
at Paddy the Pigs In Sixth avenue, put
didn't know him that time. He declared
that he was not at Nicolls ONCE any time
that Hawley was there Out was ,h'T9.
took Sholes down to the Detective Bureau
to see Mclaughlin and looked up them mar
riape records at Baltimore and Washlng,,
ton while on his vacation. He FOUND
nothing and telegraphed to that effect.
George }. Gould had entered the court
room while Mclaughlin was testl,ysn9'
MIR. Shearn called him to the stand when
Peabody finished.
Before any questions had been asked
Mr.. Nicoll said the defence was Wiling TO
admit that Howard Gould got 100000 q
year income II that was all the plaintih
wanted to prove by George Gould.
We'll accept that information and see
how much more we can get, saio MI
Shearn.
HOWARD GoUL.D's INCOME.
MFR. Gould said he was one Of the trus-
tees of the Jay Gould will and MIR. Shearn
started out to find what property the VIII
disposed Of, but objections were sus-
tanned 30 far as the will concerned any one
but Howard.
T-Under the will didn't you as executor
set aside a certain part OF the estate 'or
Howard?' 49,,
we have never divided or apportioned
the estate. He was entitled. to one
sixth Of the whole amount. The estate
is all to he held in trust during the HE
Of the children. when the principal VIII he
divided
Mr.. Gould gave the value OF the estate
lbs, Secretary Of the trust estate. had
testified that Mr.. Gould's figures were
correct, MIR. Shearn asked Mr.. Gould IL
his mother hadn't left the children
something,
SHE left only a very little, about 500. 600,
I believe
/ Mr., Shearn asked how much Of his income
he had spent In 1905 Mr.. Nicoll objected
and was sustained. Mr.. Shearn said that
his question was prompted by h decision
OF Justice Bischof in the alimony pro-
ceedings that it wasn't how much income
Howard Gould got but how much he
spent annually that could be MADE the
basis for alimony.
Justice Bowling said that it was only
a question OF how Mrs.. Gould had lived
prior to the sepa ration. He said the tac'
that Howard Gould spends all he gets or
saves most Of it has nothing TO do with
the case. ,
81, zoo, 600 into Castle Gould he tried to
sell it for 81 900, 900 last year and couldn't.
Chandler 4. Cakes, a lawyer, was
called to testify about seeing Big ley
In connection with the case. Hawley
came to his Office in March. 1907. to con-
suit him. He saw MIR. Nicoll after Hawley
consulted him. but claimed a privilege
as TO what he told Mr.. Nicoll. He said
that he had never been paid for his work
and wouldn't say whether or not he ad-
vised Hawley to sue Howard Gould FOL
services in the case. Something had beer
said about bringing q suit. but further
, thar what he read in the newspapers he
didn't know one had been brought.
plaintiff rests" said Mr.. Shearn.
BOILING DOWN II COMPLAINT.
In moving to dismiss the complaint
Mr.. Nicoll said Mr.. Gould had been pro-
viding for his wife and paid her bills. anc
that the non-support charge was readily
disposed OF. As to the cruelty charge,
which mainly consisted in surrounding
Mrs. Gould with detectives. Mr.. Nicoll
said there hadn't been q syllable OF tes-
timony or a witness on that point. TIT
only detectives appearing in the cas-
were those Mr.. Gould engaged: The
Hawley transaction couldn't be charac-
teriEed az cruelty, because there had
been no bad faith On the part OF the
defence.
AS to the abandonment charge. Mr..
tons by which he would return to his
wife were perfectly proper. :,
Mr.. Shearn. opposing the motion, SAID
that Mrs. Gould was in want al the st.
Regis and didn't have a dollar to fee a
servant. He wanted to read into the
evidence newspaper articles hearing on
the Police Department and Big Hawley
but the Court admitted merely the fact
that such articles had been printed,
When Mr.. Shearn got through Mr..
Nicoll said.
MIR. Shearn has delusions OF perse-
cution on that Hawley incident.
always thought he had and know now
that they are persistent"
Justice bowling read over the CON-
plant and aid that there was no evil
dence OF abuse or neglect aud also no
evidence offered as to cruelty and in
human trea Taking up the fourth
paragraph. relating To the abandonment,
the Court mentioned the message sent
to Mrs. Gould 10y Sells, in which Gould
offered to supply his wife with evidence
if she wanted a divorce, and said:
NO proof had been introduced that
she has ever heen guilty OF iatoXicatior
or OF humiliating the defendant before his
friends. Therefore we must assume this
allegation of the complaint TO be true
The plaintiff has made out a prima facit
case and the case will now be tried upon
the abandonment issue
II was then nea rly $50 O'Clock u thu
case was adjourned for the day.
While the separation suit was being
heard before Justice bowling a repre-
sentative Of Mr.. Shearn's Office asked
Supreme Court Justice Giegerich for AZ
additional counsel fee Of $40. 900 anC
81, 934.73 to cover the expenses TO date
An adjournment was ask ed for on hehal
OF Mr.. Nicoll. and Mirabeau l.. Towns
representing Mr.. Shearn, said:
Il am willing 10 grant an adjournment
to Tuesday afternoon ut 4 o'cloo 80 tina
Mr.. Nicoll can argue il. but we are out o
ammunition and the enemy Ia shooting
at MS"
They are out OF ammunition becaus
they have been shooting in the air.
replied The opposition.
we haven't been firing in the all