Atlanta semi-weekly journal. (Atlanta, Ga.) 1898-1920, 1909-03-23
Mrs. Carrie Lou Montgomery,
Subject of Objectionable
Letters, Faces the Defend
ant on Witness Stand.
SENSATIONAL CHARGES,
UNFIT FOR PRINT,
CONTAINED IN LETTERS
Story of Anger and Jealousy is Told
to Court-Three Letters Are Sub
mitted as Evidence by the Prose-
dution. ..,esk..S

Two women of strikingly different apa
pearance faced each other in the United
States court Monday morning. one OF
them sitting in the defendants chair. the
other on the witness stand. They were
Mrs Rosa F. Monnish, who is on fiTal.
charged with using the mails for ths
transmission Of letters that were obscene
The other was Mrs. Carrie Lou Mont
gomery, the person about whom the now
sensational letters were written.
These two continued to be the central
figures in all the testimony which fol-
lowed, and which, according to its allega-
lions. disclosed a story throbbing with
jealousy and anger. The government
charges that Mrs. Monnish has sent let
tiers through the malls which, because OF
their contents, bring her within the pale
of the laws punishment. The problem OF
the prosecution is to prove that they were
deposited or caused to be deposited by
Mrs. Monnish. There are four of them,
one is said to have been lost, the other
three of which were offered in evidence
Monday.
Their contents is not admissible to pub
lie print Two of them are addressed to
W. NJ. Preston, of Knoxville, Tenn, who
at the time the letters were received was
married to Mrs Carrie Lou Montgomery,
but who subsequently has been divorced
from her Another was addressed to Mrs.
Preston herself. They charge her with
alternating the affections Of Mrs. Mon
nish's husband. and contain illusions to
infanticide.
Jewelry Missing
Thereis a fourth letter also and It is from
this that the prosecution originated II
was postmarked Atlanta, addressed to the
postmistress Of Hot Springs, Tenn. and
signed Truth and Nemesis" It also con-
tanned the charge that Mrs. Montgomery
had alienated from Mrs. Monnish her hus-
bands affections and that she, Mrs. Mon
nish, had lost presumably because Of the
person referred to, lace pin valued at
$780, a dog collar studded with gold teeth
and set with diamonds and rubles. This
letter to the postmistress was sent to the
officials at Washington because its con-
tents were considered unfit for the mails.
Thence II was forwarded to Postoff7ce In
spector Bannerman, at Atlanta, for irIves-
tigation. The result has been the indict-
ment Of Mrs. Rosa r. Monnish by the
federal grand jury.
Chain of Evidence
The chain Of evidence which tho
prosecution has been attempting to
forge Monday is an exceptionally inter-
esting one. The first witness to testify
was w. NJ. Preston, formerly the hus-
band Of Mrs. Montgomery. He swore
that some time in May, 1907, he had
received a registered letter OF such q.
character as the one above described.
On reading it, he said, he had given it to
his wife This letter has subsequently,
been lost. The return address on the
envelope was Charles L. BelEaIm, At
lanta. When some time had passed
without his replying to IT, he testiheds
he received an ordinary letter which
stated that a registered letter, Nc. so,
-S- - g.
This letter repeated the charges con-
tanned in the previous letter. Then
came a third communication entitled
The History of Carrie Louis Family
on the envelope OF which was again
written the return address, Charles L.
BeIkum.'
In this connection the government called
to the stand William H. King, colored
mail carrier who delivers letters on Peach
tree street. He testified that he had CIV
en- Mrs. Monnish a postofice receipt for
a registered letter numbered go and
that the return address for this letter was
Charles l. Belkum.
Continuing further in his testimony
King said that on one occasion Mrs Mon
nish had asked him to come to to
her house at Peachtree street and do
some writing for her.
''She said l wrote good hand ana that
was why she wanted me-" he said.
The witness stated that he wrote a por-
ton of letter and then stopped.
''why?' asked Assistant District Attor-s ,
ney Henley.
Because considered that it was grows
ing obscene" he answered.
''What was in that letter." asked the
attorney.
''Pd rather not discuss fits contents"
said the witness.
When pressed for an answer he stated
the letter referred to a woman who had
been trusted in the Monnish home and
who had deceived Mrs. Monnish about herr
husband" There was also reference to
other unmentionable subjects.
Mrs Montgomery, when called to the
stand was shown a letter, one of the
notorious group, dated May 19. 1907, and
addressed to Mrs. Carrie Lou Montgom-
cry Mary Byrd Preston. She identified
1t as one she had received at Knoxville.
A D. Mullinax, a retail grocer, whose
store adjoins the property of Mrs. Mon
nish on Peachtree street, testified that he
had been called over to Mrs. Monnish'ss
and had heard read letter entitled "A
True History of Carrie LOUIS Family
He said that Mrs Monnish had stated
that she was going to send it to one
Preston. Mrs. Monnish, he continued, said
that the woman referred to had broken
up her home, and that she was retailiat-
ing.
This closed the testimony for the prose-
cution.
Mrs Monnish herself was next called td
the stand. She admitted writing LETT
ter dated May 10 and addressed to Mad-
anne Mary Lou Montgomery Byrd Pres
ton, but denied writing any of the others
The letter of May 10 did not use the
character of language employed in the
others. She testified further that the COLI
ored mail carrier had subsequently told
her that he had sworn to a lie because
he was afraid Of losing his job II he did
not. Miss Mamie Wall and Mrs Lizzie
McColgan also testified for Mrs. Mon.
ish. -------