Spirit of Jefferson. [volume] (Charles Town, Va. [W. Va.]) 1844-1948, 1912-12-10
/ 1 Full Statement Of / Mach Discussed
Case.
[From the Charleston Gazette.l

>e'<,~ $500
Catherine Osenton against Mrs. Mar
garrt Williamson. which was flushed
the District Court of the
United States for the Southern District
of West Virginia. Out of respect to the
court which tried the case this paper has
not discussed the evidence, nor has it
reported u. There was no trouble to get
the evidence. From the witnesses about
the court house, there would have been
no trouble to have gotten the substantial
points of the evidence. But as members
of the bar were not excluded from the
court room. there is no doubt that the
evidence was discussed fully on the
streets, and it was an easy matter, at
any point in the trial. to have gotten
q list of the witnesses, and the substance
OF each witness's stmony. The policy
of this paper is to observe any injunction
of the court that its sessions should be
kept from the public. and this led to the
order to the reporters not to undertake
to get for publication the details of the
evidence. But many things have been
published by newspapers circulated in
West Virginia. and it is therefore nothing
but fair, now that the case is over for the
present, that the history of the case
should given to the public.
Mr. n-anFAp &c
and politician. He is one of the most
popular men IN Southern West Virginia.
He is manly. courageous, we'll educated,
a splendid orator, an able lawyer, and a
resourceful, charming man. He counts
his friends nv the legion. and does not
know what it is to desert friend or
cause.
l. was developed in tie evidence in
the case that many years ago he and
his wife became estraneed. and this was
long before he ever met Mrs. William
sou. In 1905. upon the death of Mrs.
Wlliamson's father. the late William
Hawkins, he was employed to take
charge of her estate. and shortly after he
was made executor under the will of the
late William Hill. whose property Law
near CAREY Bridge, AMI consisted of
real and personal property WHICH re-
q Tired constant attention. The business
of these two estates rt quired him 10 b.
in and about Gauley Bridge grea
deal, and inasmuch as the house of th
ia f-ndaut was good place to stop, ht
often stopped there. and from that point
by horseback and in a buggy, MAJ e
visits to the Hill estate. upon which
were many coal leases, end the owners
of these coal leases had teen unfortunate
in their financial matters Some OF
them went into bankruptcy proceedings
and the collection os tnr rents an row
a'ties, and the details of the manage
ment of these properties r. CURED his at.
tention, month V, sometimes weekly and
sometimes daley. AS to these points
there WAS not dispute in the evidence.
About year ago hrs wife sued for g
divorce, and secured it, and by the terms
OF the decree. he was require to pay t.
his wife $1,000 per mouth. and to his
four infant children $4,000 per month
each, m sking one hundred dollars a
month; and. in addition to this require.
ment of the decree, he is now educating
all OF his chiinren. There was no pre-.
telce NJ de that the provision made fol
his wife and children is not am, lie
His wife moved to Virginia and broupb,
SUIT IN the Fedora Court hare for the
Alienation of her husbands aft. ctions
and this was the suit decide Yesterday.
There is Z great deal ct gossip as to
what WAS proved; but generous public
should remember that in talking abn, ,
evidence. in case of this kind pcssir
will linger upon the racy part and for.
get the evidence in rebuttal.
The plaintiff IN this case proved tina,
MIR. Osenton and Mrs. Williamson mace
many visits to cities and resorts. bu,
never without a chspeion, and peneI.
ally in the company of her two dareh.
tiers. Not one single incident was prov.
ed of trip being made without the
presence of some wcmah companion OF
these two daughters, one beng row
fourteen and the other sixteen years Of
age. The sensational part # II e eyi.
dence was met, in the opinion of the
friends OF Mrs Williamson and MIR.
Osenton. completely and fully. These
friends contend that the evidence was
ridiculous upon the face of it. 1t show
ed, 1t true, wantonness on the part of
the defendant inconsistent with her
whole life, her education, her surround
Ings. and the opinion OF her many friends
and relatives, who are anong the best
people OF this state. Every witness to
these two sensational acts was attacked
with facts which seemed convincing
These We're rebutted in the first place
by the answer of Mrs. Williamson and
Mr.. Osenton. and then in the only other
way that they could be met by the
evidence of u'timpeachable witnesses to
other facts, Inconsistent Herewith, and
then they were met again by direct
contradictions, from witnesses well
known.
The celebrated ''nigh,gown" Incl.
dent was shown TO have been Impossible
by witnesses of high character, who
have spent their lives in the association
ana confidence of the best people of this
country. And the witness who swore
to that incident WAS shown to have been
in error in other minor details about
facts that could not we'll be denied.
Mr.. Osenton's MANY friends were
gratitied at the complete refutation