The Seattle star. [volume] (Seattle, Wash.) 1899-1947, 1912-01-17
HUSBAND ACTS
AS ATTORNEY
FOR WIFE
Woman Who Attacked Judge
Main Is Finally Placed on
Trial Before a Jury.

Trial Before Jury.
Turning down the offers Of
Judge Ronald To provide him
with counsel, Harry Olson this
morning personally conducted
the defense OF Christina Olson,
his wife, who struck Judge
Main in the court house cor
ridor, with a horscwhip sew
cral months ago. Mrs. Olson
is charged with assault in the
third degree.
Judge Ronald offered Olson tho
services OF Edward Judd before tho
jury WAS impanelcd. He again
asked Olson 10 accept Judd as his
attorney without charge during the
examination OF the jury. Then, for
the third and last time during tha
examination Of witnesses. Olson
was Offered the combined services
OF John y. Miller. former mayor Of
Seattle. and Jay G. Allen. Olson
stated that he had had a disagree
ment with his own attorney. Thom-
as X. Horner, and would therefore
conduct the case himself
The facts were not In dispute.
Judge Main himself testified that
he was but lightly touched with
the whip and did not suffer any
physical pain Olson put his wife
on the stand as his only witness-
Her testimony lasted but a few
minutes. and the case went over
I'LL this afternoon for argument.
The Defense
The Olson defense was chiefly
that no violence WAS Intended and
that the horse whip was merely
used to attract attention to what
Mrs. Olson considered an unjust
decision by Judge Main. and that
she acted under great provocafiou.
Olson had been studying court
procedure for the two months pre-
ceding the trial this morning. He
was a frequent visitor to the court
house. and he conducted the case
In an exceptionally intelligent man
ner. although finding himself nj
sea several times when objections
by Deputy Prosecutor Kennedy
were sustained.
After answering that her name n
Christina Olson. and that her oc-
cupafion is that OF housewife.
Mrs. Olson was asked by her hus-
band.
We're you ever arrested b.
fore7"
mo" she answered.
Did you intend to hurt Judge
Mainy'
NO. I Just wanted TO attract
some attention to the injustice he
did
Was your husband defendant IN
a suit recenfiyg"
~Yes."
How many times was that case
tried beforey-
Court Rules Question Out.
Az this point Kennedy objected.
aud the court sustained the objec-
ton Olson made long argument
on this point.
Il want to show that Mrs. Olson
was under great provocation."
Judge Ronald ruled that provoca-
ton may be shown. but that the
facts which the witness believed to
entitle her TO becoming provocated
were not proper evidence.
You may show her state OF mind
at that time. but not the facts in
that case" the court ruled.
Olson argued that he could not
show state OF provocation with
out showing the facts which he al
leges led up to II. In arguing. he
repeatedly stated the facts In the
rental cases which caused the
trouble. He asserted several times
over that the case had been tried
once before and that II resulted In
his favor by jury verdict. went to
the supreme court, was retired by
Judge Main and again the jury re-
turned a verdict for him. and that
then Judge Main set aside the YER
dict
Kennedy repeatedly put In OBJ
lection 10 this argument as improp-
er. Judge Ronald. at one stage,
said:
The court will be fair with you.
But you must observe propriety in
this court, and you must not con.
tinue to argue anything that
the court rules against you"
We'll" said Olson finally, "'if we
can't show why she was provocated
to do the horsewhipping then that
Is all our case" And he rested.
1T is apparent why he didn't
want a lawyer" said Kennedy at
the conclusion of the testimony.
"A lawyer would have been fined
for contempt IL he had persisted
In ignoring the courts rulings"
u object to any statement like
that" Olson cried. Judge Ronald
immediately put a stop to further
wrangling by sharply announcing
that the arguments In the case
would go over till 1880 D. IN.
The horsewhipping of Judge Main
followed the setting aside by Judge
Main of a jury's verdict In favor
OF the Olsons on rent claim for
which they were sued. The amount
involved was about 5000. IL ap-
pears that an agent OF the owner
of the house where they lived pock-
eted rentals paid by Olson Tor two
years in advance, for which he was
promised n discount Of $780, The
case was first tried before Judge
Albertson. and at that time II was
also decided by the jury in favor OF
Olson. After IL had gone to tho