The Barre daily times. (Barre, Vt.) 1897-1959, 1916-01-31
Mrs. Mohr Leaves Witness
Stand Under Favor
able Conditions
MADE MAN OF
HER HUSBAND
Letter by Him Admits Valid
ity of Their Mar
riage

r Providence, Jan. 3l.-Mrs. Elizabeth
+. Mohr Saturday ended long -ordea
ION the witness stand, during which she
made personal defense of the charge
that she had hired three negroes to muir
der her husband, DIR. G. Franklin Mohri
widely known as physician in Proyi-
dence and Newport. The examination
extended through the greater part of
three full court days In this time she
faced friendly and unfriendly attorneys,
who brought from her every detail OF
her life with DIR. Mohr.
Many of these details were given re-
Iluetantly. She never wavered in her dec
llaration that she had nothing to do with
the murder, although she had objected
strenuously to her husbands attentions
to other women.
The testimony of Mrs. Mohr was re-
garded by the defense as the most Inn
portant at the trial. Cecil V. Brown
and Henry H. Spellman, two negroes,
who, the state charged, killed pr. Mohr
and wounded Miss Emily Burger, his
companion, are yet to be heard. George
| W. Heals, the physicians negro chauf-
| feur, turned states evidence.
A letter written by Dr. Mohr in 1909,
in which he admitted the validity OF
their marriage was introduced over the
protest of the state. Mrs. Mohr was
questioned closely regarding DIR. Mohr's
statement that Il write this in defense
of good woman at present.; at that
time, she said, she was not living with
her husband, but was at her mothers
home in Massachusetts,.
William III. Lewis, counsel for Brown,
questioned Mrs. Mohr briefly concerning |
his employment by DR.. Mohr. She said
Brown had always been kind to her
children.
When Arthur Cushing began the re-
direct examination, he offered in evil
denee letter written by DIR. Mohr to
L. J. Sullivan OF Fall River, Mass, to
which Attorney General Rice objected.
"This letter bears upon the question
of the marriage John ]. Fitzgerald of
the defense declared in arguing that it
should be admitted
After reading the letter the court
ruled that it could be introduced on
proper proof, but held that the prosecu
ton should have the right to comment
on the absence OF Sullivan, who is Mrs.
Mohr's brother-in- law, if he is not put
on az witness.
The letter written by DR.. Mohr to Sui
Ivan on March 5, 1909, was read to the
Jury as follows:
81 am rather surprised to hear from
Elizabeth that you dolefully betrayed a
rust and. | dare believe her, added !
both you and your wife, q
hat were appalling, However, | am not
n the mud -slinging business, but you ?
must not say too much about Elizabeth a
n you will have to reckon with me. For
myself, as | said don't care what you =
hink, but don't think it too loud Eliz 9
beth, find, had perfect right to sup
ose she was married, and | find now
m in error. / got my idea from the ',
faloney case in New York. Maloney, .
Tho secretly married Osborn and had no
ecord made of it. The courts held that
hat was not legal. However, they used
ssumed names. Religion mixed us all
p and made us do as we did. We CON P
ulted an attorney this morning and find
hat the fact that the certificate was
OF recorded did not invalidate the tran
action. ] write this in defense of d.
God woman at present, although what ! in
she admits, and that is our .;
resent difference"
Mr.. Gushing attempted to bring in the "a
eeord of the birth and baptism of the "a
lohr children, but on objection of the DC
ttorney general this matter was exclud- M
/. The court reconsidered its decision, tn
owever, after Mr.. Gushing had argued We
nat it bore on the question of the doe 81
IRIS recognition of the marriage G'
Mrs. Mohr then testified that both ID
lildren were baptized Mt the cathedral w
I'd that DIR. Mohr took them there. On yo
Ie re-cross examination Mr. Rice asked ia
RS. Mohr if there had been seine talk nj
,out her marriage. he
people were talking about you-say- tn
g some nice things about you, weren't ID
evg" &c
"They were hurt" she said.
'What did your husband mean when ac'
wrote to Mr.. Sullivan L am not in AS
e mud-slinging business" WI
81 don't know. sol
HE got more mud IN his lie than ne We
rew?" tic
NO, sir; not while he lived with me-" tn
"What did your husband mean when Al
wrote 4 write in the defense of a tel
cd woman at PRESENT. Did he mean ma
u were not good woman before ?" adj
NO, sir. / was always good girl =
mother"
She admitted that at the time the let
! was written she was not living with
r husband, but was with her mother in
union.
And your quarrel with your husband
$ the result Of your admitting inn
lper conduct ?"
No. sir
Did you say that you made man Of
n and that everyone knew it,
Yes. the doctor always said made a
n Of him and he told hundreds about
And his life right up 70 the end was j
result Of your handiwork 2" \
I was parted from him for two years y
ore the end u
This completed Mrs. Afohr's Testimony n