OCR Interpretation


The herald. [microfilm reel] (Los Angeles [Calif.]) 1893-1900, January 21, 1898, Image 10

Image and text provided by University of California, Riverside; Riverside, CA

Persistent link: https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn85042461/1898-01-21/ed-1/seq-10/

What is OCR?


Thumbnail for 10

10
THE ONLY LOVE
Cal Hunter's Correspond
ence Put in Evidence
THE LEONIS DECREE IS FILED
THE SUPREME COURT GIVES NO
RELIEF TO DOLE
E. I. Bryant Will Have to Stand Trial
in the Hoxie Transaction—The
Young Decree Vacated
Today there will be a final rallying of
forces in the Creede will contest, and
in all probability the first phase—over
the contract—will come to an end. Yes-
terday the evidence put in was of a
scrappy, disjointed character. It began
by Dr. E. A. Bryant's giving expert
opinion as to Mrs. Creede's mental con
dition. Assuming that she took tho daily
doses ot morphine she said she had to,
still he failed to understand her labor
ing under any mental unsoundness on
January 2. 1897. In giving his testimony
he formed the opinion that she was
quite sound. Dr. Bryant denies that
morphine ever prompts to benevolence,
but he conceded that it always affects
the moral and emotional character of
the user. Sometimes morphine takers
are affected more easily than at others
and are very capricious. On cross-ex
amination Dr. Bryant stated that mor
phine habitues are physically and men
tally weakened in every case.
Dr. D. C. Barber, superintendent of the
county hospital, testified along the same
line, and made the somewhat curious
statement that the county patients are
sometimes morphine habitues when they
enter the hospital, and others become
habitues after they enter. He held that
during a period ot twenty years a per
son might go on increasing the doses of
morphine until from twenty to thirty
grains a day might be taken with abso
lutely no effect. The mind might be
impaired, and it might not. If the body
was not affected the mind would not be
much Impaired.
That ended the expert testimony for
the defense, and H. J. Fleishman of the
Farmers and Merchants' bank went
upon the stand to prove the amount of
money that Mrs. Creede had had on de
posit there. The sum he testified to was
$4500. This amount, with the $46,000
shown to have been deposited at the
First National and the $11,000 which
Mrs. Creede says she received at Pueblo.
Col., was all received by her between
1893 and January 2. 1897. and. as the de
fense contends, was a very fair slice of
Creede's property.
THE DOUBLE-STRINGED AGENT
Cal Hunter, the real estate man, who
apparently posed as the friend of Mrs.
Creede and Mr. Creede during the troub
lous times of the separation and divorce,
was recalled to the stand by Mr. Flnlay
son, in order that he might identify
certain letters. Letters had been put in
by the defense that were written by Mr.
Creede to witness, and contestant desired
to put in Hunter's letters, in order that
the court might know just how the cor
respondence came about.
An extract from the first letter writ
ten by Cal Hunter to Mrs. Creede ex
poses the origin of the standing on his
head episode, which has caused the de
fense some amusement during the trial.
This extract reads as follows:
" . . . . I wished to keep you ad
vised as to what was going on here in Los
Angeles. Judge Lamm*' was standing on
his head, as you say. when he learned you
had gone, and admitted he was beaten at
his own game. Lamme also went so far as
to try and find if you had left anything be
hind that lie might attach and recover
himseif In the way of attorney's fees.
"In the matter of the bank stock. I thir.k
to wait until a dividend is In sight, when
all stock sells better. I will watch It
and sell as soon as I nan get you out O. K.
We do not want to lose on it. if possible.
Should I get any offers I will wire them
if I think they are worthy of considera
tion. Let me hear from you often. . ."
The next letter Is of Interest, inasmuch
as It has been generally understood that
Mrs. Creede cared nothing for the child
Dorothy. In the light of later events,
indeed, it might almost be inferred that
Mr. Hunter was using whatever influ
ence he may have had with Mrs. Creede.
and using her affections for Dorothy to
get her to keep quiet and let the divorce
slide through. This letter ran as fol
lows:
April 14, '97.
Dear Mrs. Creede: This will advise you
that Mr. Creede has flint] his suit for di
vorce, and I expect before many days you
will have received a copy of tho complaint
and its allegations. 1 asked that in the
event he brought a suit to make it as mild
as possible, which he has done.
I had n talk with him in regard lo letting
you have the baby Dorothy. While he Is
strongly attached to the little one. I don't
think he wants to give her up. but I am of
the opinion that I can persuade him to
let you have her in a short time. At least
1 will use my Influence, what little I have,
and by and by arrange for you to have
Dollie. and he can hear from her through
me whenever he wishes. Mr. Creede Is dis
posed to take my advice In this matter,
but. as you know, he changes his mind so
often that it is hard to keep track with
him.
1 am almost satisfied that I can prevail
on him to let you have Dollle. and he well
knows that there is no one that is more
capable of taking care or her than you.
Tou can love her as only a mother can.
You will notice that In bis complaint he
asks for the sole custody of the child; this
Is customary In all similar suits, but is
oftentimes diverted from In tho regular
routine of affairs such as are involved j n
this case.
I would advise that you let him have his
long sought after divorce and grant him
every wish so that he will have no desire
to deprive you of the i leasure of seeing
the baby, which yon want. I assure you
again that 1 will use my best i ndeavors to
have him send Polite to you, on thi terms
and condition!" you mention In your letter
There is no use of making a long drawn
out fight, when things can he conducted on
a quiet hnsls. and avoid that you are moM
desirous of, thai is, notoriety. I know full
well you do not want 10 be paraded before
the public in newspapers. So far there is
nothing said and It Is my Intention to bup
press it, so far as I urn aide
I would Fay that to let this suit go by
default is the best thing to do; then there
is no one to say that you were no- as anx
ious to have a divorce as Creede was to
I think your chances are belter for the
core of Dollle if no attention is paid to his
desire for separation, and as I wrote you
before, you both have decided to iive
"nart, and there Is no reason why the
bonds of matrimony should not be seg
gregated and dissolved. It Is best for both.
You stated you had purchased a home and
settled. I would stay where you are. as to
get yourself in position to tight this suit
you must return the $20,000 to Creede. in
fact, put him in the same position
In prior to this separation. Let us hear
from you regarding the above. Very truly,
CALF. HUNTER.
Mr. Hunter does not write with gram
matical accuracy, has evidently odd no
tions regarding the dissolving of "sog
gregated bonds of matrimony." but he
had a shrewd and lawyer-like reason
why Mrs. Creede should not fight her
husband In the law courts.
The la?t letter, after giving Mrs.
Creede a little more "taffy." contained
a warning while linking the child
Dorothy with litigation, it might even be
supposed that the possession of the
child might be made the reward of Mrs.
Creede's keeping quiet and making no
move against her husband. The letter
reads as follows:
April 27. '97.
Dear Mrs. Creede: Am In receipt of your
two letters under date of April 19th and
20th respectively, which were received yes
terday. I telegraphed you today as fol
lows: "Letters received. Don't under
stand what you want. Have written for
instructions regarding your wishes. Await
letters." My reasons for telegraphing you
were: I could not understand what you
wanted, besides you stated In your letter
of the 2t'th to telegraph you "Yes or "No."
Now if you will write me .last what you
want and expect. I will do my best for you.
You need not he in such a hurry to got your
deposition in. as you have plenty of time.
If you want the baby, say so. and I will do
my best to pot Mr. Creede to let you have
It. I don't think there is any one more
capable of taking care of her than your
self.
I am also of tho opinion this matter can
bo arranaod without any litigation or long
drawn out lawsuit, and kindly consider
this carefully nnd don't make any move
that will cause yourself any further
trouble. Very truly, CAL. F. HUNTER.
THE ONLY ONE LOVED
Mrs. Blanche Haley went next upon
the stand, and gave the ono little bit of
spicy testimony of the day. She stated
that Mrs. Creodo had told her. quite re
cently, that the first time she married
she had married for money, and she left
her husband before he had made any.
The second time she married for love,
and when she got all the law business
settled she would go back and marry
again the only man she had over loved.
The afternoon was still early, but
neither side could proceed further, nnd
so an adjournment was taken until this
morning.
THE LEONIS CASE
Beginning of the End and the Decree
Signed
The decree in the estate of Loonls has
been signed by Judge Clark, and was
yesterday placed on file. This fact will
doubtless carry Joy to the heart of the
Innumerable litigants in this celebrated
case. Not that the estate of Jean and
Miguel Leonis will be relieved from all
litigation by the signing of the decree,
apportioning to the several heirs their
share of the estate. There are a num
ber of suits over collateral issues, which
have arisen out of the estate proper, and
these will, or at least may, go on like the
rippling stream of poetical fame "that
goes on forever."
It was in ISSS that Jean Leonis died,
the brother Miguel dying also the fol
lowing year. Since then the estate has
been in the courts, and attorneys by the
dozen, representing contending hoirs,
have reaped a rich monetary harvest.
As illustrating the amount paid out of
the estate for big chunks of law supplied
to the executor, it may be said that
Horace Bell got about $4000: Henry T.
Cage and J. Roberts, $4000; Denis &
Bicknell, $3000. These amounts are
approximate only. Then for represent
ing various heirs Senator Stephen M.
White will receive property valued at
about $30,000; Horace 8011, about $10.
--000; T. Brosseau, about $6000; Horace
Appel, about $8000, and others. In the
aggregate the lawyers will have some
pretty pickings.
No sooner had the decree been signed
yesterday than a suit was Hied by Major
Horace Hell. Max Lowenthal and Horace
Appel, representing heirs claiming two
thirds of the estate. The suit is to have
the estate partitioned, and have a re
ceiver appointed to collect the rentals.
I'nder the decree W. J. Variel is ap
pointed to collect rents, and apportion
the moneys between the heirs, hut the
partition suit affects the properties
apart from those in which the trustee
has Interest. These properties are:
The Elizabeth Lake property consisting
of SOOO acres of splendid wheat and
grazing land, und the Escorplon rancho,
adjoining the San Fernando ranch,
comprising 1000 acres. In all, the estate
is valued at $250,000, and the partition
suit is merely to enable ■»aoh heir to
come into possession of his portion.
MUST PAY TJP
Mrs. Westerfield Wins Her Appeal in
the Supreme Court
The Evening Record will have to pay
$1000 as damages to Mrs. Nannie T.
Westerfield and look pleasant, for the
supreme court has so decree,]. The lady
in question brought action against the
Record to recover $20,000 as damages for
a libelous article printed and published
on October 4, 1895, in which it was
charged that Norman Simmons, aged 17,
the only support of his mother, had been
seduced from his home by a woman
named Brant, for whom he had been
working. The answer made admitted
publication, but pleaded Justification and
an absence of malice. Upon the issue
of actual malice thus made plaintiff, at
the trial, offered in evidence the article
published on the day plaintiff's action
was commenced (October 18, 1895). It
was headed, "After the Stuff," and was
a warm article.
Upon coming to trial the jury found
for the plaintiff? Mrs. Westerfield (wid
ow uf F. Brant), in the sum of $1000.
Judge York, however, in w hose depart
ment the case was tried, set the verdict
aside and granted a new trial upon thc
ground of "error of law occurring at
the trial, consisting in the admission by
the court, as evidence, of the publication
of an article headed, 'After the Stuff,'
etc." An appeal was taken from the or
der, the contention being that the article
was properly admitted. This is what the
supreme court says about it:
"Respondents contend that the admis
sion of the article was erroneous, be-
I cause il was not a repetition or rcasser
tion of the libel complained of, but no
more than a fair statement of the privi
leged fact that the action had been com
menced, giving the substance of the
complaint. We are unable to coincide
with this construction of the purport and
effect of the publication. It is true it
was not c repetition verbatim et liter
atim of the terms of the original article,
I bllt il is clearly to our minds in substan
tial effect a reiteration of the substance
jof that article. While it does not repeat
LOS ANGELES HERALD: FRIDAY MORNING. JANUARY 21,1898
the words. It refers specifically to the
first article by date of publication, with
a statement of Its subject matter In
terms which are. In themselves, clearly
libelous, and with the added vice of a
very clear Implication of the truth of
such original statements. Such repeti
tions are always admissible In actions
for libel and slander, upon the question
of actual malice, and they are not re
quired to conform to any exact stand
ard of similitude in terms with the orig
inal words, so long as they are of similar
import. If the language relates to the
same subject matter and Is of a char
acter from which a malicious purpose
may be inferred, It Is admissible."
The supreme court In the decision ren
dered concludes a review of the case by
holding that the trial court waa In error
in granting a new trial, and Its order
must be reversed.
DOLE'S HOPE GONE
The Trial Court Is Criticised but Its
Judgment Affirmed
E. J. Dole, who was convicted and
sentenced to a term of seven years at
San Quentln for raising a check from
$2.50 to $SSO, will have to serve his term
for the supreme court has affirmed the
judgment of the lower court.
At the time of his trial it was claimed
that Dole was related to the highly re
garded family of the same name at Riv
erside and was of the same kin as the
president of the mongrel oligarchy In the
Pacific ocean.
Upon the facts presented the supreme
court finds the objections raised by
the defendent to the admission of cer
tain testimony not to be well taken.
Serious objection, however, Is taken to
some of the instructions as to the law
of the case. The first of these was to
the effect that if the Jury believed "from
the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt
that the defendant committed the of
fense charged, or aided, abetted or as
sisted any other person or persons to
commit the same, then you should find
the defendant guilty." The supreme
court holds this was wrong for the rea
son that under the evidence Dole was
either a principal or not guilty. Also
that the disjunctive conjunction "or"
should not have been used between the
verbs "aid," "abet" and "assist." They
should have been Joined by the con
junction "and." By technical legal
construction a person may assist or aid
in the commission of a crime and still
be possessed with no criminal intent,
and. therefore, in no sense accessory to
the crime.
"The court also instructed the jury."
says the supreme court, "as follows:
'When weaker evidence is produced,
when in the power of the party to pro
duce higher, it is presumed that the
higher evidence would be adverse if it
had been produced.' This instruction
embodies a very poor attempt to ex
press the principle of law of presump
tions declared in the code of civil pro
cedure."
Various other instructions are se
verely criticised by the supreme court,
and particularly when the trial count at
tempted to make a distinction between
the evidence necessary to convict in
cases of circumstantial evidence, as
compared to cases of positive and direct
evidence, which distinction is not satis
factory to the supreme court. "The
better practice," says the court," would
be to refrain entirely from declaring any
such distinction in Instructing the Jury
in criminal cases."
These objectionable instructions, how
ever, are held not to have injured the
defendants' interests and on the grounds
relied upon for a reversal of the Judg
ment and a new trial it Is held that they
are insufficient to affect the result.
WILL STAND TRIAL
Bryant, the Real Estate Man, Not Yet
Out of the Woods
The supreme court has reversed the
decision of the trial court in the case of
the People vs. E. I. Bryant, in which a
demurrer to the complaint was sustain
ed.
This is the decision that has been
awaited with such Interest, for the rea
son that a rumor had reached the city
that Judge Smith, in sustaining the de
murrer, had been upheld.
The basis of the indictment found
against Bryant, who is a real estate man
in this city, was a sale of "wild cat"
land. He offered to sell and assign to
Mrs. H. E. Hoxie a promissory note for
$500. made to him by Mrs. Emma A.
Lewis, with a mortgage securing its
payment upon lots 1 and 2, block 41, of
the Rancho Providencla and Scott
tract. The land was represented to be
good tillable land, and when shown to
Mrs. Hoxie was, in fact, good and valu
able land and sufficient for security of
the note. As a matter of fact, however,
the good land pointed out to Mrs. Hoxie
was not the property mentioned in the
mortgage, and, having no knowledge of
the locations, she paid to Bryant the $500.
When the fraud was discovered, the
grand jury returned an indictment
against Bryant, and his attorney filed a
demurrer. It was contended on his be
half that an offense within the meaning
of Section 532 of the Penal Code is not
committed unless it appears that the
person to whom the representations
were made has been deprived of his
property by reason of the fraud com
mitted against him; that, as the fraudu
lent representations charged in the In
dictment related solely to the property,
and as the mortgage was only a security
for the payment of the note, and as it
was not charged that the maker of the
note was unable to pay the same, or
that it was not paid, the indictment
failed to show that Mrs. Hoxie had been
defrauded of any of her property.
This construction of the statute the
supreme court repudiates, and hold that
it' s person Is induced to part with his
property by reason of fraudulent pre
tenses and misrepresentations, he Is
thereby defrauded of the property so
parted with, even though he may event
ually make himself whole in some mode
not thin contemplated. It is not neces
sary to show that the property has been
absolutely lost to him in order to sustain
the charge.
11 will be remembered that Mrs. Hoxie,
at a later date, recovered judgment
against Bryant for the amount of the
nolo in a civil action, and it was then
shown that Mrs. Emma Lewis had re
fused to take tip'the note, and had alto
gether repudiated it.
THE YOUNG DIVORCE
Is Not a Divorce After All and the
Widow Is Jubilant
Mrs. Lulu Young can make the boast
that few women can make, viz., that she
married a man, was divorced from him,
and yet was entitled to claim her dower
rights, which a divorced woman cannot
do.
The plaintiff in the divorce action died
between the verbal rendering of the de
cree and the signing of the findings.
! Marble A Phlbbe, for the dead plaln
i tiff, contended the verbal decision of the
i court sufficed, but Pierce * Gould, for
- Mrs. Young, argued that death had in
k tervened and settled the matter. The
■ dispute went over, and then one day op
posing counsel met In Judge Van Dyke's
i chambers, and by stipulation the decree
iof divorce was entered. The court had
not hesitated to give It as his opinion
that the suit had abated at the time ot
plaintiff's death, but as counsel were
all agreed, he signed the decree.
Then Mrs. Young came Into court, al
leging that her attorneys had sold her
J out for $500 as counsel fees, and affidav
its galore were fllod. Counter affidavits,
in which the allegations of unprofes
sional conduct were hurled back again,
were also filed, and the matter came up
before Judge Van Dyke yesterday on a
motion to vacate the decree of divorce.
All of the afternoon the attorneys
wrangled over the matter, and the up
shot of it all was that the court held
that, as he had intimated at the time, the
decree was like a dead limb to a tree,
the matter having been abated by the
plaintiff's death and was really a super
fluity. As all the counsel desired It, the
decree had been signed, but, aa It had
since transpired that Mrs. Young did
not consent to or desire It, nothing was
left but to moke the record clear and or
der the decree set aside.
Mr. Marble of Marble & Phibbs re
pudiated the insinuation of the affidav
its that the stipulation had been made
between opposing counsel In his office,
but the court reminded him that he had
come into court with the decree pre
pared, and that must have been done by
him as the result of some understanding
with Messrs. Pierce & Gould.
All the nasty insinuations against the
attorneys In the ease were barred out,
but after Judge Van Dyke had made
his ruling Attorney Mathews wanted
the court to And on the proposition of
Mrs. Young's making charges against
four attorneys on mere Information and
belief. She didn't give the name of her
informant, and yet recklessly made
charges that were essentially criminal
in character. Judge Van Dyke held that
the vacating of the order was the only
matter before the court, and so. with an
exception taken by Mr. Mathews, the
storm subsided.
THE DIVORCE MILL
The Biggy Case Being Tried Before
Judge Allen
Alice B. Weed was yesterday granted
a decree by Judge York divorcing her
from Edward A. Weed, on the ground
of desertion and failure to provide.
D. B. Knull was granted a decree di
vorcing her from L. A. Knull by Judg?
Shaw, on the ground of desertion.
Judge Allen granted a decree to Mar
garethe Aviszus, divorcing her from Leo
pold Aviszus, on the ground of deser
tion and failure to provide.
The divorce suit of Bridget Biggy
against Francis Biggy on the ground of
cruelty is being tried before Judge Al
len. There are property Interests In
volved which is apparently the cause of
the contest more than anything else.
Habeas Corpus Application
A ruling was made yesterday morning
in the habeas corpus application of Au
gustus E. Peck before Judge Wellborn
of the federal district court.
Peck was convicted on an indictment
of the federal grand jury of having
taken letters from the postofflce In which
he was employed. There were several
counts In the Indictment and he was
given a cumulative sentence, with so
much time on each count.
Peck's attorney, when his client had
served the time of the first offense, filed
his petition for the discharge of the pris
oner on the ground that a cumulative
sentence was Illegal.
The matter was fully discussed before
the court, the judge holding that the
court has power to Impose sentence
for several offenses, one to follow
after the other, and the prisoner
was taken back to the county Jail.
He received a misdemeanor sentence,
and has but a few months to serve, his
sentence not calling for time In the peni
tentiary.
District court adjourned yesterday un
til next Tuesday.
Hew Suits Piled
Georgia H. Bell, Francoise Leonis et
al. vs. Michel Leonis et al. —A suit In
partition to have the property of the
Leonis estate divided In accordanco
with the awards set forth on the decree
entered.
Union Mutual Building and Loan as
sociation vs. George W. Rice et al.—A
suit to recover $1108.90 on a note, $110.14
attorneys' fees, and order of sale against
lot 11, block 4 of the Williamson tract.
W. R. Mitchell vs. F. Dassonvllle et
al.—A suit to recover $45 for street as
sessment.
Peter Adler vs. Agnes Thompson.—A
suit to quiet title to property at Tenth
and Charity streets.
Los Angeles Savings bank vs. city of
Los Angeles.—A suit to quiet title to part
of lot 8, block 37, Ord's survey, being on
Castellar street.
S. W, Strong vs. City of Los Angeles.
—A suit to quiet title to lot 13 of the
Kerckhoff tract.
Estate of Melanle Le Francois.—Peti
tion of P. E. Starkey for probate ot
will.
A Useles Appeal
In the suit of R. L. Horton, plaintiff
and appellant vs. city of Los Angeles,
defendants and respondents, the su
preme court commissioner recommended
that the appeal be dismissed without
prejudice to any of the parties and It
Is so ordered. The action was brought
to restrain defendants from taking
further steps under a notice of sale of
a telephone franchise.
COURT CALENDAR
Cases to Be Called in the Departments
Today
DEPARTMENT ONE—Judge Smith.
Nothing set.
DEPARTMENT TWO—Judge Clark.
(2139) Estate of N. C. Creede.
(N. P. 2363) Sarah L. Ruoley: letters of
administration.
(1963) Estate M. Werner; partial distri
bution.
(17311) Estate A. Gibson: distribution.
(747) Estate J. M. Batcheller; final dis
charge.
(1326) Estate and guardianship McDou
gall minors; final account.
(2377) Estate J. T. Downes; letters.
(ISS) Estate P. J. Flynn; citation.
(344) Estate T. K. Wilson; trial.
(2367) Estate H. D. Mason: letters.
(1830) Estate and guardianship C. W.
Ott; citation.
(1742) Estate T. Johannsen; final dis
charge.
(1899) Estate and guardianship a. Rus
sell; final account.
(2025) Estate W. F. Lancaster; petition to
allow claim.
(2133) Estate J. Dltchle; letters. |
(4830) Estate H, Chambers: distribution.
(23*1) Estate D. Nelson! lettetA A
DEPARTMENT THREE—Judge York.
(29087) Love vs. Madera F. * T. Co., trial.
DEPARTMENT FOUR-Judge Van Dyke,
(28711) Todd vs. Ponet.
(28509) Beck vs. Pasadena Lake Vineyard
L. & W. Co.
DEPARTMENT FIVE-Judge Shaw.
(28156) Trafton vs. Parker.
(28082) Williams vs. Palomares Irrigation
Co.
DEPARTMENT SIX-Judge Allen.
Dodge vs. Reed et al.; trial:
(27726-29254) Biggy vs. Biggy.
TOWNSHIP COURT—Justtoe Young.
Stephens vs. McGuire; trial, by consent;
1:30 p. m.
Marro vs. Jones: trial: 9:80 a. m.
Cochran vs. McPherson: trial; 9 a. m.
Clark vs. Plrtle: 1:30 p. m.
Standard Collection Agency vs. Tobln;
4 p. m.
Standard Collection Agency vs. Rheln
bach; 4 p. n.
To Be Called Tomorrow
DEPARTMENT ONE—Judge Smith.
(2450) John WoodrufT; embezzlement;
sentence.
(29,012) A. B. A. Bates: contempt; hear
ing.
DEPARTMENT TWO—Judge Clark.
Nothing set.
DEPARTMENT THREE—Judge York.
(27.864) Brooks et al. vs. Stevenson; trial.
DEPARTMENT FOUR—Judge Van Dyke.
Nothing set.
DEPARTMENT FlVE—Judge Shaw.
(29.556) Smead vs. Armstrong.
DEPARTMENT SlX—Judge Allen.
(21,577) Ford et al. vs. Bushard et al.;
settlement of bill of exceptions.
TOWNSHIP COURT—Justice Young.
Helsel vs. Mllhouse; trial: 9:30 a. m.
Cochnan vs. Bayles; supplemental pro
ceedings: 4 p. m.
Lantgworthy vs. Francis; trial by con
sent; 9:30 a. m.
Henderson vs. Paulie; demurrer; 9:30
a. m.
Bragg vs. McKinney; demurrer; 1:S0
p. m.
SURREPTITIOUS POOL SELLING
"Blondy" Frank Arrested for Placing
Bets on Oakland Races
A complaint was sworn to before Jus
tice Owens yesterday, charging John
Doe with violating the pool room ordi
nance by conducting a room on South
Spring street where pools were sold on
races not run In the city or county..The
complaining witness Is W. A. Moore, an
ex-pollce officer.
A warrant was Issued, and in a few
minutes Detective Goodman brought in
Frank Weitsel, better known as "Blondy
Frank," an employe of Fitzgerald's
bucket shop, opposite the Hollenbeck.
on Spring street. Weitzel deposited $50
cash bail, and was released, to appear
today to plead.
Weitzel was arrested on a similar
charge only a few weeks ago, and was
released on ball.
It Is alleged that Weitzel surrepti
tiously places bets on the Oakland and
Ingleslde races, pocketing the money
and making a memorandum of the bets,
which are paid on the newspaper re
ports the day follow ing.
Caught the Visalia Barber
Arthur Pechner, a Visalla barber,
wanted there for obtaining money by
false pretenses, was arrested yesterday
on Main street by Detectives Goodman
and Steele. Constable Broder of Visalla
will be here today to take back the
prisoner. .-sttk
AGRICULTURAL PARK
F.ntrle* Now Open for the Great Sunday
and Monday Races
Entries are now open for the great two
days' coursing meet at Agricultural Park
on Sunday and Monday next. The match
Is a 64-dog stake, for a purse of $200, and
promises to be the best coursing event
ever given In Southern California. Con
tinuous racing for two days. Entrance
fee. $1. File entries with the secretary, at
143 South Broadway, In the rear. Entiles
close Thursday evening, when the draw
ing takes place.
The remaining ties and finals of last
Sunday's races will be run off next Sunday
morning, commencing at 9 oclock. Cours
ing In the 64-dog race begins promptly at
10:30 oclock, and all the dogs entered for
that event should be promptly on the
ground at that hour. Special attractions
each day.
Randsburg Gold Fields
Reached by rail in ten hours via Santa Fe
route. Leave Los Angeles 9:50 a. m.; ar
rive Johannesburg 8:30 p. m. Returning,
train leaves Johannesburg 9:30 p. m.; ar
rive Los Angeles 8:30 a. m.
Brown's Hot Air Furnace
Fits the climate and pocketbook. Heating
houses, halls.etc, a specialty. 123 E. Fourth.
All prices of wall paper greatly reduced.
A. A. Ecketrom. 324 South Spring street.
JOTTINGS
Oar Home Brew
Malsr & Zobeleln's lager, fresh from their
brewery, on draught In all the principal
saloons: delivered promptly In bottles or
kegs. Office and brewery, 440 Aliso street;
telephone 91.
Hawley, King & Co., cor. Fifth St. and
Broadway, agents genuine Columbus Bug
gy company buggies and Victor bicycles.
Largest variety Concord business wagons
and top delivery wagons. Hawley, King
& Co.
Everything on wheels. Hawley, King &
Co., corner Fifth street and Broadway.
Agents Victor, Keating,World and March
bicycles. Hawley, King & Co.
MARRIAGES
PRIGGE—REITZ—In Lor Angeles, Jan.
19. IS9B, by Rev. A. A. Dlnsmore, Henry
I'risge of this city to Lydia Margaret
Rettz of San Diego.
GIBSON—At Monrovia, January 20, im.
at the age of 56 years, Col. T. M. Gib
son,
Notice of funeral later.
Awarded
Highest Honors—World's Fair,
dold Medal, Midwinter Pair.
* CREAM
BAKING
POWMB
A Pure flrape Cream ol Tartar Powder.
40 YEARS *HS-8-TA«NDARI>.
I Turkish, Persian, Sine V*%w . A
I Boukhara, Kurdistan l^lljy
I Mm B. MltiraiTS Ration
S For Los Angeles (Direct from Turkey) Just Arrived. This Maenificer
lection with his Entire stock
| SSaSSSeS 1 !*!. Auction
£te Commencing At . . .
£3 Monday, Jan. 24 354 S. Broadway
£2 Mr. Mihran has decided to close his store in Los Angeles, hence he co;
'Jp dispose of his big and exquisite stock at auction, at whatever price they
fjjfi and he means it. RHOADES & REED, Auction.
| Cheap Coffee
flftj You can buy low-priced coffee in almost any grocery store in 1
*k You can buy cofiee of inferior price and inferior grain—bul
here. We pride ourselves on the QUALITY of our coffee. V
not sacrifice the flavor of our coffee for the sake of being al
m sell it at a reduced price. Why not drink good coffee ? C
TO drinkers know Jevne's coffee.
W -
208-210 S. Spring St., Wilcox Bldft.
DR.TALCOTT&J
Strictly Roatabie- EltaMMud T<» Years. , 11 li_
SPECIALISTS (
Oa Mm Pacific Coast Treat la* DbuM sf I
MEN ONLY hr
W. posTOvsty gssmt«t A cars Varkvcsls. Plies mi \ Jtlr^BttsS
Rapture Is one aasfc. Any form of VWsslissss lo tlx fc m%wL\m tiBA Jm
& Bloc I TshKs. SuKiurr snd Aoils md Chrosk jUIQ Qk jff
js. s «pedslty. To stmvourgood tat* 'Bml
We will not ask for a dollar ||
until we core you.
W< mess ttus eswhsfXiftr s»d.tsfor mytftatm ywX
We ocrujiy «h» ss*V» Well. Pum tulliliog »l» «m BB»
n«» of
TViM tot ih* •<< "«»K>ls<Ma •» oat et io»n put-ms .nj ylWjf V VV '/VWT I
oOjere si»Wn» to rsnstn Ik 0i» eKy durhig trestnwnt. 7 £&sy) Wtm\ X zSsW L/
Corr.,twlsh<.st*«rnilty ««~.r*l. jMnj Ml Ml \ l»
Cor. 3d&MaHi Sts.. Los Angeles.Gal. h^^fe
OVER rVVtXS fAROO \S|SP Mil
Wben Others Fall Consult [) r . Lloblg O Co.'* World DISpO
V 123 BOUTII MAIN STREET. The oldest Discern
,/ Coast-established 25 years. In all private dlsei
\\ NOT A DOILAK NKED BE FAID VNIIL
/ ate*. *>JV\ CATARRH s specialty. We cure the worst cases In t
l*F months Hpeeiel sursenn from San Frnn.-lsco Pißpen*
\"kJh \V*;I stant sttendancc. Examination with mioroscope. In
(II \v jl Hfc 1/ Blv ,ls, FREE TO EVERYUODY. The poor trested fre
Itw lit Fridays. Our long experience enables us to trest
/^^ N !ISISSk cases ol secret or private diseases with ABSOLUTE C
/ X jrsi* \ 1 OF SUCCESS. No matter what your trouble is, opm
If '((th ' with us: you will not regret It. Cure guaranteed I
CiSS -V IJr " n, • Und " e,oP,d ° rg ' n ' Holui SOOTH' MAIN
•'Where Summer Holds Full Sway"
.... Santa Catalina Island ....
Th... ...H ... hour, from Los Angeles. Cal. A summer and winter resort with
teroart Sn «Oelt mountain stage road in the West ft
tSt%i W«»f jSS«Sa Wild goats, qnall and dove. Tn thousands. Ola*, bo
MT^^l'sr.^™?^!U^^ea P s^a'enl»ri«A Open sll the yesr. Eonnd-tripse:
m^ B de P°"' *™ Angeles, for San Pedro
WHOLESALE FUEL NEW I
Back Diamonds (T£) 7T\ ]7 All Kinds by th
and Wellington Ton or Ca;
Wood ol ill varieties constantly on hand. Olve n» a trial.
Tel. Main 1599. CLARK BROS., Corner Seventh St. end Santa Fe
flter NEW AND SECOND-HAND
JSI Carpets, Mattings, fur
tiflfi&i and Stoves p_rk
I. T. MARTIN, 531-533 S. Spring St.
S. F. Wellington Coal $10.50 Per i
_ „ . ,v« „i. T Be certain ot getting the getting tbe genuine
Delivered to p M«»> »„ l0 * ger ,« d ,„«. money .
_ 332 SOUTH SPRING STREET
Banning Company gjgga
™ **** -^—^—^——m~——~—
Zlska Institute
1718 Sacramento Street,
Near Van New Aye.
Home and Day School for Glrli
From Primary throughl Collej late work, Ba
perlor advantages in Languages and Mutlo
Individual attention. Bmill classes. SpNls
,tudent..d M iue|. A> y t> PrlnclpaL
Allen's Press Clipping Bureau
223 Wait Second Street
Lo* Angeles, Cal.
Furnish advance reports on all contract work,
such eg sewers, reaeivolrs, irrigation and pump
ing plants and publlo buildings. Personal clip
plagtoicam all papers in the United State*.
Ist quality Crystal Lenses (none bett
DELANY, The Optlch
213 South Bprl
Dr.WHI
128 N. Main Si
Private Disc
MEN ONI
Established Twent

xml | txt