Los Angeles Herald, Volume 25, Number 107, 15 January 1898 — AN ODD CASE Mrs. Creede Leaves the Court Room Ill THE DISPUTED CONTRACT SHE ALSO CLAIMED TO GUARD BABY DOROTHY Doctors Provoke a Warfare—Mr. Gage Takes No Stock in the Brain's Automatically Working [ARTICLE]

AN ODD CASE

Mrs. Creede Leaves the Court Room Ill THE DISPUTED CONTRACT SHE ALSO CLAIMED TO GUARD BABY DOROTHY Doctors Provoke a Warfare—Mr. Gage Takes No Stock in the Brain's Automatically Working As the contestant of the Creede will approaches the end of her case—that is. this preliminary case, for the proving of the invalidity of the contract is necessary before the main contest over the validity of the will can be begun—the evidence has become largely corroborative and scrappy, with a notable exception, however, ln the expert testimony.

Amid the conflict of the attorneys, the puzzlement of witnesses, the general interest of the onlookers, Judge Clark maintains a Sphinx-like attitude. While the court generally contrives to conceal any leaning it may have one way or an- , other, from the rulings or a casual reimark, a shrewd observer may generally hazard a guess that will prove approximately correct. But Judge Clark raps counsel on either side over the knuckles •with absolute impartiality, and wears a mask that absolutely hides the bias of mind, one way or the other, which may have been occasioned by the testimony submitted so far.

One side of the story has been heard, and on the showing made it would apipear as if the much discussed contract Iwould be knocked out. Remembering [that Mrs. Creede was the wife of a 'very wealthy man, that as such her station in life was established, and that unhder the law she had interest in it, it appears something only short of marvelous 'that she should by contract give away so very much for so very little. The contract itself was as follows:

"This is to witness: That in consideration of the sum of $20,000, to me in hand paid fby N. C. Creede, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, I hereby release the it-aid X. C. Creede from all obligations or .liabilities, of every name, nature, or description to either provide for my support t and maintenance, or from any inheritance 'I might have from his estate in case of ■Tils death: and after this date I shall have do clajm on him for any purpose whatever; this being Intended as a full and complete '*>ettlement of all property interests between the said X. C, Creede and myself, and In full for any alimony that might under any circumstances be usked for or allowed by myself or by any court. And the care, custody and control of Dorothy Hitt Creede, our adopted daughter, is hereby given to the said X. C. Creede, and 1 agree that I will not interfere in any manner with his Care, control or custody of said adopted child. "In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and seal, this 2d day of January, 1597. LOCISA CREEDS.

"Witness: J. M. Elliott, John T. Jonas."

This document was subscribed to—not by Mrs. Creede In person, but by Mr. Jones, Creede's attorney, by making affidavit before his own- law partner, who ls a notary public.

It will lie noted that tha contract or agreement is of the variety that has no specific appellation in law, but that ln '•popular parlance is of tho "lead-pipe cinch" brand. To give it additional binding force and for another reason to be referred to. it was reinforced by a deed that—taken in connection with the

agreement—left the wife divested of every vestige of right, title or interest in the estate of her husband, to which, as his wife, she had a valid claim, and left her absolutely penniless, aside from the $20,000 paid over to her. A very handsome birthright, surely, to go for a mess of monetary pottage. The mere fact, however, of a deed having been obtained from Mrs. Creede, it ls contended by the contestant's counsel, goes to sustain their claim that there actually was a partnership between Creede nnd his wife previous to their marriage, and the deed was made necessary to release Creede from responsibility on that score.

One Other point is worthy of note in the contract, and that is that in making mention of Baby Dorothy she is referred to as "our" adopted daughter. As a matter of fact, Creede only adopted Dorothy as his daughter, and Mrs. Creede l?ave her signed consent to his doing so. But as other phases of the case develop it Is quit.- possible that some interesting facts may be developed along this line, for it is understood that the claim is made that when Mrs. Creede signed the document giving her consent to her husband's adopting baby Dorothy, she was under the impression, and it was so represented to her. that she was signing papers of adoption in which she with her husband figured in loco parentis to the baby girl. With all these facts in mind, some of tin- references made in certain of the letters submitted in evidence yesterday are more easily understood. THE CONTESTANT INDISPOSED Upon court convening at 10 oclock Mrs. Creede was recalled by the proponents of the will for the purpose of answering certain questions put by Mr. Gage which struck at the very root of the controversy regarding the validity of the contract. "You had been contending with Mr. Creede for 125,000 instead of $20,000, had you not" Inquired Mr. Gage, "After I had already signed the contract 1 asked him lor that," was the answer. "But hadn't you talked with him bofore about it" "No, I never talked with him about it until afterwards." "And did you never ask Creede nr Jones for more than $20,000?" persisted counsel. "I don't think I ever asked Jones for anything. I told Creede that I was going away next day and asked what good $20,000 would do me; I couldn't buy a home with it. He said be would give me more by and by. lint i had signed the contract when I had that conversation on the Sunday. "You spoke of Hunter as having been the confidential agent or On ede; Is that I one of your letters to him?" (submittina letter.) "Yes, sir." In the letter Mrs. Creede referred to

having already made up her mind befor< seeing Hunter, to leave. An Inquiry wui also made regarding Judge Lamme am how he came out, as the writer knev, "he was standing on his head." In s later letter Mrs. Creede again referrec to Judge Lamme by saying: "I am no' one bit afraid of Judge Lamme." This Lamme is the one you spoke tc about the agreement, is it not?" inquired Mr. Gage. "There is only one Lamme, Mr. Gage,' interjected the court. "Well," responded Mr. Gage, laughingly, "if the court takes Judicial notice of that, it is all right." All of these letters were written by Mrs. Creede from luka. Mississippi, and referred almost entirely to the divorce suit which her husband Instituted against her, but which apparently fizzled out. THE DIVORCE SUIT THAT FAILED The following are extracts from the most important letter of the series, and while Mrs. Creede appears to have been short ln spelling and long ln capitals, the sense ls easy to be made out: ITJXA, Miss.. April 19. 1597. Mr. Cal F. Hunter—Dear Sir: 1 am Just in receipt of yours of the 14th, and must say that I am surprised at your saying that Creede Made his plea on as mild growns as poslahle I would like to know how Mutch worse he could Make i! for it is a lie from Heglnnlng to ending and More ls to the point I can prove it and that ls what counts I law the Idem of him a .Making a great Itlow about (fee a taking Morphine Why him ami I both took it Before wee were Marled and he and his Nephew both new It for I never made a pretense of hiding It now that 1 can prove & I can prove that the largest amount that I bought In Los Angeles I Bought for him for I can't take Morphine In Tablets form as I can prove By Doc Alnsworth & I can also prove By him that I was so uneasy about Creede taking so Mutch In Tablets that I got him to send some of them to San Francisco to see If their was anathlng In them that could harm him... I think even Creede as cunning as he thinks he Is will see a point & I hardly think he can get everybody to swear to a lie even for Mr Creede for cverone are not Infidels now Creede has told me that he would not scruple to swear to a lie for a friend & so you see It would not stop him from swearing lies on Mcc & I will make him prove them if he goes to far. Now I won't beg anylonger for the Baby to Bee given to Mcc on the terms that I have already Mentioned to you Just ns soon as you get this I wont wait one day after the time for you to answer I will that verry day if I dont get s satisfactory answer I will send In My Deposition long Before the 30 days are up & as for notoriety is concerned I don't care a straw now if there is any more of my faults that Creede wants to show up tell him to show them up I don't think It will help him any I am ready now for anything that will help to show us Both up tell Creede that he knows I never of My own free will went Back on him & I wont commence now so let him tell what few truths he has held hack & and all together with the lies he has already told if it dont Make a Beautiful Laughing S:ock of us Both then lam Mutch Mistaken as for My coming Hack then I have nothing to fear for I have got nothing that any one can take, nothing but my home here and it aint worth as Mutch as the law allows Mcc As to the Baby 1 admit that at first I did not want us to take her But after wee did take her I got to Lovu the Little Motherless child & feel that I am In great Measure responsible for bur welfare & no Man can take care of her that I will nor neither will a hlerd Person love and care like I Both can & will A: I know that what I ask Is reasonable for God knows that a child is a great care on anyone But I Love the Utile Darling & won't mind the trouble Mr. Hunter. (Signed) LOUISA CREEDE. After the letters had been submitted Mrs. Creede left the witness stand In a nervous and apparently hysterical condition. Mr. Gage's questioning was ended, however, and Mrs. Creede, ac - companied by her maid, left the court room.

E. C. Robinson, clerk In Trout's drug store, was recalled by the contestant, and testilled that prior to January 2. 1597, he had sold and delivered to Mr. Creede morphine many times in quantities valued at from $5 to .sls. These were wholesale packages, and no record was kept of them. Only small quantities in broken packages were registered in compll ance with the law. In mak-1 ing purchases Mrs. Creede would get from three to eight bottles Of the powder and four or five bottles of the tablets. A PUZZLED EXPRESSMAN The next witness was Morris J. Fitzgerald, an expressman, and his testimony was of particular importance as casting light upon Mrs. Creede's mental condition about the time when the contract was signed, and when she left her home. "I was around to the back door," said the witness, "to move her trunks, and after I had loaded about half up Mrs. Creede came and asked me what I was going to do with the things. I told her I was going to take them to West Seventh street, and then she said I had better tako them off or she'd have me ar-

rested. I unloaded, and w hen I had I done thnt she bade nn- load up again. She inquired where Rltchey, th.- hack-1 driver, was. and asked me to go to the drug store and ring him up. 1 did so. and. upon returning, told her that Rltchey was not at the stand. She then sent me back to find out when he would

return. Just then wo saw a hack approaching, and it proved to be the one she was waiting for. I started to drive

off, when she ordered me to slop, again threatening me with arrest. In a little while she told me to drive on, she in the hack driving alongside. When half way to Seventh street she ordered me to drive down to the Hollenbeck hotel. Mrs.

Creede appeared to be very nervous, and at times was crying, for I saw her brushing the tears from her eyes."

THE EXPERT TESTIMONY At this point O. Gibson Vance, another of Trout's clerks, was put upon the stand to corroborate the statement that Mrs. Creede purchased morphine in

wholesale packages, of which no record was kept, the law not demanding it.

Then began the taking of expert testimony. Dr. H. o. Bralnerd was first

summoned to the witness stand. Having made a special study of mental and

nervous diseases, he spoke with authority. He testified that the habitual use of morphine tends to weaken the moral character and impair Intellectual capacity. To some extent there may be a modification, so far as reasoning ability is concerned, but none on the moral side. The Intellectual weakening would show, if some sudden demand or pressure should be made upon a person, when the will power would not be normally exercised.

Mr, Flnlayson put the witness a hypo* thetioal question covering all—even the minute details of Mrs. Creede's case, and which occupied about ten minutes in reading. In response Dr. Bralnerd said that such a woman was not In a normal mental condition. While perhaps not Insane, she was not in possession of normal reasoning power, nnd her emotions were not under control. Speaking generally, her will power would be weal; by

reason of being a habitual übbt of morphine. On cross-examination Mr. Gage labored assiduously to weaken the foroe of the doctor's diagnosis of Mr. Creede's condition. Several of the ponderous medical works from which he quoted, however, were not known by the witness, and a third was pronounced by him not to be up to date, although an excellent work fifteen years ago. "Don't you know," queried Mr. Gage, "that some morphine users have been men of great intellectual ability and are the authors of authoritative medical and legal works?" "No, I do not," responded witness modestly, and as If ashamed of his own Ignorance. "There may sometimes be Intellectual activity, but not exactly ln those fields." The witness went on to explain that while intellectual activity might be stimulated, indeed, the power of originating ideas would be lost, and intelligence would be displayed only along lines of mental action that were familiar. A RED FLAG OF VERBIAGE Dr. A. Stanley Dolan, assistant superintendent nt the Southern California state hospital at Highland, gave some very interesting testimony as illustrating the mental status of morphine maniacs and as casting light on Mrs. Creede's general condition and particularly on the day the contract was signed. Witness stated that a habitstnl user of morphine could take thirty grains a day. Where the perspiration started out It wits an indication that the full effect of the drug was operating on the glnnds of the skin. After abstaining from morphine—missing the usual dose—there would be nervousness ami depression, and after taking a dose there would be intoxication to the extent of the amount taken. Tho benevolent faculties would be affected and in consequence the person would be generously inclined. The will power would be weakened and the person bo more susceptible to influences. Such people are usually impulsive and act on the spur of the moment nnd there is conf"usion in the co-ordination of Ideas. Dr. Dolan stated that he saw Mrs. Creede in November last, but strenuous objection was made to his testifying as to that. As to the hypothetical question put to the previous witness. Dr. Dolan. in response, stated that such a woman as mentioned by counsel would, owing to depression and confusion of ideas, not be of sound mind. "I don't know." said witness," that I would deem her insane in the accepted sense, but her will power and Intellect would be impaired. I don't think she would have full appreciation of what she was doing in signing the instrument. A sharper attack was made upon the theory of Dr. Dolan than upon that of Dr. Brainerd by Mr. Gage, and that is saying a good deal. He Was asked his opinion of the woman who could for three hours sit on the witness stand and give her testimony without nervousness and answer sensibly and to the point all questions asked. "Many of our actions and thoughts are automatic," the witness responded. Talk about a bull in a china shop! It was as nothing to the scorn of Mr. Gage for the answer of the witness. "I've asked you questions and you have answered them. Now which were automatic?" sarcastically queried counsel. The skirmish would have been highly edifying to a Jury, but it lost its force somewhat before the court. When Dr. Dolan got a c hance lie explained what he meant by "automatic." "We walk automatically." said he. "and conversation is generally largely automatic. I mean that our will power

is not called at all times into play. If new ideas are not generated by an effort of will, then Intellectual power and concentration of thought are not necessary." "If an editor goes into his sanctum and writes a powerful editorial, do not the intellectual powers have play?" interrogated counsel. "A good many of them are automatic, aren't they doctor?" inquired the court. "Yes," answered the witness, "and the fact is, Mr. Gage, that what a person is accustomed to do is done largely automatically, as it does not require the same amount of thought or mental effort." tin redirect examination Dr. Dolan said that it would be possible for Mrs. Creede to sit upon the witness stand for three hours and answer all questions lucidly and yet do so largely in an automatic way. Being acquainted with all th.- details of the case, and having thought over it for months, little mental effort would be necessary to answer questions bearing upon matters to eon- ! Bid.-r which her brain had become accustomed. He also stated that while morphine in continued use generally

emaciates, such a thing is not an inevitable result. Those persons who can retain it may assimilate food and fatten, j but they do so at the expense of the muscular tissue. Drs. McCormack and Wernigk also testified along similar lines, and then an adjournment was taken.

NOAH LEE IS FREE

Discharged on a Demurrer by Judge Wellborn

j Noah Lee, the young man not yet tw. nty years of age, who was charged j with Implication in a train robbery that j took place In Texas, was yesterday discharged from custody by Judge Wellborn In the district court. The decision was based on the demurrer made by Lee's counsel, Curtis D. Wilbur, esq., to the jurisdiction of the Texas court which caused the boy's arrest.

'I'll.- alleged offense was committed in Atoka County, in the Choctaw nation, in th.- Indian Territory, on June 24. lSf(3, in what is claimed to be a murderous

assault attempted on the person of W. P. Danforth and others. The Indictment against Lee was found ln the Federal District Court for the Eastern district of Texas. Counsel for the defendant claimed that this court had no right to apprehend Lee, as the offense being committed in the Indian Territory the Federal Court of that Territory alone had the right to bring the initial step in his prosecution. Judge Wellborn, in nn extended opinsustained that view in the matter, holding that while the Texas court formerly had the required jurisdiction, a recent act of congress which was passed. however, before the alleged offense was committed, gave the class of crimes with which Lee is charged to the jurisdiction of the Territorial court, and that therefore he cannot be held on any process of the Texas tribunal. Lee wus accordingly ordered discharged.

New Suits Filed Main Street Savings bank vs. Graoleuse Sartiat et al. —A suit to recover $519.92 on a note and certain sums due for assessments, $108.98 attorney's fees, and order of sale against lot 7, block 15, O. W. Childs 200-lot tract. Estate of Mary T. Knox, deceased - Petition of Lucy S. Blanchard for letters of administration. The estate is value d at $«30. Estate of J. K. Johnson, deceased —Petition of A. C. Johnson for probate of will. The estate is valued at $1700.

Susan Richards vs. City of Los Angeles —Complaint to quiet title to lots 71. 74 and 75 of the subdivision of the property of Don Manuel Reeiuena.

Juanita A. Gless et al. vs. J. M. Boal— A suit to recover $360, being twelve months' otlice rent in the old postoffice building, 10S North Spring street.

Bernardino Guirado vs. Charlie Fook —A suit to recover $1000, with 12 per cent interest, 10 per cent of the amount for attorney's fees and order of sale against certain land in Chinatown.

Estate of William B. Dole, deceased— Petition of Arthur M. Dole for letters of administration. The estate is valued at $3000. Bad Spanish Boys In response to a letter from Marshal J. W. Cook of San Luis Obispo, under date of January sth. ln which a Spanish boy 14 years old, named Johnny Valencia, and another, named James Layva, were accused of stealing letters from postoffice boxes, t'nited States District Attorney Flint advised their arrest. Yesterday another letter arrived, announcing that both boys were under arrest, with two charges against Valencia and one against Layva, with bail fixed at $500 in- each case. Both entered a plea of "not guilty." Their examination Is set for the 22nd Inst.

Court Notes J. J. Williams, convicted of burglary, was sentenced yesterday by Smith to one year in the penitentiary. Ross T. Hickoox was admitted to practice in the district court yesterday on motion of Tnited States District Attorney Frank P. Flint. Mary Bentley, charged with disturbing the peace, was discharged in the township court yesterday, tt developing that it was a mere neighborhood row In which she had been concerned. J. M. Vena, a colored man, was yesterday arraigned before Justice Young, on the complaint of M. It. Cohn, son of the pawnbroker, who charged him with an assault with a deadly weapon. The application for a writ of habeas nrpus ln the case of Augustus E. Peck was presented to Judge Wellborn yesterday in the district court by Attorney W, P. James, and was submitted for consideration. Will Ford was acquitted of burglary In Department one yesterday, after Assistant District Attorney 'Williams had fold the jury It was such a clear case against the youth that he would not detain them with argument. Later in the day Ford was re-arrested on a similar charge. Will Sehaefer is now being tried for being concerned with Ford and two other boys in several burglaries. COURT CALENDAR Cases to Be Called in the Departments Today DEPARTMENT ONE—Judge Smith. (2460) John Woodruff; embezzlement; sentence. (29012) A. B. A. Bates; contempt; hearing. (2l'.<S) Ashery Fezell; grand larceny; arraignment. (24901) J. A. Colcord; grand larceny; arraignment. (2462) Will Shafer; burglary; trial. (2443) Vincente Sepulveda; appeal; hearing. DEPARTMENT TWO—Judge Clark. (29840) M. Duck vs. W. Luck. DEPARTMENT THREE—Judge York. Mullally vs. Townsend. DEPA KT.MENT Van Dyke.

Nothing set. DEPARTMENT FIVE—Judge Shaw. (29211) Brown vs. Brown. (28774) Summer-field vs. Russell. DEPARTMENT SIX—Judge Allen. (28102) city of Dos Angeles vs. Everett et al. <2'.<m> Gibson vs. Prltohard; trial. (1981!)) Thomas vs. Gates. TOWNSHIP COURT—Justice Young. Cochran vs. Bayles; 4 p. m.