Show THE KELSEY DIVORCE The Plaintiffs Side of the Case Concluded CONTINU FOR A WEEK ATTEMPT TO SHOW TITAT SHE HAD OTHER LOVERS I Kelsey Pins His Faith to a Bundle of Letters WhicH He Guards Like tIle Ark of the Covenant He Laughs While His Wife vee1i The hearing on Mrs Sadles M Kel seys motion for temporary alimony in her suit for divorce from Lewis P Kelsey was resumed yesterday morning morn-ing before Chief Justice Merrltt The crossexamination of the plaintiff plain-tiff by Judge Ellis was continued The line of questioning adopted on Saturday with a view of showing that the plaintiff had other lovers was continued She was asked if she had known J 1 Nelson in this city in 1892 and i she had gone out riding with him She said she knew him but did not go out with him She knew Alex Miller wih ler Denver having met him at his sweethearts house She had never corresponded with him Had got a note from him once He never addressed ad-dressed her in endearing terms She showed the note to Mr Kelsey I wag enclosed in a letter from Mr MillerS dear lers sweetheart who was a friend of the plaintiff She never knew a Mr Teccomb a lawyer She received a pistol as a present from a Mr Seeley Mr Seeley said if she would shoct and hit a pertain mark she could have the pistol She fired and hit the mark and received the pistol therefor She never corresponded with Mr Seeley When in this city she left the Walker house for a cheaper boarding board-ing house because she did not have money to stay there and Mr Kelsey Kel-sey said he could not pay her bills too high at the Walker as they were The plaintiff was shown a letter to Mr Kelsey which she said she did not think she wrote She said she never knew the Windsor hotel named in the letter She did not believe the letter let-ter was heis She sent two or three notes to Mr Kelsey while she was at the Walker She may have told him in one that she was going to move She never consulted 2Ir Rogers or any other lawyer in Denver about her case She had consulted Mr Baldwin in Salt Lake in 1892 She was in Salt Lake In 1800 1892 and 1894 In 1892 and 1S93 she received many letters from defendant de-fendant Could not say whether he addressed ad-dressed her as his wife She wrote to him as her husband signing herself sometimes Your loving wife Sadies He had sent her telegrams as Mrs Kelsey She had only retained the one produced in court She Wept and He Lal hell Several letters were handed to the plaintiff Ith the inquiry as to whether she wrote them Some she remembered having written but some she did not remember Witness continuing said she had no doubt but she was Kelseys wife until he told her in Denver that she was not his wife She did not remember the dafe when Mr Kelsey so told herAt her-At this point witness broke down and wept copiously After a time the severe crossexamination was continued contin-ued more letters being shown to her which she said she did not remember writing but did > not deny She said she might have written them She wrote him many letters During this proceeding when the plaintiff was weeping and looking over letters the defendant was looking at other letters and laughing about their contents as he was conversing Witness said she sent Mr Kelsey many telegrams and signed them with her maiden name This was because of the request qf Mr Kelsey to keep the marriage a secret He sent drafts to her in her maiden name When she I lived with him In Manitou she could not realize she was not his wife al though when she sat down and thought of it after what he had said she had doubts of it From July 1S90 to August 1891 Kelsey wrote to her once or twice a week She had writ ten and telegraphed to him for money wri and he sent I to her Returning to another branch of the subject witness wit-ness said her sister had adopted the name of Madame Lavine as a business name I was not her real name Her husband from whom she was fom separated separ-ated was named Peterson ReDirect Examination On redirect examination the pajn tiff said all I she did from 183 until I Kelse left her was under jlelbeys wishes and instructions She did as he desired her up to the time of the separation After the plaintiff was excused Cur Varian stated that he hal an aprojht ment to go to Wyoming and had arranged ar-ranged to go with the other counsel But now K IH ey objected Mr Varian had received a call for him to ccme to I Wyoming Je therefore asked a continuance con-tinuance of the case till next Monday I Mr Varian had gone yesterday tile case would have been continued Colonel Ellis of counsel for defendant defend-ant said hehad sf no personal objection but his client raised a serious objection objec-tion to the further prolongation of the case There was involved a vast amount of property rights which i caused a feeling of unrest Mr Kelsey was therefore placed at a disadvantage disadvant-age in a business sense and wanted the case to go on Mr Varian said that so far as the property interests were concerned that was not affected by this hearing Nor would it be by postponement for when L the state was instituted the question of dower rights would be settled and dower done away with In any event this postponement could not affect Mr Kelseys property I was merely n matter of convenience and courtesy to himself as an attorney He was engaged en-gaged in a criminal case and would I not have accepted the engagement but I for the consent given that he could go Judge Merritt said he did not think Mr Varians request was unreasonable and granted it the case going over till Monday next The parties then left the court room the defendant carry ing a big bundle of papers the letters received since 1888 by hiui from the plaintiff I |