Show IRVINE SCANDAL famous divorce case comes up in court alz ilz IRVINE WANTS A NEW TRIAL affidavits in support of tho the motion and counter affidavits by mrs irvino judge Fow ersa argument consumes tho the entire a day criticised criticized the rulings of judge zane john zano zane comes next Ar ArEu menta upon the plaintiff motion tor 7 a now new trial in tho the fa famous irvine divorce caze case were begun before judge merritt in the third district court yesterday morning the publio pallia generally la Is conversant with the duets in the case cans is as well an the tha proceedings berst heretofore afore hal had the ara act was the killing ot of C S M montgomery iby by W H irvine irvane the iuie plaintiff in the case at lincoln N nob db on way may 25 5 1393 1892 irvine claiming that montgomery had bad committed adultery with his wife ut at the grace hotel ilabel in chicago on february 21 24 1893 1892 subsequently irvine was tr tried led I 1 ind and end and tin n december 3 1892 he lied an action tor for divorce against its ilia wife in the ithe third district court alleging that the had committed adultery with C E montgomery at chicagoans chicago and at lincoln mrs irvine denied the material at al of the complaint in her answer and in a cross complaint charged irvine with cruelty and prayed that a divorce tie granted her upon thu ground the trial waa had bad before judge zane beg liking on 18 19 1893 and atter after a two weeks hearing his honor granted sirs mrs irvine a L decree on oil tier her cross complaint and a cowed lowed tier alimony in the sunk sum wt of together to cather costs end and attorneys fees wt orr Ir vines attorneys attorn eya then moved for a new trial and the ho motion has since been pending when the ithe motion was waa calli d up yesterday judge powers and W 11 dick son bon were present as an the representatives ot of mr irvine while john marshall judge bennett und and john 1 M I zane were on hand in tho the interest of the defendant SOME NEW affidavits judge powers made the opening argument gur rient and began by reading the adl davits filed in support of and in opposition ipos 1 to the motion among the AM avots in support of uie the motion momon are aitho tho following I 1 J M murdock murdoch deposes that in the summer of 2883 he often saw sirs mrs irvine enter rooms in the montgomery block at lincoln E r hunger deposes le poses that B E L simon told him in IM that hat he had bad seen montgomery and arst irvine in the act of criminal intimacy in the woods near line ellie penitentiary at lancon hunger also deposes that ihal he be has seen montgomery r om ery and mrs mra irvine near whore where simon claims to have seen them mis its 1 0 IAL baldwin of liln coln certifies that atie often saw dr girth visit mrs irvino irvine when mr irvin e tas mas absent paid further that hat mrs irvine told her that she had endeavored to persuade dr simmons to commit art an abortion upon union lier her but he refuse 1 0 M duffield Duffle ld deposes th that a t he worked tor for irvine in this city in IWO 1890 and at t one time saw mrs hinline inline and montgomery in a bedroom to lo aether gether at the formers home montgomery Monta omery was undressed and mrs irvine was covered up in bed COUNTER affidavits the truth of these affidavits of course are emphatically denied by mrs irvine and others and it Is shown by counter af I davits that maldock Mul dock Is unter under the charge of f embezzlement that danli ads reputation Is bad diat chat 6 simon imon told J IT II sheen subsequent lo jo the killing of montgomery that he had bad soon aen ae n montgomery and a woman in the ahe woods wood of the some time prior thereto but know who the woman was ete etc continuing judge powers stated that he would urge the minting Frantin of the motion on oil three grounds viz errors aee oc curing at tile the arila in the line admission and rejection of evidence the insufficiency of 0 the evi evidence derce to justify y ti tile a verdict erf fiet newly discovered evidence sufficient to tile the to 40 a new trial TI IT judge powers further declared that he understand how bow the judge before whom the froise daae was wai tried could ever have arrived ot at the conclusion leached beached in the cafe unless influenced by passion or prejudice or a failure to understand mic die evUe nce ile he then dwelt at some length upon the all alleged d errors mado made by the court in the a admission 1 I en 13 and us ion of evidence after which lie ile took up the che other branches of ills his motion tn in cono aslon the judge Ing insisted isted that the ch charged argei of cruelty by MM irvine it proven were condoned and that the ithe charse charge of adultery made by mr irvine against his wife was 0 loarry sustained by the evidence alo that many men had been sent to the from the tha third district court tor for adultery on evidence that was by far less conclusive ithan that hat brought out upon this trial further that hat one court forgot everything in favor of the plaintiff and remembered everything in favor of th the defendant deth fen dant anil and that the former did did not I 1 have a fair trial the J cudse u dge also declared that the at of alimony awarded afra irvine was monstrous and without precedent in abase a case of ar character judge powers concluded his argument shortly h 0 artly before 5 and court adjourned until 10 toils morning M when hen john AI zane bill toe roe heard on ion behalf of the defendant |