WAUPACA REPUBLICAN

March 23, 1883

 

TARR VS. HANNAWALT

 

The Exciting Event of the Week

 

            On Monday the old gray and bald headed men, including the boys of Dayton and part of the town of Springwater were over to Waupaca to attend the examination of James Hannawalt of Springwater, Waushara county, for an alleged “criminal” or “quasi-criminal” affair with Harriet Tarr which was alluded to in our columns last week.  The examination was held in Music Hall before Justice Chesley.  Dist. Attorney J.F. Dufur and Irving P. Lord were for the prosecution and Dist. Attorney Soule, of Waushara county for the defendant.  A motion was made to clear the court room of all by-standers, but was amended, by ordering all boys under 15 years of age to retire, and give the other boys and old men a chance to see or hear the circus, which is usual on such trials.   The father, mother, sister and brother-in-law of the injured girl were present, and the father Rev. Mr. Hannawalt, and a sister of James, besides quite an array of witnesses on both sides.

            The girl told her story in a plain straight-forward manner and although subjected to a rigid, though respectful, examination by Mr. Soule, she was not balked in the least.  It was evident to the minds of all who heard her story that she had been the willing victim to a lustful person, and she declared James Hannawalt to be the man and the only man.  And – she put the matter right down to dates, and had a witness to prove that James was at the barn yard fence on the morning in question, while she was milking the cows.  James did not deny being there but pronounced the main part of the story false – of course.  He only stopped for a “drink” and when Eugene Brigham came along he hired him to cut corn.  Eugene left and then he stayed a little while longer to see about when her folks would be home, as he wanted more help “in his corn.”  Hattie, it seems, stayed all night at Hannawalt’s the night before, and if he had wanted to know particular about business, why did he not see to it while she was there.

            Witnesses for the defense were brought on to show that Hattie had been indiscreet by being out late nights with one John Hanson – especially one night Sept. 5, when he accompanied her home from a meeting held at Hannawalt’s school house, by Quincy Foster.  But Hattie said he only helped her hold the gate up a half hour, and she went into the house – her sister Mrs. W. Brooks’ about 11 o’clock.  Another witness swore that Hanson (who was working at Hannawalt’s at the time) didn’t get home that night until three o’clock.  But Dufur argued that made no difference with this case, and Irving suggested that he might have been “over the garden wall” stealing melons somewhere.

            Irving Lord made the opening plea for the plaintiff, followed by Dist. Attorney Soule for the defendant.  We think he hurt the case by suggesting that if the ladies didn’t want to hear his “hot shot” they might retire.  They all left.  (The ones above noted and two or three personal friends of the party).  Then Mr. Soule had full swing.  He worked faithfully for his client, used logic and “shot shot” to show the boys where the laugh came in.  Spoke of the social standing of James, his riches, and his influence; and the possibilities of the property being inherited by “that heir” in case his client should die.  He wound up by flattering Justice Chesley very beautifully.

            Dist. Attorney Dufur closed the argument.  He said he did not propose to win his case by using language that would necessitate the removal of ladies form the court room.  His argument was powerful and convincing.  At the close Justice Chesley said he should hold the def’t for trial, and James Hannawalt was ordered to give bonds in the sum of $300 for his appearance at the next term of circuit court, which he immediately complied with.