Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1851-04-26

The council for the defendant renewed his motion for
delay, bnt it was oyerruled by the court.
Here the evidence upon both sides closed and
Mr. Hyde Senior Council closed the case for the de-
fence in an able and ingenious argument to the Jury of
something more than an hours duration.
lie said it was of great importance not only
IN account Of the pecuniary considerations involved;
bnt in far higher respects, for it concerned the peace
and happiness of individuals and the cause of good
morals in the community.
There were several distinct propositions upon which
the defense relied for acqua of the deenden after
this long protraced examination. First, that the evil
dence in relation to the sldneer definite; Sc
cond that if the Islander spoken, it than
two years prior the commencement of the suit to
which the Statute of limitations requiring such suit
to be broush within two years from the time the SIAN
der was uttered, complete barrier to its prosecu
tlon Thirdly, that if spoken,the words true, and
lastly that there could be claim for damages for loss
OF character for the woman had character to lose
lie then proceeded to argue these several points
riatlm The foundation of the charge he said rested
principally upon the evidence Of one man, Mr.. Shep
herd, who could not recollecr the day the month
when the deenden uttered the slandeous words nam
ed in the writ 1t was true that there was other test
mony, which tended to show that he had spoken oi
Mrs. Fairbanks character upon other occasions, but
these were mere light and trivial expressions, which
conveyed no real meanings and which could have
HIS argument upon the matter of time, when the al.
lodged SANDER uttered was extremely able. and
showed that he understood we II how to make the best
OF difficult case He then endeavored to show, that
there malice in the act of the delendent, mas
much as he merely talked on matter which was
common topic of conversation with every body IN the
village, and that there could be no guilt in talking of
character so notorious.
The writ alledges that the slanders were uttered by
Mr.. Samuel r. Burroughs in the spring of 1913, only
about two years ago. and the evidence for the most
part goes to show that her character had been sub
ect Of constant remark and anmadversion for tenor
dozen years previous. Has she then received any
damage from the defendant to her character when it
was SO obvious to all that she has character lose.
Gentlemen of the Jury, this lady demands money at
your hands, for injury done to her reputation 1t is for
you to investigate and inquire how much il any repu-
ation she really had that she should come before this
honorable court with such claim. When the very
fact that her character the subject of such frequent
comment at all times and at all places, in town and
out of town, in the the way to church, and
in the barrooms, Of itself strong presumptve evil
dence, that there was something rotten Asociety was
consuted that woman stood the best and airest whose
name was never mentioned out Of the circle Of her
own immediate neig hborhood and it could not be that
any woman's character should be made the topic of
conversation for dozen years, unless there loun
dation for it somewhere.
As regards the utterance of the SANDER, if nv
client did really utter it, it should exonerate him
that when it uttered, he said as the witness adj
ms, that it was based upon what his brother John
G. Burroughs, told him, viz that he had unlawful
intercourse with the plaintiff at her fathers house
prior to the date Of her marriage AS he gave the
authority for his words, why should he be held re-
sponsibe 10 case so notorious as this one?
Gentlemen, you have had the testimony of that
brother to-day, in the form of a deposition, in which
ne states, under oath, that he did have knowl
edge OF her at the time and place specified
Was there any reason why he should come forward
and crimlnae himself He was out of the State
beyond the jurisdiction of this Court, but vet he
comes forward voluntarily, and confcsscs to these
facts, IN order to save bis brother from the conse-
quences Of his own indiscreiion, which he had mar
rated TO him. Gentlemen of the Jury, said Mr.. III.
you have heard from many of the most respectable
citizens oil Warren what was the opinion in regard
to tins womans character, by the general speech of
people. number Of witnesses have testified that
her reputation was not good, and in addition to all
you have the testimony Of Rev. Mr. Trask, which is
vital IN this connection. lie states that on giyen
occasion, IN an interview with Mrs Fairbanks she
appeared In very disturbed state of mind. superin-
duced by the fact that she was, as she said, neg
lected by society around her; that on that occasion
she plaintvely remarked that 1t was cruel and
wrong that she should be put down and crushed
when another as much TO blame or guilty ms herself
should be respected or bolstered up in society Mr.
Irask was Of The same opinion. This is the test.
mony Of Mrs, L. herself in relation 10 her own renl-
tation.
Mr.. 1'rask has uniformly, in the most honorable
and Christian manner, symsahsed with this unfor-
tunate woman, and II Is in no sense through his
agency that she is here in all these painful crcum.
stances In the case Of Fairbanks and Carnen,er
ne acted the part Of the good Samaritan, he bound