The Ohio organ, of the temperance reform. (Cincinnati, [Ohio]) 1853-1854, 1853-12-30
volunteer COUNSEL
rAIH b JOHN TAYLOR.

John Taylor was licensed, when
youth of tWenty-one, to. practice ct
the bar Of this city. He was poor
but well educated, and possessed ex-
traordinary genius. The graces Of his
person. combined with the superiority
of his intellect, enabled him 10 win the
hand Of fashionable beauty. Twelve
months afterwards he was employed
by wealthy firm of the city to 60 on
a mission as land agent to the West.
AS a heavy salary was offered, Taylor
bid farewell to his wife and infant son.
He wrote back every week, but re-
ceived not line in answer. Six
months elapsed, when he received a
letter from his employers that explain
ed all. Shortly after his departure
for the west, the wife and her father
removed TO Mississippi. There she
Immediately obtained divorce by an
oct of the Legislature, married again
Forthwith, and to complete the climax
Of cruelty and wrong, had the name
ef Taylor's son changed to MARKS
thatV her second matrimonial part.
ner This per6dy nearly drove Tay-
lor Insane. His career from that pc
Rod became eccentric in the first de-
gree. AT last fever carried him
off At a comparatively early age.
AT tan-early hour on the 9th of April
1910, the court house in Clarksville,
Texas, was crowded to overhowing.
Save in the war times past, there
had never been witnessed such gath
ering in Red River county, while the
strong feeling apparent on every flush
ed face will sufficiently explain the
matter. 1
At the close Of 1889, George Hop
kins, one of the Wealthiest planters
and most influential men Of Northern
Texas, offered a gross insult to Mary
Elliston, the young and beautiful wife
of his chief overseer. The husband I
threatened to chastise him for the out |
rage, whereupon Hopkins loaded his
gun, went to Elliston's house, and
shot him in his own door. The MUIR
derer was arrested, and bailed to an
swer for the charge. This occurrence
produced intense excitement, and
Hopkins, in order to turn the general
wrath which at first was violent
against him, circulated reports infa-
mously prejudicial to the character Of
the woman who had suffered such |
cruel wrong at his hands. She brought |
her suit for SANDER. And thus, two
cases, one criminal and the other civil,
and both out of the same tragedy, 1
were pending in the April Circuit
Court for 1910.
The interest naturally felt by the
committees as to the issues became far
deeper when it was known that Ash
ley and Pike of Arkansas, and the
celebrated S. S. Prentiss, of New Or
leans, each with enormous fees, had
been retained by Hopkins for his de-
fense.
The trial for the Indictment of mur-
der ended on the 9th of April, with \
the acquital of Hopkins. Such a re-
suit might well have been forseen by
comparing the talents of the counsel
on either side. The Texas lawyers
were utterly overwhelmed by the ar
guments and eloquence of their oppo-
nents. 1t was a fight of dwarf
against giants.
The SANDER suit was set for the 9th, lI
and the throng Of spectators grew in
number as well as excitement; and |
what may seem strange, the current
of public sentiment now ran decided |
for Hopkins. His money had pur-
chased pointed witnesses who served
most efficiently his powerful advo-
Gates. Indeed, SO triumphant had
been the success of the previous day,
that when the slander case was called,
Mary Elliston was left without an at
torney-tbey had all withdrawn. The
,,;ouv nettifoUoers dared not brave