, 1873-01-26
Conclusion Of the Tucker Re-
lief Hria1.
Arguments OF Counsel, and instructions
Of the Court.
The Jury, After a Long and Stormy Ses-
sion, Fail to Agree,
Ten of the Panel For Plaintiff,
and Two Against.

debate throughout the day. Judge Norton fri
addressed the jury in behalf of the plaintiff
His principal points were that the goods wer
taken away by violence, the house having bee
forcibly entered. He spoke at length Of til
fact that the seizure was made at night, and til
sufferers we're women, against whom there wer
pitted three men. The papor introduced in eyi
dence Was signed by Afrs. Tucker under duresa
she calling God to witness that it Was lic TIL
whole amount Of goods obtained was not enough
to furnish any house decont1y.
REMARKS OF NR. SMITH
The speech for the defence was by.aIr. sidue,
Smith, and occupied two hours in the delivery.
It contained fervid eulogy Of the Relief anG
aid Society, the difficulties in which it Was
plsced, and tho impositions prnctiacd on it. hfr,
Smith rehcarsed the facts stated in the testimo-
~, her obtaining goods from various depart
ments of the relief, giving different nam es and
various residences on various stroots Tho
articles we're given up under written consent of
Ms. Tucker; therefore there was no trespaes.
II, however, it could bo proved that there had
been duress in obtaining Mrs. fuckers sigma
tile to the paper, the act Of trespass would be
aggravated. But there had been no duress. and
extracts were read from Coke defining
the term, and counsel fixed the
terms to the present case HRS. Tucker had not
been imprisoned, and it did not appear from the
testimony that she had over been threatened
with imprisonment. So pretty man as Lam
beit would not be rude to any one It Was only
necessary to look ut that gcntleman's get-up to
zee that he could not possibly have been unclyil,
to man OF woman. The question Of dnrcss was
argued at length as related to the testimony OF
several witnesses. Tho circumstances of the
seizure we're reviewed at length. and the wit
nesses for the prosecution especially those stig-
latzed as "played-out detectives, were trested
in caustic manner. He closed with general
resume OF the subject, and special appeal to
the jury.
nm. LYLE RING.
N the closing speech, alluded to tho presence in
the court OF the ladies who had been the per-
nEtent trends OF Mrs Tucker, which, he said,
lsdy's character L glowing tribute was paid TO
the great fire, eulogy was uttered upon the
worlds charity, and q reasonable amount Of
Praise given to the Chicago Relief and Aid So
ployed in such society, there should have BEEN
some selfish men, was not to be wondered at
The Relief Society had not been immaculate. or
entirely free from blame. To prove a
Mtsespass, M it vas only, necessary to show
Of the party trespassed on. The pleas
put in BY the defence were that the defendants
entered the houae Of tho plaintiff by the leave
md license Of the plaintiff. This WAS the turn
ing point in the case. Even if she had obtained |
ths goods fraudulently, there was q trespass in |
taxing them in the manner testified to. Mrs,
Tucker testified that before leaving the barracks
the had the alternative giren of either giving up
G!', t1s goods or OF going to jail. The Rev. hi.
Nllliams m was . confederate in the game, who
es7e such unholy advice to woman as to sign |
paper contesslnS her guilt, and trust to those |
Who we're prosecuting her. II Mrs. Tucker was |
n.ot under duress, why did Bho ask
= =. she no,.am.n wan under under. arrest ? Why
o!tle defendants WIS like that OF the Jew in
Gil Bias who stood by the roadside with a car
hne cooked and disarned and robbed the un1e-
Eenerate- All the testimony showed that Mrs.
ewing up the goods. Mr. Draliner picked up
his own expressman, and stated in bis evidence
that be took the policeman along to keep up
s1or Of force and in order to intimidate the
lhntla !a1af.., Both H. Harvey and Mr; Avery we're
= acknowledge BY the counsel for the plaintiff.
1ts whole value Of the goods obtained BY
1ls. Tucker did not exceed $500. This
aa tanshiux novld aoq eosat not 60 far toward
not enough for ono family would be princely gem
sIfoasy; Tho testimony Of Mrs Lyon and Mrs {
4olse had very little weight, and Was not worth
s psang formally before the jury. All the testi--
~ Ft1s showed that, after the goods we're taken,
q .2e Nj: King spoke st length on the sanctity :
.. 1ae domicil, after which he explained the E
e.:afs . OF the damages, why theY should be 49, I
e. xsseo, and how estimated. The general hard Z
.GP ~; o. the seizure formed the theme of the q
lang portion Of the argument, and the custo- b
~! special appeal to the feelings of the jury in
asaan ot the plaintiff and against the defend i
~ nM. more righteous use Of the funds OF the =
as.s1 Society, he said could not be made than 8
F9ag the damages claimed. I
TIE CHARGE TO TIE JURY &
s... 49, aos plfhllT constructed, few points being
va aaeg concealed under large amount of ya.bi- a
3ee Judge instructed the jury for the d
Es antdua mt II the defendants, one or ~ of Il
"a la guilty Of trespass. Il they carried away
=, booos contrary to her will they were guilty
s.,s lnespass The plea Of leave or license could
nt I os sustained By proof either Of direct con- ::
S.",.a u RaSe and license implied by the circum -
saa:ss' LeaTo and license could not be con- 1c
.s!ea IS proved the plaintiff were either re- n
Of her liberty, or feared that she would be
70 ]a1 unless sho gave consent II the de- te
s.as s.a. I, took the goods under leave and n1 ot
cor.ss. .oosained IN compulsory manner, such ~ ~
~ could not be urged in defence OF the act sc
~ ~ me jury believed from the eTidenco su
ts ttsa nat the goods had been frauduleutly OBJ
d. Hoi1 the Relief Society," il they we're in IA 1a'
H.! possession Of plaintiff, defendants m re
h:s , no: justified in entering the house and II
ts.is tss them from her except by leave and license
4. n.y. g17en- Il it appeared to the jury from i.
~ =; :s7deace that q trespa8s had been commit !
eate5ng ~ thn the house the question OF the
T. ;ncEiity, or subsequent injury should enter n
+ = the question Of damages, and, in assessine 80
= asmsges, all that had been done in q vanto3 A.
K: reckless way should be- considered II,
r,s1. the injury to character, and the
sA arising were also things to be considered of
a<seasng damages: The Judge mr.
-. CHARGED FOB THE DEFENDANTS | mr.
~ IL Inc jury believed from the testimony that
= saes M On or nbout the 18th OF December,