The New York herald., 1876-11-24

seduction cases. AZ Tor himself II the hrst time
participation IN the trial had been painful duty for
HIM He felt certain that the jury would DO only too
atmosphere Of the He desired 70 put them
their guard against any false sympathy Tor the fair
plaintiff some things 90 man , Was proc, against
woman like tho plaintiff He ,pred her
far as duty his client would permit shield her
the torrent Of evidence against her that abe had drawn
forth BY her appearance in The case. !. may have
elderly members OF the jury wero seated nearer the
plantG-exposed to the full blaze OF her charms at
several sever psrsons ihs, be had la clear ar A case g.
but that there was one thing that would
prevcn. him from getting verdics-there wa.
tina. the jury knew that they were under oath, and
inertia He recalled tho testimony OF tho plaintiff that
she cid no. want moneyonly desired that her charac
ter should be established. Ho asked had u not been
estabiisheds Tho press had published to iae
world every morning the "details Of iho trial.
n iskoS ss y lnsV
her written evidence aud her oral evidence,
established is In way that would be ioreotens
twonty to have been under tho rigid discipline OF
man whom she had described q brute, and who. to
his mind or tho most startling monsters ever
exhibited q court II had been proven that whlic
her family werc without means, that they were also
When she met tho defendant tho plaintiff was already
adept In the ways OF New York liie-alroady pos.
sessing alias She fell in with this rich Cuban and
whole evidence showed that never did privateer
on tho Spanish Main board nomcward bound Indian
ship dctormnedy than did this family board this
rich Cuban and determine TO capture him. He was
u big bonanxn, and they resolved 70 seize him. Tho
counsel then spoke OF her going to Solars INTO pr
assumed name " Tue excuse she made. that il was
IA few days, reminded him o tho wet nurse
VINO had cnild and coudn't prove she had husband
and who excused herself 10 hor employer by saying
that anyhow the child was s'only worry small one"
(aughter) Wncn she was 'seduccd'' as She claimed.
v<lun ,nsfnu nf EtnF vrh eh
would have brought her assistance, had, by
her own testimony, shown that she had
person experienced In criminal conversation. Mr.
del vae doniod he had had criminal intercourse
with her. and 10 the counsel behind him. Hc roerrcd
to tho fact that tho plaintiff had never blushed during
the entire trial or given sign OF DISTRESS Not re-
porter prosen. had oesn able during the trial. IN
| ircssed When she once put her handkerchief 10
her while testying her counsel raised cry OF
water watcr!" AS though the bench was about TO
be wrapped flames; and then II turned out to be
only momentary eclipse OF tho handkerchief, and
| that she had been
SHEDDING DRY TEARS
Aftcr that with radiant face and sparkling eye and
tripping tongue she went her testimony tho
she had madc OF herself on the standto the zcst and
relish and keen cnJoyment with which she went INTO
ali tho stories OF and indccency purportng TO
have boon told her by tho defendant lie tnen
showed ina, the story she said ,no DC,
| with u Spanish lady, who had no children,
could bo found in the Deca,ncron; that 1t had got
i
had picked up the tuition Of her monster OF
stcptasher Ho next attacked her vcracty. and asked
could be thought her oath In Hat denial OF the
oaihs Mr. and Mrs Quackcubos and twelve other
nesses; OF her statement, cohradiccd by her letter,
that her step;aihcr was always slender anu gentle.
He then into tho question OF the promise oil
riage and argued that II the jury were satisfied there
had been such PROMISE the subsequent relations Of
1 the two parties OF account and tho verdict
| should bo the defendant Among other things, to
tortiy his argument that there promise Of mar
| rage ho quoted the plaintiffs testimony where she
1 mai ma
the defendant until three weeks alter thor first
quaintancc, and yet swore that the ring bought
OF tho proof gwen by the Jcwcier that the ring
bought the very day sfcr they had first met tho 10Th
OF January. He next rcfcrroi 10 the plaintiffs going
| under the name oi Howard, her DENIAL OF the fact,
| whc her own letters proved that she did 60 under
that name, and that long before she know Mr.. Del
Vale sic tho habit OF receiving letters under
that name He asked tho jury, sensible men, wha.
went by alias and under that alias Kept up
| spondence with mem What amount OF sold gold
would they take TO let such thing go on If once they
OF March, caIle0the letter OF confession, IN which
tho pla,nuT revealed her stcpfathcr's villany,
| showing that the contents Of the letter
| were directly against her evidence giving HIM
| good character. He contended that there
no evidence to show that she rciurrcd tho ring
and that statement that shc had written q eltor
Del Vale eon,a Ming II was lasc. He referred the
| DEFENDANT conleiiunx shat his testimony had been
| straightforward There only Two discrepancies
| in It, and be had examined II narrowly he had SAID,
on his direct examination. that he bad written tho
marginal tho secret letter tho after its
receipt aud cross-exannation stated no could not
tell when hc mad written tho notes This, Mr. Choato
| contendcd, not argument against the deieud-
ant; hc had obviously careful TO observe his
oath. The discrepancies were the sinple result OF
over his part 10 be right He believed no
| man connected with tho would ever go to the
| help of u woman hereafter, who slipped up in tho
street. on Inc M lce .. & on ~ o,anso peel
this case, MS II was man then holping q This
| falling IN the street BY woman was an historical
trick OF tho .nymphs oil the pave" The trick had
! OF. begun many nm acquaintance that had ended
| uisaslrously. Speaking OF the meetings II So
| iari's the counsel said thai It was not a
place where man. alter beng belrothcd TO woman,
took her carry ills ccurtships. He ridcucd the
idea ui the alleged engagement between tho plaiutlf
aud defendant and the story That her scpiather would
! shoot any man she would marry. Ihe stepfa,hcr
learning from Mr. CevaIlos tLat the defendant was
rich but immoral forgot his shooting Intentions. II
he had any, and assontcd To having HIM caught
| 10 the mcshes II shc had ever engaged 10 bel
| Vale facs would not only have leaked among
| some OF her nclahDors, but tho family would have
proclaimed II from F.ity.sixth street TO second ave.
nuc. Del Vale had nibbed but had hold OF
the bait. Had tho two been engaged. how could the
visits OF Louis Cramcr and HIS proposal OF marriage
three weeks alter the alleged engagement be looked
| upon? Any whose daughter would bc thus
| vist,cd alter beng engaged would conclude shc
| had many bcaus TO her suing too many
Strings TO her beau. (Lauehier) How could tho
plaintiff have time attend 10 Cramcr II most OF her
| time taken up with the defendant In gong to
Soiari's and with bcr ssdigrcssonsy' cloud laughter
Ho asked what would bc ihought OF the pIainn ana
her mother and sister the confession letter was not
trucY II true how was II that this whose
bcastlincss exposed that letter. see her
at poughkecpsic with her mother at ani place
whom she than ever helpless against his al
tacksy Again, was II such letter that woman
| would write to whom sho had given her
HEARTY He argued TO show that tho plaintiff went
| the Hotel Royal because Frederick Hammond was
there the nutuor c tho letters the envelopes of which
In 1874 addressed TO Miss Howard bore initials
| ef. HI Where was Hammond during all the inney
Az tho Palisades Hotel, IN New Jersey. from which
doubt IL tho far plaintiffs nngcr would have
drawn him 10 the court as The magnet draws tho
needle. but from which subpoena could bring
him. The counsel showed that the testimony OF tho
two bell boys had remained unmpcaclicd, although
JOB was nearly put ~ ON thcin, Mr Cuno being tho
Instrument In the hands oi the other side to do
WITH but Mr.. Clune dad not dare come up 10 the
scratch When called He asked " II reasonable 10
suppose that girl engaged 10 man would. as the
psintin nnd done. enter his service US ncnial and
receive puy her services. Mr. Choato then argued
against tho charge oi seduction, which, hc said,
amer all only :ondary consideration tho accusa-
tiun was seduction under promise OF marriage; n
there no such promise The seduction Of
l Ind ixlo. a.i1da L., aiL.