Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1879-03-31
THE CAMERON BREACH OF PROM
ISE CASE.
An Exchange Of Personalities Between
Butler aud Peters.
The Motion Overruicd after Considera-
Bile Controversy.

WAsuiNGToN. March % The attendance
at the divert amcrUn trial to-day was small.
but the proceedings were enliycncd by the CX-
change of personalities between Butler and
Peters, growing out of Il hotly debated ruling
of the court upon the admission of the evil
dcnce of Mr.. Riddle.
Peters said if they were going to fight Fort
Fisher and Big Bethel over again, he would
like to know it.
Butler said he did not see the necessity Of
introducing his own military history into the
case but if such necessity existed he would
abide by it, and thought his record would
stand as well before the country as that of
Peters, Who spent a considerable part of the
time in old Capitol Prison, traitor to his
country.
After some further remarks of a hostile
character by the opposing counsel, Butler
said he should now ask for Il non-suit. on the
ground that the receipts from Mrs. Oliver,
produced in evidence and not disputed, were
bar to the action. They were a full release,
given after months of negotiation of u. the
claims upon Cameron. and he thought the
court should withdraw the ease from the u-
~.
His honor said there was no doubt a. to his
power to ID so. What he wanted to know
was whether there was any controversy as to
StdttlhtHtN IIdtIt III tUt ItttlItlN. II NOT ne
should hold it to be bar to this action
\ recess of halt an hour was then taken. to
allow plaintiffs counsel time to tortity them
selves and prevent if possible TINS sudden ter
mination OF their case.
After recess Butler made the argument that
the receipts given by Mrs. Oliver for money
received was settlement of the case, and the
law he felt conv WINGED, would sustain that
view. If it did not, then it left the way still
open to blackmailcrs to pursue their nefari-
Gus work. as they mad since the DAYS of Ham
iton, who WAS bled so bad that his salary
was insufficient for his support
The Judge said he had always deferred to
the perogatlve of a jury. SO long a. there
was evidence for jury to consider he should
do so now. He denied the motion of Butler
that the court instruct the jury to bring in IA
verdict for defendant.
Butler then made another motion that Mrs.
Oliver was, in the eye Of the law. married
woman, and was therefore stopped from con-
summarizing another marriage
The court had no doubt there was a mar
riage dc facto between her and Mr.. Oliver.
and would to that extent ostop them both
from DENYING the legitimacy of offspring but
did 1t dsqualliy the parties when they aban-
doned the dctacto life, from making con
tract future: Could they not enter into tn-
turc contracts:
Butler thought society had some rights in
this matter. After this suit had been brought
plaintiff wanted to sue Oliver as her husband.
She was estopped by her acts.
The Judge said that if he should govern
himself by the acts in the ease, he should
make short work of it. but this case must be
tried as any other is. The parties came here
both of them as adultercrs Well. that was
rather n Dnor recommendation f,r Il S.uat,r'u
wife. but if after being informed of all the
adulterous practice of the woman the Senator
Is fool enough to marry her, there is nothing
to prevent it. This womans history aud
practices run through the entire case and he
believed her antecendent history. played the
part of deception, and all know that deception
did not bind in Il contract to marriage. But
he had no fears of the jury running away
with justice while he held the reins, so he
would override the motion.
The court then adjourned until Monday.