New-York tribune., 1879-04-01
THE OLIVER-CAMERON TRIAL
THE CASE NEARLY CLOSED.
TIE PRAYERS OF PLAINTIFF AND DEFENDANT
. NEW LETTER PRoDUCED-TiE CASE SUNNI

| eron case opened ths mofhihR Wy t"o '"ueo '"'@
'We gentlemen. your prayers Let's get into ths case
| as soon as possible"
Mr. TOney suggested that the prayers he submitted
without argument either side. for II they got to
angling, the case might be prolonged two or three
days more
The Court don't think 1t will. Read your prayers
The plaintiff then proceeded. and the prayers were
| granted. as follows:
That If the Jury believed from the evidence that there
was contract between the Daintff and the defendant,
as alleged in the declaration OF marriage OF the de
fendant 10 the plaintiff either within reasonable time
without specifying any particular time to DO so ana
cna rnc nac rannesd 6S da5danf 70 comply
with the same by marrying her. and that the detend9nt
did not do hut had failed and refused TO comply with
s4ld contract then tley snaIl hid I"r the pnt .n,
That IN the Jury shall believe from the evidence that
the defendant promised the plaintiff to marry her. they
may infer acceptance OF bis promise from her bearing
and conduct toward him.
nd circumstances the PROMISE proved In the case, to
marry. request and the refusal provided the jury
may nd from tae facts ana 6ne circumstances tha
That If the jury shall believe that there was a con CON
tract between the plaintiff and defendant, and that after
sail contract was made the drfendant seduced thc
take pItce then such evidence OF seduction allowable
In aggIavalOn of damages provided the jury shall not
believe that the plaintiff received satisfaction for the
Thal if the jury find for the plaintiff they should
consi Ter, assessing damages, the injury sustained by
| The plaintiff IN her feelings and III her reputation
That the defendants counsel having admitted in the
progress OF the cause that # the alleged promise of
marriage made by the defendant be has broken II,
aud also that the defendant was amply abe TO- pay any
he considered by the jury as cOnclusiyey proved
That il the Jury believed from the evidence that
plaintiff and defendant contracted 10 marry each other.
and that the defendant failed aud refused To marry her.
they must find for the palnth ana such contract 10
sufficient IL made either verbally or in writing
That in assessing the damages, the jury are not
limited to the mere pccunary damages the plaintlh
may nave sustained. hut may take into consideration
her character utatiOn, and IN this
find Tor plaint'h such amOuut-not exceeding
SjOO00-as they believe the facts and circumstances
| fnn u;rps i1plt tnn
| plaintiff received satisfaction IOr the seduction.
II Is not to binding contract OF marriage
between the plaintiff and defendant that the defendant
should have intended TO marry the painth at me time,
mutual engagement was entered hto provided ihe de-
fendnt Intended to make the plaDtG believe that he
! intended to make her his wife.
If the Jury believe from the evidence that there was
q contract Of marriage made between the plaintiff ana
defendant and that no particular time was lxed loI s
celebration OF the marriage me law VIII imply that
Trey intended 1t should DO celebrated In Reasonable
If the Jury believe from the evidence that the plain
tG debaucned and srxuaily known 5y the defend
and that IL accomplished by means of promise
OF marriage on the part OF the defendant consent o
| plaintiff TO marry defendant amounting 10 q mutual
promise to marry may be Implied.
instructed the Jury that il IL competent for
them compare the Brstow letter. which is admitted
to be genuine with the letters in dispute for the pur
pose OF forming their opinion whether the dis
puted writing Is genuine in the light of AL the testimony
Some half.dozcn prayers offered were rejected.
General Butler said that before he went for his side
he had something say that might in effect prevent
the asking for new trial if such thing should become
necessary. He had his possession letter written
by Mrs Oliver, dated February 30, 1879 to bring
suit AGAINST Mr. Oliver in Kentucky her husband.
The letter came u him from leading lawyer in Ken
tucky he did believe that she would dispute its
genuneness.
Objection was first made by the plaintiffs counsel to
its reception, and then Withdrawn
Mrs Oliver went on the stand.
General Butler-Dd you write or cause to be written
this letter showing it 10 herr
Witness (ater reading the letter)-Those my
timents (risng from the chair.
General Bltlcr-They are Well sit down AN not
through yet
Witness thought that she had written to Thomas b.
Houston. attOrncylt-law at Lexington Ky, the
Goth Of February last She resided in that city at No u
Deawareave OF B-st. she caused the letter to
be written
The letter was then read rs follows
want YOU to Inquire the amount of property owned
by T. W. oIiyeP yer & lie bought house in Nicholasyile'
rented one there. All that is it belongs to him.
an advised by my friends of Kentucky to bring snt
against him. He had Il wife living in North Carolina
Of Kentucky says entitled TO what he has ana thar
I should at begin sult against him on the
charge of bgamy, which can prove, as everybody m
divlde equally with YOU sue him for the whole amount
State carried Isaac 7. Gould, and interested in
seminary at Mersburg; that Is kept by George F.
really il owned by I. W. Oliver winch be proyed
Please Investigate and answer lmmediatey; y Yours
No. II Dela,care are corner Bst., Washington D. Q.
The then retired from the stand. The follow
ing prayers for defendant read and allowed
Tn the declaration of the plaintiff $4,000 claimed
from the defendant for damages for an alleged contract
to marty The damages so claimed are what are called
OF the alleged contract Under the pleading II IT ap
pears the evidence that, after the alleged promise
Uf marriage, negotiations arose or existed be-
tween Of S orcy fro tbc wc fernratcG m
tba uaXn 4 10 he q
$1,000 for which she executed receipt IN full OF every
thing all damages in claims. this wond be satsfac
OF present claim. and she would be bound Ivy
result oi the transaction with the defendant to
be esOpped and prevented from receiving anything in
this The operative words OF the receipts OF the
painIIG given IN evidence by the defendant. sui
cieny full to cover the subjectmater for which the
plaintiff brought suit, and If given after tho alleged
csu,e OF acu2n aIosr, they are par 10
the evidence shows that they were obtained from the
plaintiff by deceit, fraud, Misrepresentation Of the
defendant, or executed in mistake OF facts.
That plaintiff sues tine defendant for damages for an
proof 10 make out this affirmative allegation is on the
plaintiff and 1t must he sustained by preponuerance
OF proof and not simply by possibilities or Presumpions
II such prepOnderancp weight OF proof does not exist
has not been produced the verdict should be for tho
Upon the question OF the credbility TO be given to
the plaintiffs testimony. the Court Is respectfully
qucsted to that II maxim of the law that II
party tcstles fl'ely IN any important or material par
statement Therefore il II appears from all
tho evidence that the plaintiff has testified falsely,
knowingly, without regard to important or material
particulars involved IN her whether of place
time presence. III reference TO which she could not
well be mistaken, she must he regarded guilty OF
deliberate faaehood aud her evidence should be re-
iccted bv the jury upon itOdm IiSus in uO, olSus ia
Omn ibHS-falsc In one respect. false IN all.
General Butler said, tar his side concerned
they willing to submit the 10 the Jury without
argument upon the instructions of the Court Mr.
Toney, of the other side, speaking for himself
expressed "A similar Willingness NJ Peters, how
ever. objected, and thought 1t would be doing full
Justice TO his client TO do
The Court said that he should conne the argument TO
two hCuis on both sides.