The daily gazette., 1882-12-13
--------------S-~-O-3@
COUNT PISUCEEsDIrS,ss
The ThOrne-Woldin Jury Charged--NIe
Caulley VS.. Rice.


Benjamin Nields, Esq, at the afternoon
session Of court yesterday stated the facts of
the Thorne- Weldin case, declared that the
whole matter had turned out TO be oath
against oath. The plaintiff, he said, had
declared one thing which the defendant de-
MED. He did not think it at all likely or
reasonable to suppose that Mr.. Thorne
would do the work he did for nothing. In
asmuch as the first witnesses eontradicted
each other the jury should take other testi-
mony upon which 70 base its decision. He
spoke about half an hour and was followed
by Harry Emmons, Esq, for the defense.
Mr.. Emmons spoke brfly, arguing that
Mr.. Weldin was under no obligations to
Mr. Thorne, who had solicited to be allowed
the opportunity to get up the drawings for
the defendants house. The plaintiff on the
other hand, however, was under obligations
to the defendant. Thorne's bid for the
work was In the nature of scheme to get
ahead of Weldin.
Mr.. Lore followed for the defence, basing
his remarks upon the assertion that the
plaintiff had already been paid for his work
by the favors shown him by Mr.. Weldin,
who had given him credit when a stranger,
without reputation and without capital, had
taken a note in part payment for bill owed;
and In other ways had done what he could
to aid Thorne. Thorne's idea was to get
name and reputation as a contractor by
building first-class house. Thorne's offer,
Mr.. Lore contendcd, to do the work for
5000, during the winter when work was
slack, was only u plan to get Mr.. Weldin in
his power, so that when spring came, and
work was plentiful, he could ask what he
pleased to complete the dwelling. After
speaking nearly an hour Mr.. Lore finished
and Mr.. Neilds began his answer and the
closing argument.
He began by defending his client from the
imputation Of the opposing counsel, that he
"stretched the truth" while upon the wit
ness stand, and then reviewed the testimony
closely, comparing the oath of Thorne with
the affirmation of Weldin.
Mr.. Nields spoke for 80 minutes, and at
5.55 court adjourned after the transaction of
some minor business.
THE MORNINGS SESSION. -.
At 10 O'Clock this morning, after the
opening of court, Chief Justice Comegy's
briefly charged the jury In the Thorne-W
din case, and at 1890 they retired.
The case of Samuel w. McCaulley VS..
John V. Rice, trading as Rice & Co., was
then called, a jury being drawn. Anthony
Higgins represented the plaintiff and Mr..
Rice was announced as his own counsel.
After addressing the court, considerable
sensation was produced by an unusual scene
IN W1lcn Mr.. hlce mauc Drlel auufeSS. Tie
felt it his duty to explain his anomalous
position of both client and counsel. He re-
ferred to the plaintiff as magnanimous
generous, etc., and possessing the love of
money equal to that of Shylock. After
speaking in general way, his remarks
being interspersed with quotations from
Shakespeare, he broke down and paced
quietly up and down the bar seemingly
unable to speak.
Upon being motioned by Mr.. Lore to take
seat Mr.. Rice regained his voice and
passionately exclaimed;
"Tell it not in Browntown and publish 1t
not in Hedgeville how have the mighty
fallen"
He then explained that he was aware of
the fact that man who conducted his own
case had a fool for a client. He had, when
the suit was at first brought, engaged emf,
nent counsel but they had withdrawn.
Turning to the jury he trusted that his
apology for delaying them would be re-
ceived. He remarked that he was a man
OF probity and fair. dealing, and for the first
time in fifty years those principles had been
assailed. "If have said or given express
sion to my feelings, hope will not preju-
dice your minds In the case. will present
tue case as clearly, plainly and succinctly as
possible" lie then went on and described
how he had borrowed money of Mr.. McCaul-