The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1884-09-19
EVIDENCE OF WEAKNESS
The Attorneys for the Sentinel Still
Scheming to Gain More Time.
A Step Taken Which Proves that They
Have No Evidence to Sustain Their
Charges Against MI. Blaine.

IN the Blalne-Sentlne case nleda Dill OF discovery
in the federal court. 1t was expected that this
would be the next move toward further delay
ing the trial of the case, and it is evident, from
the relief which is asked, that the defendants
hope by this means to find a way out of the pre-
dicament into which they have gotten them
selves. The bill is quite lengthy, and includes
all documents that have heretofore been filed in
the case. The proceedings are under the title of
the indianapolis Sentinel Company and John G..
Shoemaker against James G. Blaine, in which
Mr.. Blaine Is made to appear as the defendant
After setting forth in full the previous proceed
ings, including the complaint, the answer of the
defense and the reply, the bill states that the in
terrogatories, which had been overruled by the
court, remain unanswered, and that lit will be
evident.to your honors upon inspection and ex-
animation of the p~leadings in said suit at law
hereinbefore reacted-to-wit: said declaration
and reply; that, in order to sustain the defense
of justification pleaded by your orators therein,
it will be necessary and material for your ora
tors to show and prove" that the relations of
Blaine with the woman whom he afterwards
married had been improper, resulting in their
marriage under the circumstances charged in the
libelous article.
The bill further states that the counsel are
informed and believe, and therefore charge the
fact to be,n that James G.. Blaine was married
to Harriet Stanwood on March %, 1851, in Pitts
burg, Pa; that said marriage was elandestinely
arranged. secretly performed, and hastily ac-
complished. That no license was issued by any
authority for such marriage, none being re-
quired by the law of the State where it was con-
tracted, at that time; that no public official re-
cord was kept or made of such marriage, the
law of said State requiring no such record at the
time such marriage was contracted; that the
minister. one Bryan, who oficiated at said mar
rage, died several years ago; that if any private
memoranda or record was made of said MARRIAGE,
of which your orators are not informed, the
same is now lost or destroyed, as they are in
formed and believe; the particulars of which
marriage aforesaid are specially and fully known
to the said James g. Blaine"
The bill further states that Blaine and Miss
Stanwood were employed as instructors in a
seminary at Millersburg, KY; that they there
became acquainted, and that this acquaintance
grew into intimacy: and 'therefrom one Jacob
Stanwood, a brother or an uncle of the said
Harriet, or some other person or persons who are
unknown to these, your orators, waited upon
the said Blaine at some time, a short time imme-
diately before said marriage, charged him with
the seduction of said Harriet, and with being the
cause of her said condition, and threatened him
with severe personal chastisement or other vio-
lence, unless he would marry the said Harriet;
LA Inc saLu plaine, nahing no uenlal q 1naC
threatened, undertook and agreed to
marry her as heretofore stated in the bill; that
one or more persons were present at the inter-
view between said Blaine and the relative or
6 - anatoss rs 81 ~ s,oh $500 800
known to your orators
The bill states that after their marriage Mrs.
Laaaaoe NJ &c. ~ a., ee.a, Smc
49, non4ha of.n. H. 49, "aom - aL:iS
S nae horn - fn"a 70 8 1e5 n : ase q 0nAio
mIo ao,osaI fnrtba, sbou 4ba+ 4hAuLa
aoa5 anS Ia $780, - 81 500; :. 49, ~; a I@
En OoG fat ~ the said suit a. 81 law II sa Z
IRIa;ne for ,ibe,. tba4 tba facts stated = sai5
ansmay n 6 ins Isl .ioo r nc 49,, tr,a and tha = s ~
san,a con bs f,iiy aStahI;sbeS bs tha e ara ~ 70
the said defendant RIaine 70 the interrooa
tor;as heretofora nrn~nonndad. +hot ~
so;d fae+s abova rsc;teJ y = 90
pac,l;.rlu w;tbin tho not;ca Lnouladoa ~
Information of tha said Rlaine the dsfen5an+
bare;n. that tba aforesaid fac+s \ \ 4 oro
neaessar 80 roa4ariaI - ~ .Lom 80
neo 1855 ahu s ssea ~ 70 shomn ny your
oforeso;d ana +bo+ I All ana 1890 j; soou :
fnone anJ b ~ s.;5 daeaedaa = oe naia $50 sUS z
~ ita ~ = va ;nfasn. =; s"tu lao.s' anu 7
niS h.oMleuse anu .uiorinau0n concerning 1ne
sS Nh $50 dessasss nv anS ofs,aah - y hon t orasOrs Il
: ! ! ,na sa ~ uno.oons = III ~ @ $3.50 "a - 81. So ~ nn
- - o T6 = ELL : .n a. oa nOr = pua f
PcSg = ooeainihs q Lun, Grue - coMPlsCe PROOF
! sne iac.s nereiI a.iegee ana seS for1n IN sala
~ en.n - z :
law, rhm5 anu your orators fas,u iursnsr snow snas
sley an 90 it Any anu eonpleUety
= = ste.a P loxo = iasee Necessary
70 . snelr uelense IereloIoae anegeu ana see W IN
~ "a aisoasa : - : : :: iaw al9resalu. VIII.
~ q uaoys9Ly " ny Sae am =
4ho.aenos nSa = Psi esii VI iaIss iouE olTa1lSors
relS pray snae a l9n anu compieCe 9lsGoVery
!; 20 .naua ~ : sa.u uei ban, lanes Y; Dialne,
~ eiau - Sne iaeUs nere.oioIe stateu. any %
ehat emu tnae ne oe sulnlloneo 70 answer TINS
your orators bill OF discovery, and that, in
answerins lne same, u orIer Inae sucn alscov-
sas may " naue, ne may De orueleu unuer nls
SorpoLai ~ soae;nn oaen. anu uneer ms proper
na amuanu supscrlpeloh, " maAe lul: true, ana
coInpiese answer 10 inc lnSerrogaIorles hereln-
al9 Td, LoI.owing.
daroa an S,i Z ppaysr aor sne ulscovery OF eva
1890 ruo sn : - , stSoes tnae lnasmucn as your
law 10 comnal Inc d;scovsrv bars;n 49, 1900