Springfield globe-republic. (Springfield, Ohio) 1884-1887, 1886-02-09
NO VERDICT YET.
The Jury Can Not Agree on the Ammon-
Hahn Csse-Rsvisw Of Tsstimony-Other
Court Notes.

wv '-"S'Sf '6is
The Jury Can Not Agree the Ammon-
Hahn Csss-Rsvisw Of Tsstimony-Other
Court Notes.
The alimony suit Of Mrs. Margaret AM
mon vs.. Ralph Hahn, which has created
more of sensation than any that has been
heard in common pleas this term, was fin
ished yesterday. J. l.. Zimmerman opened
the argument for the prosecution by giving
careful review OF the testimony. He
claimed that by this they had shown that
Hahn had made the first proposition of mar
riage on November 8, 1884; that the propo-
sition had been accepted on the last Sunday
in November; and that they had fixed De
cember 3 for the marriage day. But Hahn
had claimed to be sick on that day, and Mr.
Zimmerman said they had proven that
on that day he settled up his fathers estate
and made out certain deeds. He claimed
that defendant had seduced plaintiff under
promise of marriage on the night of Novem-
Der 20, and that OH that night Mrs.
Edighoffer had found them in bed together
at the Edighoffer house; that on the next
morning Martin Edighoffer, brother-in-law
of the plaintiff, had called Hahn into the
dining room and asked him what he was
going TO do about the matter; that he had
here again promised to marry the woman;
that they selected Rev Knuth to perform
the ceremony; and that they started down
town TO get the license. He stated further
that Hahn had been devoted in his atten-
tic Is to the woman for considerable time.
that he had taken her driving and escorted
her 10 various places, and had made reg
ular habit of spending mis- Sunday evenings
with her. He expatiated at some length
upon the society which the festive Ralph
was at this time forming for the purpose
of bringing males and females of like
disposition together with view
to matrimony. In answer to the claim OF
the defense that Hahn was irresponsible,
the prosecution had, he claimed, proven
that during this period Hahn was a member
of that intellectual body, the board OF
education, and had participated regularly
in its deliberation; that he had settled VI
his fathers estate; and that he had trans
acted other business of more or less i'm.
portance. In his speech the young attorney
frequently waxed eloquent
George Arthur followed with the argu-
ment of the defense, handling his task in a
mastery manner. He claimed that there
was not sufficient evidence of a contract.
and even If there had been Hahn was not
responsible; that the whole thing was a
conspiracy between the plaintiff and Edig.
hotter to rope young Hahn into their nei
and get a share Of the Hahn estate. He
claimed further that plaintiff was a woman
Of bad character; that her first child was
born but month or two after her mar
riage with Prof. Amman and that she hat
been seen sitting on Edighoffer's lap.
f. S. Wallace closed with an eloquent ap
peal for the prosecution, touching lightly
upon the points of the testimony alread,
mentioned.
Judge White charged the jury at consid
cradle length. He first set forth explicit,
the points of the petition and the answer
thereto. He stated that promise of mar
riage is tie same as civil contract and jus
as binding. The exact date of the contrac
was not material. Courtship in itself diC
not necessarily imply proposal If eithe
party lack sufficient ability, either from ex
treme youth or other cause to fulfill IN,
provisions, then there Is no contract. Fo
this purpose the youth is sufficiently decaye,
at eighteen and the maiden at sixteen. II
regard to responsibility, drunkenness restet
on the same theory as insanity. If they
should find that Hahn made the contrac
but was at the time so drunk that he coult
not form determination, then il was no
binding. He then explained the nature o.
breach Of contract and the rule for tn,
measurement of damages in case they shoult
find for the plaintiff. The jury then wen
out at 5 o'clock. One notable feature abou
the case was that the plaintiff was not al
lowed by her attorneys to remain in the
court room a moment longer than was abso-
lutely necessary.
The jury seems to be having a .'monkey
and parrot time over this case. They were
out until nine o'clock last night without re-
porting and retired again at nine this
morning. They were again excused fol
dinner and are still out
The case of James w. Booth VS.. John d.
Pollock will be tried this afternoon before a
jury specially called for the purpose.