The morning call., 1890-07-30
The Sharon Case Paraded Before
Judge Shafter.
Mrs. Terry Tries to Prove Her Marriage, but
the Contract Is Cut Out Of
the Retrial.


in it.. the plaintiff, Mrs. Sarah A. Terry,
and her Ditterest foe, General William III.
l.. Barnes. Both appeared in the court
room yesterday, and lent to the case
little Of its eld-tme interest.
Mrs. Terry's counsel have nearly all de-
serted her, and she now leans upon soli-
tary reed, William T. Baggett But in her
long and violent struggle with the law, since
her first appearance before the public, she
has actually absorbed more of the true spirit
of law than ninety-nine out of 100 lawyers
ever acquire; and it is by no means an I'M
common circumstance to see her, during the
ineXtrieable mazeS of her case, lean intently
over the shoulder Of her counsel and in
struct him as to the manner of questioning
a witness or charging him with an abstruse
technical point during the progress of an
argument.
No CONTRACT IN THE CASE.
The old case, as it appeared in court yes
terday, was practically the beginning of a
retrial in which, however, the famous mar
riage contract. annulled by the Federal
court was not to take the prominent part 1t
did in the first trial Representing the de-
Tense vera William f. Herrin and General
Barnes while William 4. Bagsett struggled
with the prosecution.
Mr.. Baggett opened the case. he re-
viewed briefly its proceedings in all the
courts, and then stated his position and the
considerations he believed his client
entitled to.
III the Court please" said he. 1--WE hold
that the decree OF the United States court
canceling the marriage contract should in
no manner prejudice the Introduction OF
other testimony to prove that the plalntIH
and defendant were actually married.. We
do not mean to introduce the prohibited
contract n which. has DnpD
burned, or to prove its contents, but we
will undertake to prove the marriage with
out that contract, and we hold that we can
lawfully do so without violating the decree
of the United States court.
I'VE will show that the plaintiff and Mr.
Sharon were married on August % 1850,
and lived together as husband aud wife,
and that the marriage does not depend
upon that contract While the United
States court declared that contract void,
because 1t was not properly drawn, 1t has
not at any time questioned the tact OF
marriage, and independent of that dOcu-
ment We shall abundanty prove the rela-
ton claimed by the dear vile letters and
many other facts as hand"
Judge Shafter aSSented to this view OF
the case, and admitted that the Federal
court had simply passed upon the validity
of the contract, without intending to queS-
ton the marriage. Now, as far as | am
concerned, gentlemen" he added, 20
ultdu anu lullOuuCG lOuI CNIuGuCC VI llldl-
riage."
OVERLAPPING DOCUMENTS.
Some time was consumed in Overhauling
the immense bulk of documents that belong
to the old case, and then Mrs. Terry WAS
called to the witness-Stand.
"When did you begin to live with Sena-
tor Sharon as his wife," asked MIR. Bag
gett.
"On the 25th of August, $780,
When was the written contract made
and why?"
THAT afternoon we had the contract
made. We never considered the written
contract the marriage, for we considered
that we were married long before that-in
fact, when we began to live together in the
same house. | was afraid that lie would
die, and wanted something to show that
we were married"
Mr.. Baggett explained that the witness
was questioned about the contract simply TO
have the fact Of its annulment on record.
Mr.. Herrin wanted Mrs. Terry to state
under oath whether or not she ever had any
written agreement Of marriage, but Mr..
Baggett protested on the ground that coun-
sci was endeavoring to induce witness to
violate the injunction of the Federal court.
Mr.. Herrin maintained that the question
was proper. He wanted to find out if Mrs
Terry had any other written agreement be-
sides the annulled contract anu the verbal
contract she proposed to establish.
Judge Shafter Interrupted this discussion
by stating that the original plcadngs were
not broad enough to cover oral contracts,
and he was surprised that the attorneys did
not see it.
Then" said Mr. Herrln, !" 1 move that
all the witness has said be stricken out"
g 1t is so ordered" responded the Judge.
4" Am TO understand" asked Mr.. Bag
gett, little surprised, that we cannot in
troduce any more testimony? If so, we can
except and make this very short battle"
Judge Shafter-I consider that the whole
five volumes Of evidence are in, except the
contract. 1t is the same as if they were de-
positions.
NO AMENDMENT PERMITTED.
Mr.. Baggett then moved to amend the
complaint so as TO embrace oral testimony.
THAT will not help YOU" said Mr..
Barnes, because Mrs. Terry's sworn state
ments heretofore made are inconsistent
with that position"
The Judge observed that, inasmuch as it
is in the Courts discretion, he would de-
eide 1t too late to make such an amend
ment, as the case mad been too long pend
ing.
When Mr.. Baggett attempted to intro
duce the dear wife" letters, said to have
been written by Senator Sharon, Mr.. Her
rim said he wanted to see them. Thus far
lie had never seen anything but a photo
graph of them. There was no objection.
After the noon recess Mr.. Baggett sug-
gested that he could expedite matters con-
SlutIdUly IL u6 Ntlb dilONtu W IHltuuuCt
certain points of evidence in the form of
documents and oral testimony.
Mrs. Terry again took the stand, but
when asked what conversation she had
with Sharon after the contract was made,
the Judge Interrupted by expressing the
fear that this would only leai to another
attempt to bring the annuIed contract into
court.
Mr.. Baggett-Oh, mol We will show
plainly the actual consummatiOn of the
marriage after the contract vas made.
An amusing sally from General Barnes
interrupted proceedings at this point, and
the Judge, finding the case likely to 90 be-
yOnd the limits he had prescribed for it,
told Mr.. Baggett he must rely on the con-
tract set. out in the pleadings.
Mr.. Baggett-Well, if your Honor please,
l will except.
Judge Shafter-Gn ahead and get up
your exceptions briefly. Do not incumber
tile records with the whole polyglot Bible,
as many do
LITTLE TESTIMONY INTRODUCED.
Mrs. Terry was then allowed to identify
the following letters written by Senator
Sharon. the first dated May 3, 1851
My Dear Wife: You had S120 and then $50;
before left s24o am afraid you are getting
eXtravagant SHARON.
Ny Dear Wtfe: Inclosed find $500 l am
much better to-day. Hope to be up in few
days. Truly, S.
Mrs. Terry said that Mr.. Sharon often
wrote to her as his wife, and once he had
heard that General Barnes objected to her
being called. wife," and Sharon then said
that it was no ones business. She had OBJ
jected to his going as a single man. "Once
when we were about to make our marriage
known to the world" said she, sharon
came TO me and said that the politicians
objected to it. He asked me not to get
nervous and he would acknowledge all
after the United States Senatorship fight
was over"
She further stated that Mr.. Sharon never
denied, anywhere, that she was his wife.
She had lived with him as such. and he had
introduced her in public as his wife. She
always understood that to be their relation.
he was always willing to give what money
she wanted, but would not give her a d.
vorce.
On eross-examination, Mr.. Herrin wanted
to lmpeach the witness by reading her tes-
timony given heretofore, but this proceed
ing was not allowed, upon Mr.. Baggetts
protest.
After Mrs. Terry had finished testifying
the Judge ordered the evidence all striken
out as outside and beyond the contract