The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1892-10-20


note was demanded by plaintiff, and
by the defendant and an attorney for
plaintiff at the time it's payment was de-
manded by one OF the attorneys for the
plaintiff.
Was the note 10 suit presented ct either
ment was demanded2 IL not you may
consider that fact as q circumstances bear
ing upon its genuineness.
The weight, II any, to be given these
circumstances or any OF them, is q matter
for you.
The plaintiff may have demanded
thirty thousand dollars, ,and the defendant
may have given his note-the note in suit
for that amount. Whether he did or not
10 for you to determine, as l have already
said, from the evidence In the case bearing
upon this question, and all the circum'
stances connected with IL.
The signature to the note may be for
gerry Notwithstanding the fact that the
defendant may not have prosecuted the
plaintiff for forgery. The note may be
genuine, and IL may not have been pres
sented by either the plaintiff or bis attor,
of Il was demanded.
The fact that plaintiff may or may not
be prosecuted for forgery should the verN
dict In this case be against him, should
have no weight In determining just yer.
dict.
case, upon the testimony, and the law as
given you by the court, and have nothing
to do with any other case that may or may
not be hereafter instituted.
IL you do not find from all evidence in
the case, and from all the facts aud cir"
| cumstances disclosed by IL, under
the instructions l have given
You, that the defendant executed
| and delivered the note In suit, that will
| end your labors, and your verdict should
be for the defendant.
But, IL you do find that the defendant
did execute and deliver the note in con-
troversy, you will proceed to the deter
mination of the other issue between tho
parties; towit, is the note based upon q
sufficient consideration
| AS have already said to you, and as
| you are fully aware, the claim OF the
| plaintiff is that the note in suit was given
| TO him by defendant in settlement of a
claim plaintiff had, or honestly believed
he had, against defendant for damages,
because of the seduction of plaintiffs wife
by defendant and the alienation of her
L affections.
As bearing upon this claim of the plain
tiff, testimony has been introduced on be-
| half OF both plaintiff and defendant tend
L ing to show the relations existing between
plaintiffs wife and defendant Tor somer
time prior, and up to the time, when IL is
claimed, the note was given. What these
Il
all the evidence bearing upon this branch
Of the case, aud from the actions and con.
duct OF the parties.
This evidence, as we'll as the other eyiS
dence in the case, is to be weighed in the
light of reason aud probability.
Looking at all the evidence on this
branch of the case, introduced on behalf
Of the plaintiff and on behalf OF the de-
fendant, weighed ia the light of reason
and probability, what were in fact, the
relations existing between the defendant
and plaintiffs wife during this period.
Direct proof of adultery-of criminal
conversation that 10 evidence Of eye wit.
nesses,is not re quired, for such is the ma.
ture of the offense and the secret and clan
destine manner in which II is committed
that such proof is in most cases un-attain
able. Yet, where II is sought to be in
ferred from circumstances, they mus
lead to the conclusion of guilt by fair anC
necessary inference.
Where the act of adultry is relied on anC
| Is not shown by direct proof, the plaintiff
must show flrst-a disposition to illici
intercourse on the part of the wife secont
"a disposition to Illicit intercourse witt
tke wife on the part of the defendant; anC
third-opportunity to crafty such mutua
disposition. In such cases the rule is tha
| where the evidence is as capable of an
Interpretation which makes It consisten
| with the innocence of the accused party al
Il OF OuS CODblstent Win nlS gun, the mean
l ing must be ascribed to IL which accortis
| with his Innocence rather than that whict
l mputes to him q criminal intent.
1t is claimed on the part of the plaintiff
however. that in order to maintain this
action it is nece ssary to show the act OF
| adultery in fact
| AS another matter of law l say to yoI
that an adjustment and compromise oi
bona flde controversy as to matters which
are fairly the subject of debate between
the parties at the time of such compromise
each party acting with a full knowledge
OF the facts, (and no element of fraud ol
| OF serious or injurious mistake inteTven
ingD will be unheld by the courts. Its
last requisite that the claims should have
been real, or in some doubt, and theiI
validity controverted and that they shouC
have been assested in good faith
mere false claim, slammed one
| set up without any colorado pretense
or plausible foundation, for the purpose
merely of extorting money would not sus'
| tain such compromise. A compromise
| of q claim is not q sufficient consideration
to sustain promissory note when such
| claim is not sustainable in law or in eq>
uity. or at least doubtful in some resuects
Ii the pi aintiH honestly believed thai
l the defendant bad debauched his wife
4 and in good faith claimed damages from
the defendant therefor, and there was d
bona fide controversy between plaintiu
Il anu db kO matter, ana III
| plaintiff's claim WAS true in fact, or ri
least doubtful in some respects. u was
l then the right OF plaintiff and defendan,
to settle and adjust this claim beIwee en
themselves, and If this being the situation
between the parties, the defendant agreed
to give the note ia suit in settlement OF
/ such claim, and in pursuance of thi,
agreement made the note in suit and ue'
livere d it to plaintiff, and the plaintiff &C
| cepted the note in settlement of the claim
then the plaintiff is entitled to vPrdc
against the defendant for the amount o
, the note and interest.
Il IL You find from the evidence that the
plaintiff honestly believed that the de
fendant had Gebauched his wife, and il
good faith claimed damages from defend
4 ant therefor, and there was a bona fld,
controversy between plaintiff and de-
1 fendant as to said matter, and that plain
tiff's claim was true in fact, or at leas
doubtful in some respects, and the plain
I'LL and defendant agreed to settle auC
| adjust the claim between themselves, anC
the defendant agreed to give plaintiff tbs
| promissory note in snit in settlement o.
the claim, and plaintiff received same al
such settlement, II Is then immateria
whether the defendant admitted that he
had sexual intercourse with PLAINTIFF
wife, or whether he had any such cunnec
tioA in fact, and your verdict must be FOR
the plaintiff and against the defendant
for the amount of the note and interest.
If the plaintiff honestly believed that
the defendant had seduced and debauched
his wife, and made a claim on defendant
for damages on this account and plain~
titf's claim was true in fact, or at least
doubtful In some respects it was compe.
tent for the parties to settle such claim
that they might avoid lawsuit between
| them on account OF it, and IL they did set
| tie IL, and in pursuance of the settlement
eNnf 9Iu .,Ia A