The Indianapolis journal., 1894-03-14

son, in Cincinnati, was offered for the
plaintiff and objected to by the defendant.
In the argument following 1t developed tnat
the testimony was concerning the birth or
Miss Pollards first child Attorney Carlisle
admitted that the Identification of Miss Pol
lard by the witness was not complete, but
complained Of the manner and length OF the
cross-examination Of Mrs. Logan, who had
herself protested against il as persecution
Judge Bradley decided that since more than
a day had been consumed in cross-examina-
ton Of Mrs. Logan the rights OF the de-
PENDANTS had been preserved. and admitted
the deposition, the defense noting an ex-
cepton.
Mrs. Mary Logan is a Cincinnati physi-
clan, as appeared from the deposition read
by Mr.. Carlisle. She had in 1884 treated a
young girl about to be confined, who gave
the name Of Monica Burgoyne. saying that
her friends called her Mona" Witness
said that Miss Pollard. who was then in the
notarys office, bore some resemblance TO
her. although she had doubtless changed:
she had represented that her husband had
died, or there were family reasons for keep
Ing the birth a secret.
lard had gone for her confinement to the
Cathohc sisters on the Reading road three
physician had made two or three calls, al
though the young woman under the
eharge OF the physicians of the Institution.
-Four or five months afterwards Mrs. Bur-
goyne had been taken 10 the house or
Drs Perry and Buchanan, where she
passed under another name. which the wit
ness could not remember. If Miss Pollard
was the person the doctor could not identify
certainly, saying she has changed greatly
If il is her. III has been several years since
/ saw her. This lady's figure is thinner, her
hair is different and she has changed in
many ways. i am positive that the young
woman wore spectacles" Miss Pollard is
thin and does not wear spectaclesl
The cross-examination was read by Mr..
Butterworth. The witness was certain that
the young woman had not passed under the
name of Louise Wilson. The reading of the
deposition was very tedious, taking more
hours and served 70 pmntV the
court of a majority of the spectators, and
was not concluded until after the noon re-
cess.
SISTER CECILIA TESTIFIES
The people who had deserted the court
began to push back at 2:30, when the
plaintiffs counsel varied the monotony by
calling a witness The door between the
Jury box and the judge opened to admit
two sisters of some Catholic society, at
tired in the black bonnets and gowns of
their order. One of them seated herself
beside Mr.. Carlisle, while the other took the
chair in the witness box, looking very pale
and troubled at her unusual position.
Sister Cecilia, of the Order of Sisters of
Charity of Cincinnati, was the name given.
She said that in 1884 she had been sister In
charge OF the convent at Norwood, o. ten
miles from Cincinnati by rail and five miles
by road.
person there by the name OF Burgoyne?'
asked Mr.. Carlisle.
Il do not
Have you examined the records of the
institution lately?'
Il have"
Objection to the question of the result of
the examination was made.
DO you remember female patient who
was visited by female doctor from Gin
cinnati?"
There was one who was visited twice
by DIR. Mary Street"
figured mysteriously in the case were placed
before the sister and she said: Il was pre-
sented set of books like those by a lady
who had been a patient In our asylum not
long before 1 left the asylum in August,
1885, but 1 cannot say whether these are the
Identical ones. l placed them in the book
case of the asylum and left them there"
Are these the books?' asked Mr.. Car
Isle.
the same books; but they look like them
What is your best opinion on the ques-
tion?''
''That they are the same"
DO you remember that ii was brought
to your attention that one of your patients
was corresponding with some one through
a Cincinnati newspaper"
''she told me so l thought I persuaded
her to deSist; tried to-
''Do you know Miss Madeline Pollard?"
81 have met her in Washington.
Would you know her if you should see
II would now"
Ibid you receive a letter from her?'
zone. 1t came 10 me in Pueblo"
''Did she describe in conversation and by
letter the institution and incidents connected
with it in 1855 which would lead you to
identity it?''
one moment" interposed attorney But
terworth objecting to recent descriptions
of the convent as immaterial.
Judge Wilson replied TO the objection that
after nine years had elapsed 1t was neces-
sary to depend sometimes on corroborating
circumstances for identification.
Colonel Shelby counter argued that the
results of the conversations and letter after
the institution of the suit and when, without
making any changes in instance, 1t would
be easy to fabricate testimony, were mani
festly Improper
The hour for adjournment had arrived,
and as Mr.. Butterworth asked time to con-
suit authorities, the court adjourned, leav-
ing the testimony at the crucial question.