The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1894-04-10
BRADLEY AND THE JURORS.
The judges Decision on The Prayers
for Instructions.

couTVeeu mhue AOE Ine Elalntiu-Ot
Those of the Defense He Grants
Seven, Five With Notifications, and
Refuses Five-The Burden of Proof
That There Was No Contract of Mar
riage Intended to Be Carried Out
Rests on the Defendant-Carlisle
Opens the Arguments.
Washington, April 9.-The beginning
of the second month of the Pollard
Breckenridge trial this morning wit
messed the beginning of the end in the
commencement of the arguments before
the jury. There were few persons pres
ent when the court convened, but the
plaintiff was mong the spectators, much
to the surprise of most persons 1t was
supposed that she would not care to hear
her character publicly discussed with the
freedom that counsel use in such matters.
Miss Pollard looked well and she APP
peared to be in the best of spirits, chat
ting with Miss Ellis, of the House of
Mercy, who sat beside her.
Col. Breckenridge and all hiss lawyers
were prompt, including Maj. Butter
worth, who delivered a speech in Cincin-
natl Saturday night and left that city inn
mediately for Washington.
THE INSTRUCTIONS TO THE JURY.
After some time had been spent in en-
panelling a new circuit court Jury, Judge
Bradley read his decision with reference
to the prayers for instructions to the jury
which were submitted by both sides on
Saturday. He granted nine Of the four
teen prayers of the plaintiff, modifying
six of these, refused four, and decided
that one was covered by another prayer,
thus practically granting ten of the four
teen prayers.
Six of the twelve prayers of the de-
fendant were granted and a substitute of
Judge Bradley's S for another was accepted,
thus making seven prayers granted, five
with notifications, and the other five
were refused.
THE BURDEN OF PROOF.
After making his decision, Judge Brad
ley said that while the burden of proof
rested on the plaintiff TO show that con-
tract to marry was entered into,
as the defendant had set up the
defense that the contract was
the burden of proof would rest upon him
to show that there was an agreement that
the contract was not to be carried out,
and that statements made in the presence
Of other parties were made with this un-
derstanding by both parties Mai But
terworth and Judge Wilson each made an
appeal 10 the court to set no limit of time
on the argument, and Judge Bradley
granted the request, with the understand
ing that counsel would not take up too
much time.
CARLISLE OPENS THE sPEECH-MAKING.
Calderon Carlisle then began the open
ff1nr 81
any attempt at oratory he told the Jury
that in his opening statement a month
ago yesterday he had been exceedingly
temperate, but he could now say that all
his statements, and more than these
had been proved, He agreed with Mai.
Butterworth, that there were three par
ties to the suit-the plaintiff, the defend
ant and the community, and he pointed
out the full accounts in the newspapers
of the progress of the trial as evidence
that the community was deeply inter
ested. He asked the jury to consider its
duty to the community, and promised to
point out later on what the community
had right to expect. Before going into
the legal aspects of the case Mr. Carlisle
reminded the jury of the distinguished
career of the defendant and the ad-
vantages at his command in preparing
his defense. Mr. Carlisle said that the
plaintiff, who, though humble saddler,
was yet prominent Mason and Odd Eel
low.
MoLLIE GIVEN THE MISCHIEF.
He sketched briefly the life of the plain
tiff up to the filing Of the suit, a period
ranging from 1876. when her father died,
until 1893; and incidental to this he
paid his compliments TO Mrs. Miller, alias
Mollie Shinglebauer. 1t had been shown
by reputable witnesses on the stand, Mr..
Carlisle said, that during the period COW
cred by Mollio Shingl Northumberland
plaintiff was in Pittsburg, Pa, and not
in or near Frankfort, Ky, as the Shingle-
bauer woman testified. AS to
Brant and Huffman, who swore
they knew the plaintiff as an in-
mate of Lena Singleton's disrepu-
table house in Lexington, KY. Mr. Car
Isle said It was shown by reputable wit
nesses that the plaintiff had not spent a
single night in Lexington during the pc
riOd fixed by ''these two constituents OF
congressional district" as Mr. Carlisle
called them. ana further than that it had
been shown that the house fixed upon by
one of these young men in
his imagination as the place
where Madeline Pollard lived
W ith Lena Singleton, was not built until
1885. Il ask you, gentlemen" Mr.. Car
Isle said, mot to believe the story Of
such disreputable characters as John
Brandt and Hiram Kaufman"
RosELL SCORED.
Then he took up the attack on the plain
tiff's character contained in the testimony
OF Rankin Rosell. who said ne broke his
engagement with Miss Pollard because he
did not like the way she allowed him to
caress her. Il think every one here had
formed an impression of Mr. Rosell in the
beginning when he testified here. / got
one and think You got the
same one" He told how Resell
had kept the tintypes of Miss Pollard and
himself for all these years and then
turned them over to the defendant and
had come on to Washington to say that
he had sat in the open reception rooms Of
Wesleyan college two, three, or four
times a week from an hour and half to
two hours with Miss Pollard In his lap.
He placed against the testimony Of Rosell
that given by Mrs Brown the
vice president Of Wesleyan college.
which was that visitors were al
lowed to come TO the college one
night a week only, and that Rosen was
no exception TO this rule. To more fully
show the character Of Rosell, reference
was made to the fact that he had been
forbidden TO visit the college.
DOWN TO 1884
''Now," said Mr. Carlisle, tive have got
to 1884, and from that time forth there is
not even an attempt TO attack the char
acter Of the plaintiff, except so far as it