Asheville daily citizen., 1894-04-03
BRECKENRIDGE HARD HIT
HIS TESTIMONY APPARENT
l.Y IMPEACHED.
\ Typewriter who Addresset d
Letters For BreckinIidge To
Miss Pollard at a Time When
He said He Was Not COmmu
niCating with Her.

WASHING Ton, April 3.-The mystery OF
an alleged letter beginning MY Dear
Sister Louis" pervadeG everything about
the Circuit court this morning when the
triad of the Pollard Breckinridge case
began. When court adjourned yesterday
afternoon, Judge Wilson, Miss Pollard 5
attorney, was trying to make Breckin-
ridge say tha. in 1886 he had taken to
be copied by typewriter in the capitol
letter beginning My Dear Sister
Louise" Breckenridge denied al! knowl.
edge of such letter, and he also said
he had no Dear Sister Louise" Judge
Wilson further asked him if he had not
taken to this same typewriter bundle
OF envelopes to be addressed to Miss Pol
lard, 16 North Upper street, Lexington,
Ky, and Breckenridge denied this also.
The period when the alleged letter is
supposed to have been written was coy
| cred IN the statement of Brecknriupe
that he had no relations aud no CORES
| II
Additional interest was given to the
name Louise in the alleged letter be
cause Miss Pollard claims that Louise
Wilson was her assumed name, when in
Cincinnati in 1855.
Judge Wilson said that the name OF the
Typewriter who copied the Sister Louise
letter hich, however, he was unable to
produce, was Mrs. Louise Lowell, and
this morning when court convened, Mrs
Lowell, who is now clerk in the Treas.
ury, was present with a friend. They
sat next to Miss Pollard and Miss Ellis.
Eutterworth asked Judge Bradley to
decide whether the evidence about the
SISTER Louise letter was competent.
Wilson III answer, said he proposed to
put the witness, Louise Lowell. on the
stand on the ground that the plaintiff
was not IN possession of knowledge sh,
now had at the time Of her testimony in
chief. 1t was not the purpose of the
plaintiff. he SAID, 10 play any trick or to
take the defense by surprise, and the de
lendant would be given ample opportun-
ity to make any explanation he chos,
concerning the letter. Carlisle said he
DID not learn the name OF the witness,
and did not see her until Sunday morn
ing Butterworth SAID he was not criti-
cislng counsel, but thought the a gcd
contents OF the alleged letter should not
be placed in evidence until it was known
what the plaintiff expected to prove
by it.
Judge Bradley, III rendering his decision
referred to the question as a novel stu
ation," and said he had found authority
Tor the intetlcction OF proof concerning
the existence OF a document that might
be lost or destroyed. He therefore de
cided that proof tending to prove that
such letter as that beginning my dear
sister Louise" existed might be intro
ducsd.
Judge Wilson then called Mrs Lowell
to the stand She said she bad known
Cot Brecklnrldge since February, 1856,
when she had a small Office on the House
side o. the capitol where she did stcnog-
raphy and typewriting, She had done
work for BlcckioriGEc and vas ac
quainted with his handwriting Defend
ant had brought to her at the time indi-
Gated letter to be copied. The manu-
s,ript was in the defendants handwrit-
ing, Witness said she returned to Col.
Brcckinridge the Ms. and copy of the
letter in question, She also did other
work for the defendant, such as address.
ing envelopes,
"Ah," said Judge Wilson, "what did
you put on those envelopes ?"
Shelby objected, but the question was
allowed. Miss Pollard, Sc North D
per street, Lexington. kv.," was the an
swcr, a direct contradiction OF the testi-
mony given bv the defendant Miss Pol
hard smiled, and .here was buzz OF in.
terest throughout the room. Breckin-
ridge busted himself writing.