Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1894-03-13

manner. They said nothing although sev-
cral Of them locked beseechngly toward
Judge Bradley. but the Court was de-
tcrmined that his peremptory order should
be obcycd instantly obeyed. and the un-
doubtedly greatly disappointed women
filed out OF the courtroom with the best
grace possible The seats vacated by the
women were instantly taken possession
Of by members Of the bar and others who
had stood outside. and the proceedings In
the pending case went on.
! PLAINTIFF AND DEFENDANT.
Defendant B-eckinr.dge preceded his
counsei in arriving at the courtroom. ana
seated himself at the long table just back
OF Miss Pollard and was an interested
spectator Of the expulsion by Judge
| Bradley Of the female spectators. Then.
throwing himself comfortably back in
! his chair, vigorously chewing a qull
toothpck. he industriously prompted his
| counsel. preparatory 10 the taking up
! Of the case And in the legal sparring
between counsel he busted himself In
| making suggestions to those on his side
When not doing this his eyes wandered
about from one point 10 another in the
| courtroom. occasionally resting uoon the
plaintiff. who sat Just few feet away,
| seemingly unconscious of everything save
| what was being said by the lawyers.
| Dressed as she was Friday last, Miss
| Pollard sat most OF the time with folded
| hands and with downcast eyes Now ana
| then. however. she shifted bottle OF
| salts. Occasionally. too, she bent toward
| Mr.. Wilson. evidently prompting him in
matters connected with the case. she
was evidently much more composed than
| on Friday last, undoubtedly having
proHted by her experience Of that day
THOSE BOOKS.
When court opened Mr.. Carlisle. rising
| called attention TO the question that arose
| on the 9th instant as TO certain books the
| defendant had been given notice 10 pro-
duce These were the books delivered by
| Sister Augustine to Mr.. Stoll. of defend-
ants counsel. The Court had directed an
| order 10 he issued. Mr.. Carlisle read from
| the sienOgraphc report Of the case 10
! show what had been said by the Court
| on that occasion. The Court had directed
| that the books i'm question be placed III
| the custody Of the Court Mr. carlisle
| said that on Saturday. the lOth instant
| a package had been left with the clerk.
| scaled and bearing a statement signed
| hy c. H. Stoll, as follows: "These are the
| r1ur volumes Of Washington lrvngs
hooks which agreed To seal up and place
! In tho hands OF the clerk after the cOun-
an for the plaintiff agreed that they
rj,ht bc so left and sealed. and kept
| sealed after We so delivered them ana
! We so desired.
an agreement, and said, "a he understood
! +, tho hooks were TO be delivered 10 the
| Cierk and there be subject to the order of
| tba Court He asked for al understand
| ing as to the books.
| Mr. Butterworth said that the suggestion
| of sealing the books had been made by
| counsel for the plaintiff. and Mr. Stoll had
accented II as reasonable and satisfactory
lie said that their purpose had teen 10
! have the plaintiff identify these books, |
particularly, as il was in their view I'M
! yOrtant.
Judge Bradley said that he had no re-
| collection as TO an agreement The re-
marks made by the Court at the time
| had no reference to that.
Mr.. Wilson said the books were here
! and all he asked was opportunity OF In
! spccting them in the presence Oh the
| clerks
Mr.. Butterworth asked II Mr. Wilson OBJ
| iected to having his client stand up and
| describe them.
| Mr.. Wilson said he did not propose 10
| have his client describe them. when the
| time comes for her TO speak" he began,
| but was interrupted.
---r WILL CUT A FIGURE.
Mr.. Buttcrworth said that these books |
would cut figure in the case. Suppose"
he began. the plaintiff presented set of |
books to this asylum where she was. We |
deny il. But suppose she did present it, |
ought she not be able TO describe --.
Here MIR. Butterworth was interrupted |
by the Judge. who rected what he re- |
called Of the proceedings on Friday rela- |
live to the books
Mr. Butterworth proceeding, said that |
she might be able to describe them after |
she had seen them. He believed there |
WAS good reason for requiring this de- |
scription
Mr. Johnston, for the plaintiff said his
suggestion 10 have the books sealed up !
VAS made in response to a very improper |
suggestion from the other side. The ques- |
ton now was whether the remarkable in |
dorsement and condition on the package |
was 10 stand.
Judge Bradley said that the order made |
10y the Court TO place them in the hands |
Of the Clerk would stand.
THE Clerk is authorized. them said |
Mr. Wilson, TO allow us TO Inspect |
them?"
Judge Bradley assented to this and |
Clerk Hodges proceeded to break the |
seal and unite the package of books.
Mr.. Butterworth gave notice that the |
defendant would object to certain deposit |
tions taken without sufficient notice.
|. DISPOSITIONS.
Mr.. Wilson rose then and offered TO |
read one Of a somewhat voluminOus array |
Of depositiOns.
Mr.. Butterworth objected. saying they |
had not had opportunity TO examine the |
deposition, and that the notice required |
under the rules Of the cour' had not been |
given.
Mr.. Carlisle said this was one Of the |
depositions referred TO by Mr. Mattingly |
Friday: that the depositions arrived here |
Saturday morning by express, and had |
heen with the clerk since Saturday morn |
ing
The depositions in question were handed |
10 Mr.. Butterworth. and he and Mr. |
Breckinrdge and Mr. Sibley spent a |
minute or two examining them. Mr.. But |
terworth said that they would object be- |
cause no notice at all was served that |
these depositions were to be taken. There |
were notices attached to the depositions, |
but there was no evidence OF service, ana, |
IN point Of fact, no notice had been |
served. ,,.,,
"Oh. yes there was" said Mr. Wilson, |
and he walked over and showed Mr.. But
terworth what he considered evidence or |
notice. Then Mr.. Butterworth and Mr. |
shelby examined the papers again for |
few seconds.
Nr shelby. then, rising, said they OBJ
ioc,ed because the deposition was taken |
yyitbout due notice. March 9th, he said, |
notice was issued in Lexington. Ky, ana |
= cony handed TO him. The papers
showed a similar notice had been served
mon others. supposed TO be attorneys
So~ Mr. Carlisle. Statements were ap-
ended however. from these pe'@ons' TO |
,ba erect that they were not attorneys /
OF record. -,.-. ..
Mr. Carlisle said he was somewhat sur
nr,sod nj Mr.. Shelby's lack of frankness
IN his matter. AS matter OF fact notice |
had heen given on the Sd Of March TO have |
,bose depositions taken on the 9th. but. |
owing, TO distractions. the taking OF the |
deoositjons had been delayed until the 7th |
Of March. 'ms.,,,.. L.a |
MIR. Butterworth said that ailidavits had
hccn fleI as 70 the facts relating TO the |
taking of the depositions.
MIR Carlisle argued that the notice had |
heen sufficient: further. that the certiiicate |
that the deposition was written IN the
uresence OF the witness was suihcsent.
Judge Bradley said the Court eouid not
sn,iclpate what the afildayits to be hied
might be. and suggested that the fnrther
discussion OF the objection TO the deposit