New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1894-04-04
NEW WITNESS FOR MADELINE
MRS LOWELL swEARs THAT SHE COPIED
THE SISTER LOUISE" LITTER
SHE ALSO ADDRESSED ENVELOPES FOR COLONEL
BRECKINRIDGE TO MISS POLLARD-THE
DEFENDANT DENIES THE TRUTH
or THE TESTIMONY.

or THE his ilaiONi'
Washington, April Colonel Brecknrdse anu
Miss Pollard were both on the stand to-cay, am
both gave testimony relating to the alleged letter
which the plaintiff claims written 10 her IN
1886 This is the letter alleged to begin MY Dear
Sister Louise" and by which the plain;n cou"Se'
seek to impeach the testimony Of the defendant
To-day, after hard legal fight. the piaintin at
torneys succeeded in Pacing on the stand Mfs'
Louise Lowell who testified that while type
writer at the Capitol in 1856 she had copied le'-
ter written by Colonel Breckenridge addressed MY
Dear Sister Louise and that she had mdorsei
numerous envelopes for him with the name MISS
Pollard, No. Sc North Tpper-st., Lexington NY
Miss Pollard also took the stand and testified that
Colonel Breckenridge frequently sent her letters
while she In Lexington and he in Washington
They were all typewrtten, she said and IN mem 81
was addressed 10y various titles, such as MY Dear
Spitire" and my Dear Louise Colonel brecK.n-
ridge denied that Mrs Lowell had ever COPIED loT
him anv such letter as that she described, or That
she had addressed envelopes for him win the name
Pollard. although ne acknowledged that Mrs. Lowell
had written letters for HIM
Most OF the day was taken up in this testimony
and in argument.
Major Butterworth asked ulge Bradley to decide
whether evidence about the Sister Louise letter
was competent Mr.. Wilson, in answer SAID ne
proposed to put tine witness. Louise Lowell on the
stand on the ground that the plaintiff was not in
possession of the knowledge she now had al the
time of her testimony-in-chief.
Major Butterworth said he was not criticlsng
counsel, but he thought the alleged contents oil an
alleged letter should not be placed in evidence until
Il was known what the plaintiff expected to prove
by it.
Judge Bradley. in rendering his decision. referred
70 the question as "a novel situation" and said he
had found authority for the intersection OF PROOF
concerning the existence of document that might
be lost or destroyed He therefore decided that
proof tending to prove that such letter as that
I liSf' pht Do
duced.
Judge Wilson called Mrs. Lowell to the stand
She said she had known Colonel Breckenridge since
February. 1885, when she had small Office on the
House side of the Capitol, where she ala stehogrd-
ply and typewriting. She had done work for
Colonel Breckenridge and was acquainted win MS
handwriting In answer Judge Wilson. Mrs
Lowell said the defendant had brought TO her at
the time indicated letter to be copied. Tho manu-
script in the defendants Handwriting Inc
witness said she returned to Colonel breckenridge
the manuscript and the copy Of the letter In ques-
ton. She also did other work for the Defendant
such addressing envelopes.
"Ah" said Judge Wilson. what did You put or
those enveopes?'
Major Shelby objected, but the question was
allowed
Miss Pollard IS North Upper-st.. Lexington,
KY" was the answer-a direct contradiction Of the
testimony given by the defendant Miss Pollard
smiled. and there buzz of interest throughout
the ROOM Colonel Breckenridge busted himself
writing
Now" said Judge Wilson state whether you
made a memorandum OF work done BY you for
Colonel Breckenridge"
Il did," said Mrs. Lowell. and she produced a
little blank book and read out of it the address
given.
why did you put that name down." said Judge
Wilson.
Feeling sure that should hear more Of Miss
Pollard and not being willing to my men,
DRY, i put it down"
Now, tell what those envelopes looked Ike"
"They were small envelopes. such that
business would use, and yellow with age
How was the first communication he brought
TO you addressed?'
I'VE object to that question" said Major Shelby.
objection overruled." said Judge Bradley.
MY dear sister Louise" said the witness
Major Butterworth and Major Shelby made siren
uous objection to the admission Of testimony cor
corning the contents Of the letter. Major Shelby
commended that the letter should be produced.
\ We haven't tit was given to the defendant to
II be mailed to the plaintiff" said Judge Wilson
IF mailed the letter to the plaintiff how can l
produce the letter." said Colonel Breckenridge.
You and will have little conversation about
that after a while" retorted Judge Wilson.
Judge Bradley ruled out testimony as TO the con-
tents Of the letter. Judge Wilson then asked the
witness TO tell by her memorandum book how many
times she had done typewritng work for the de-
PENDANT and she said that her record showed that
she had done work for Colonel Breckenridge fifteen
OF sixteen times but that did not really represent
the whole number Of times she had written letters
for him.
On cross-examination Mrs. Lowell said she had
written Miss Pollards name and address on the ny
leaf Of her little memorandum book because she
thought that she might have to write the name
again in her work, and she wanted to remember II
for that reason.
Were you in the habit Of making memoranda Of
your work like this address OF MISS pollard
mo, was not
why did you put Miss Pollard's name and ad-
dress down."
Because Of the unusual character Of the work -
evidently referring the tme-stained envelopes
Major Butterworth endeavored TO find out how II
that she became known as the writer OK ne
10 tell him She had mentioned the fact TO friends
that she had written letters for Colonel breckih-
Colonel Breckinrldge resumiOg the stand SAID 20
he rs sSs M5 Office at the Capitol she
had done some work. but comparatively very nttle
MSS MSS to o. Mrs -s:'' Loweli for coPyiing.
VIII you deny that you dd?'
DO you know where the MSS. IS tina, you have
Il don't know 1t was years ago, and 1t has prob
ably been destroyed II certainly was never pre-
~ viii ask t. In ls You delivered to her Mss
TO be copied addressed My dear sister Louise'?'
ceOnel Rrecklnridge dsn,ea that he @s!iverfi saS.
MSS In his own handwritIAg to Mre. Lowell
When he was asked IL he had mentioned 10 tn'
tvpewrter that there was a great disparity IN hi:
and TIA! Of the 3dy 70 whom ne oe Ts wFns
After some sparrnG Judge Wilson abandonec
this line Of questioning, and asked Goionel Breckln
ridge II he had not sent Mas Pollard letters al
dressed NO. Sc North rpper-st. Lexington. ky.
Certainly not in 1856 the witness sara: Il De pc
in 1857 but that IS an indist!nct memory go. ,...
"I)id Won not write 10 Miss Pollard In 1856. askn1
her 10 write you a letter asking for some agri
cultural or Civil Service report. and 70 sign III
name Mary Smith 10 IT,
II did not: never DID" said the witness.
Colonel Breckinrldge denied that he had at an
,,roe carried 10 Mrs. Lowell package of envelopes
10 he addressed separately from the letters,
20 deny entirely what the witness said on N
~ said