The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1894-04-08
THE LAWYERS "PRAY."
PRIYBKS FOR INSTRUCTIONS 10 JU-
RY IN THE BRKCKISRIDGEC CASE.
Eleven Requests bv the PIainti6 and Eight
by the Defendant-The Decision
Reserved.
WASHINGTON. April THE LAWYERS

WASHINGTON, April THE lawyers
in the Pollard Breckenridge breach or
promise suit gathered in Judge Bradleys
court this morning to argue on the mat
ter of prayers for instructions to the
jury There was not n large audience
being members of the profession, who
were attracted by the prospect Of a legal
battle 1t was after IL o'clock when the
arguments began, as the first hour OF
the court was devoted to hearing motions
on all sorts of subjects, Saturday being
the regular motion day of the court.
Neither Miss Pollard nor Colonel Breck-
inridge were present. and while Messrs.
Wilson, Carlisle, johnson and Farrell, OF
the plaintiffs counsel, were present, only
Messrs. Shelby, Thompson and Mckinney
appeared on behalf OF the defendant.
When Judge Bradley announced that
he Was ready to hear the case, Mr.. Car
Isle arose and read the fourteen prayers
which set forth the instructions TO the
jury asked for by the plaintiff. The pray
ers Of the plaintiff read. Mr.. Shelby read
those prepared on behalf of the deten-
dant-eight in number. The instructions
prayed for were, robbed Of all legal
verDiage, as follows:
III PLAINTIFFS INSTRUCTIONS.
The court is prayed TO instruct the jury
that this is an action for breach or CON
tract for marriage, and If they find that
there were mutual promises, that TINS
constitutes a binding contract, and that
a subsequent marriage OF the defendant
would be no Defence neither would PROOF
of the Illicit relations on the part OF the
plaintiff with another, if he knew Of these
relations at the time Of making the con-
tract.
The defendant denies that contract or
marriage was entered into by him. HIS
contention Is that there was a mutual
understanding between plaintiff and nm
self 10 deceive others with reference 10
their relations. The burden Of proof lies
with defendant. and he must prove that
she was a partner TO the understanding
ON the whole evidence the verdict must
be for the plaintiff. unless the jury finds
that she agreed with the defendant be-
fore making any promises of marriage
that these promises were MOTTO be bind-
ing The burden OF proof lies with MN,
and he must prove that she was party
to the understanding.
they find that the defendant made MS
promises in good faith or not, II they
find that she took them in good faltn anu
so acted upon them.
They must find for the plaintiff unless
they find that the plaintiff did not accept
the promises and knew they were not
binding promises.
Ii the Jury believes that the defendant
made the promises in bad faith ana that
81 t1-Cr, n good
they must regard this as no defence and
the verdict must be for the plaintiff.
Whether plaintiff understood the reasons
Of defendant in making the promises or
not this Is no defence, and they must ind
for the plaintiff.
The defendant having claimed that he
had had carnal knowledge before max
ing the promises. this does not render the
contract invalid
If the plaintiff did tell the defendant
that she had Illicit relations with Rhodes
and they find that he thereafter made
promise. the fact Of her having told him
does not invaliGate the contract. and
they must find TOR the plaintiff.
AS TO DAMAGES.
The fact that the defendant admits his
secret marriage a n date that places
il before some and after other promises
OF marriage made TO the plaintiff is no
defence. and does not initiate against
tre plaintiff, but should be considered
by the jury as a matter OF aggraVatlOn !
in estimating damages.
IL the defendant kept his marriage
secret from the plaintiff and then made |
promises of marriage 10 her, this should J
be considered by the jury as asgravaung !
damages.
In estimating damages. II the jury finds
for the plaintiff they should consider all
tho facts I'm the case and the relations that
existed between the parties up TO the
time of the breaking OF the promises |
the social and necuniary advantages that /
would have ISSUED 10 the plaintiff from 1
the marriage, the humiliation that came /
from the relationship. and the loss that /
will come in after life I'm seeking her /
own living. and they may also award
exemplary damages.
II they find for the plaintiff and also
find that the defendant did announce his
Intentions OF marrying her, TO a third
Marty. after his secret marriage TO another.
which marriage he concealed fom the \
plalntiff, they must consider this fact
i'm aggravation Of damages. and the aDh-
ity or inability Of the defendant 10 pay
should have no effect upon their judgment.
Finally, IL the jury finds that the plain
tiff was sexually pure, save with the
defendant and that his attempt 10 I'M
peach her purity was not made 10 good
faith. they must consider all this IN as
sossing damages. which damages. how
ever. must not be in excess Of the sum
claimed, $1,000.
PRAYERS OF THE DEFENDANT.
The instructions prayed for by the de-
fence were briefer than those presented
by the plaintiff. They were read by Mr..
shelby Immediately after the conclusion