Evening journal., 1894-04-10
CARLISLE'S PLEADING.
Strong and Eloquent Speech In
Miss Pollard's Behalf.
JUDGE BRADLBYs INSTRUCTIONS

Suit-JurOrs See a Tintype.
WASHINGTON, April lO.-Attorney Cal
deron Carlisle, who is more deeply versed
In international law than in breach OF
promise litigations, consumed the day in
the criminal court in a review of the testi
mony before the jury in the Pollard Breck
inridge case. His statement was a de
tailed dissection of the evidence and was
delivered in a clear, dispassionate manner.
although the lawyer at times referred &C
Colonel Breckinridge in very soothing but
coolly worded terms
The silver haired congressman conduct
ed himself very nOnchalantly, Joking with
his lawyers during the day, while Made
line Pollard, sitting directly ia front OF
him, kept lrtr face shaded by black gloved
hand most of the time.
Only once was there any interruption OF
the argument, and that was when Colonel
Breckenridge set the speaker right on the
point Of a family title about which he
seemed to be rather particular All day
the closest attention was given TO the
speech by jury and spectators, so that there
was a deep silence in the courtroom. Mr.
Carlisle will continue, and it is not impos-
sible that the speaking will last until Fri
day.
| cision on the prayers for instructions
Nine prayers Of the plaintiff were granted
in modified form and five of them refused
Six prayers for the defendant were grant
ed in modified form or substitutes granted.
and five were refused. Incidentally the
judge said that, while the burden Of
| proof rested on the plaintiff TO show that
a contract to marry was entered into. if
the defendant set up the defense that the
contract was not made in good faith, the
burden Of proof would rest upon him to
show that there was an understanding
| that the contract was not 10 be carried out,
| and that the statements made in the pres
ence Of other parties were made with this
understanding on the part of the plaintiff
and defendant.
Judge Bradiey's Instructions.
The instructions granted for the plain
tiff, in condensed form, are as follows:
First-If the jury find from the evidence that
there were mutual promises Of marriage, as
claimed in the declaration, that would consti-
| tute a binding contract, and II the defendant
married another person. that would be q breach
Of the contract upon which the plaintiff would
be entitled TO sue. Illicit relations with him or
with others before the contract was made, if
known to him, would be no defense.
Second-Ihe burden Of proof is upon the de-
fendant to show by apreponderance Of evidence
that there was an agreement that merely the
semblance Of a contract not 20 be carried out
was agreed upon between them.
Third-If promises were made by the defend
ant in bad faith. but accepted by the plaintiff
/ in good faith. this bad faith on his part would
not constitute a defense.
Fourth-The conduct Of plaintiff and defend
ant at, about and after the making Of the con-
tract is to be considered in judging its good or
bad faith.
Fifth-If the jury find that the defendant
promised the plaintiff in good faith 20 marry
her, the burden Of proof rests upon him 70 es-
tablish by preponderance Of proof a defense
or release, and IL would not be a defense that
he had Illicit relations with her or she told him
Of Illicit relations with others.
| Sxth-lf before the contract there was inter
course between the two and the defendant
knew that she was previously unchaste, IL con-
| stitutes no defense.
Seventh-f she informed him that she had
been impure with Rhodes, that constituted NO
defense.
Eighth-The secret marriage does not con-
stitute a defense.
Ninth-If promises were not made until after
the secret marriage, it does not constitute q
defense.
Tenth-If the jury find for the plaintiff. they
are 10 consider the prospective advantage q
the plaintiff from the marriage, the injury e
her feelings, reputation and chance of earning
a livelihood by the breach Of promise and may
award exemplary damages as we'll
Eleventh-If the jury find that the plaintiff
was chaste save with the defendant, and thai
the attempt 20 impeach her character wa
made for the purposes of defense, they ma
consider the fact in awarding damages.
For the Defense.
The instructions for the defense were:
First-Before the plaintiff can recover tn
jury must believe from all the evidence that
2 | and defendant 10 become husband and wife.
Second-n the jury find that statement
were made in the presence Of OF 10 third par
ties that they We're engaged 10 be married. an,
such statements were made pursuant 20 an un
derstanding for the purpose Of deceiying thiri
: persons such statements are not 20 be taken a
: constituting or evidencing contract.
i Third-The burden Of proof TO establish tn
Z contract is upon the plaintiff.
Fourth-u before the contract the plaintiff
was guilty Of lewd or unchaste conduct witt
other men unknown to the defendant he wa
not bound by the contract and may avail him
a self Of such defense, whether at the time Of hi
- refusal he knew of the conduct or not.
Fifth-If the jury believe that the plaintiff
. was guilty of unchaste conduct W, IA other me
unknown to the defendant, they must find TO
II him. even If knowledge of it did not come {
= him until after the refusal.
2 Sixth-The jury may in mitigation Of damage
IS consider the plaintiffs character and conduc
4 if the same were bad. and if the plaintiff wa
not seduced by the defendant they may con
slider her want Of virtue.
= Mr. Carlisles Plea.
Leaning on the witness box in a careles
, attitude, Attorney Carlisle reminded tn
! Jury that all were fellow citizens of th
) District engaged in the performance Of
duty to the parties in the case and to th
community.
s. While some of the facts and the final c'
N tastrophe had happened in the District. tn
& plaintiff was a resident of Kentucky, {
the same congressional district as the d.
fendant, who came to Washington merel
as a temporary representative Of thi
rs state. The plaintiff was friendless won
c an of humble birth; the defendant, ma
p. of national reputation. Later it would
e. the duty Of the speaker to say what Il
n community had a right to expect of Il
Id defendant and how greatly had 1t been
as his interest TO find everything he coul
in against the character Of the poor girl.
C. Mr. Carlisle, who has himself been q
master of one of the leading Masonic lodg
of the city, reminded the jury of the Maso