Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1894-03-29

had stated yesterday afternoon, the CefenSe
desired to submit some points as to DR..
Green's deposition. They desired to submit
them privately. Judge Bradley granted his
request that this should be done at this
point. This deposition was one of those
excluded by the court at the time Of the
argument last Saturday. Mr.. Stoll and Mr..
carlisle walked up together to the bench
ana the former read number of extracts
from the deposition in a low tone to Judge
bradley, to prove that in view of the course
the case has taken of late the deposition
should properly be admitted. Mr.. Carlisle
argued against its admission.
Whatever the decision of the court was, 1t
was not announced, but evidently did not
differ from the one first made last Saturday,
Tor the deposition was not read. 1t was
then realized that the defense had brought
It's case down to the point where to be logi-
cal ana consistent the man who is charged
with having seduced young girl and later
failed to keep his promise of marriage must
go before the jury and tell his own side of
the case
Nr. breckenridge on the Stand.
The defendant, Mr.. Breckenridge was then
called to the stand. He said, in answer to
the usual preliminary questions that he
was the defendant in this case; he was born
near Baltimore, August g. 1897; he went to
Kentucky with his father, Robt. ]. Breck-
inrtdge in 1S45, and had resided in Lexing-
ton since 1S47. He was prepared for college
In Lexington, and graduated from Danville
KY, In 1855, when he was eighteen years
old. He began then the study Of law.
he took his degree from the law depart
ment OF Louisville University in 1857 He
entered the bar that year, and had prac-
ticed law ever since. He studied law in the
office of Maj. Madison c. Johnson of Lex
ington Under the law of Kentucky he was
not entitled to license until he was
tWenty-one years old, but diploma from
the law department of the Louisville Uni
Versity was equivalent to a license 30 he
took that course.
His First Marriage.
He was married March II, 1859, and his
wife died in the following year in giving
birth to child. He entered the confeder-
ate service and rose through different
grades until he was colonel of the ninth
Kentucky cavalry. He was married the
second time September 10, 1851 He was
married with the idea that he was going
Immediately into service but the federal
troops occupied the city that night and he
did not go into the service for several
months, when he eluded the sentries and
Joined Morgan.
Had Had Five Children.
He had had five children by his second
marriage. of whom four were living After
the war he returned to the practice of law.
He took up the course of the Harvard Law
School at his own home, and resumed the
practice Of law in November, 1865. He be-
gan first In partnership with Judge Benz.
+. Buckner. In 1873 he formed partner
ship with Mr. Shelby. Last June they took
his son Desha into their partnership. He
had served number of years as a member
Of the school board of Lexington and also
a member of the council
He was elected to the Forty-ninth Con-
gress from the Lexington district. and had
served in Congress continuously ever since.
He had been a professor in the law depart
ment of the Kentucky University a mem
Der of the board of directors, and connected
with that institution in other ways.
when and where" asked Mr. Butter
worth. did you first meet the plaintiffT
when He First Met Miss Pollard.
In the spring Of 1884, Mr.. Breckenridge
said. He would say in the latter part of
April-he met her on the train going from
Lexington to Franklin.
1T was a cool morning; so cool that he had
with him a light overcoat which he had
left on his seat. For some reason he had
gone forward and as he returned TO his
seat the plaintiff addressed him. He said
he did not know her, but at his time of life
young people grew up out Of their recol-
lection. She said. Il know you." and then
said her name was Madeline Breckinridge
Pollard" that her father vas a great adj
mirer of John c. Breckinridge and had
named her after him.
They had some further conversation in
which she said her father was dead and
she was going to Frankfort to see her sis
ter, who was dying with consIImntion
When they neared Frankfort he left her,
and did not see where she went
When did you next hear from Madeline
Pollard?" asked Mr. Butterworth
Received u Letter From Her
Il cannot fix the date" said Mr. Brock
inridge but some weeks after 1 received
a letter from her."
The defendant said he had been unable to
find the letter. He could state substantial
ly that it contained a request for him TO
come to see her on a matter of business at
the Wesleyan College. Witness in repIy
said substantially that 1t would be tncon-
Nenient for him to come to see her ana
suggested that If she would state her bust
ness he would be glad to advise her
ter from the plantiff?"
Il did, said Mr.. Breckinridge
The Repudfnted Letter.
Mr.. Butterworth here handed the witness
a letter. the famous letter repudiated by
Miss Pollard, and asked him to examine II
and see If he recognized 1t.
ut would be affectation for me to ex
anime it." said Mr.. Breckinridge. 81 do
recognize it."
Mr.. Wilson objected to any testimony on
the presumption that he received it from
Miss Pollard.
How soon after you received that letter."
asked Mr.. Butterworth. did You meet the
pla1ntr, II at all?'
II saw the plaintiff" said Mr. Breckin-
ridge, ION the 1st Of August, and / received
this letter the latter part of August" He
said he had received the letter in the usual
way in his mail. He had a converse ton
with Miss Pollard at the Wesleyan College
on the subject matter of the letter. In this
converse ton she had used language similar
to that In the letter, and made some re-
mark about its being something worse than
a divorce case.
offered in Testimony,
Mr.. Butterworth here offered the letter
in testimony, arguing that sufficient ground
had been laid for its Introduction. Mr.
Butterworth read number of authorities
He urged that 1t was competent to give
the letter to the jury that they might COM
pare it with writings admittedly those Of
Miss Pollard
Mr.. Wilson's Objection.
Mr.. Wilson, in replying, said that he
was expecting that at the close of the
testimony of the experts the letter would
be offered in evidence and had prepared
himself to meet the question. They were
not, he said, dealing with case where
suit had been brought upon an instrument,
the authenticity of which was denied,
where genuine writings might be compared
with that in dispute. In such cases it was
well settled that comparisons could be
Ia Nv t1A Il l.