The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1894-04-06
The Plaintiff Herself Takes the Stand
and Gives Evidence That Is Not Wholly
Supported by Another Woman.
COUSINS COME TO HER AID
And Prove that Mrs. Miller's
Statements We're Untrue.
Testimony of Mrs. McClelland Brown
and the COlored Cook at the House
Where Miss Pollard Boarded.

WASHINGTON, April 5-The defense In
the Pollard-B d-Breckinridge breach OF prom
ise suit rested it's case to-day. and the TAX
ing of rebuttal testimony for the plaintiff
was begun.
Judge Bradley's admonitions OF the night
before had the effect of reducing the at
tendance at the Circuit Court to-day to the
thinnest audience yet gathered. and some
of the men present wore a sheepish air.
The defense made an unexpected move by
calling Miss Pollard to the stand and ques-
tioning her about the birth of her second
child, which, she said, was born at noon.
Feb. 3. 1883.
Il only held 1t in my arms two hours, ac-
cording to my promise him." she began.
Now, Miss Pollard" Mr.. Butterworth
began, nervously, warning Miss Pollard
with great solicitude to confine herself &c
answering his question. Mr. Wilson also
admonished her.
The child had been taken to the Protes-
tant Founding Asylum, on Fourteenth
street, in Washington, where she had vis-
tied it with Dr. Mary Parsons once. She
continued: Il gave it a little German
name / pinned a note on its clothing so
they could name it. 1 was reading Carlyle
and 1 named it from character of his.
from that of Colonel Breckenridge or my
own" The second time she saw the child
was on the Sd of May. at Wright's under
taking establishment, before IL was buried.
When Mr.. Butterworth asked how the fu-
neral expenses had been paid she said that
Mrs. Parsons had looked after that She
supposed Colonel Breckenridge had paid
them, but when Mrs. Parsons was recalled
to the stand they could ask her.
That's all, Miss Pollard" said Mr.. But
terworth, dismissing her. and then he
called for DIR. Mary Parsons, who was not
forthcoming however.
Miss Pollard had been perfectly self
possessed while she was being questioned
about her child, and had spoken in a low,
almost plaintive tone. 81 don't know much
about those things, you know. Mr.. Butter
WORTH" she had said when he was asking
her about the regulations Oh the founding
asylum.
Some time was passed waiting for DR..
Parsons. and when the Judge inquired the
cause Of the delay he was told by Mr.
Shelby that the defense wished to further
croSS-eXam mine her about matters she had
testified upon for the plaintiff, and which
they had omitted to ask her about The
plaintiffs lawyers thought this was rather
unusual procedure, but were not disposed
TO press objections.
middle-aged lady with spectacles, who had
been sitting in court, was called. She an
nounced her name as Mrs. Liddie, said
she employed in the Census Bureau,
and in 1883 had been matron OF the Wash
ington Founding Asylum on Fourteenth
street The record of the asylum for that
year being shown her, she Identified the
record of child brought there by large
colored woman, which had a paper pinned
on its clothing. A slip Of paper which she
thought had come on the clothing was
TASTED in the book
The objection TO the introduction OF the
Exception was taken. Attorney Shelby en-
deavored in other ways TO bring out the
point he had aimed at, but in each in.
stance was defeated by objections of coun-
sci for the plaintiff, sustained by the court.
Finally, after a prolonged wrangling, the
matron was permitted TO testify that the
child had been christened Downing. At
this point Miss Pollard began To shod tors,
and received the attentions OF her attor-
neys The slip pasted IN the asylum record
was penned in a feminine, delicate hand
with the words: please name my baby
Dietz Downing and beneath ii in red
A question from Mr.. Shelby as to whether
any other child had died in April, 1888.
brought the reply: They die so fast and
so rapidly that l cannot Keep track OF
them" The record, however. would show,
the witness said When Mr. Shelby offered
TO place the record in evidence. IL was
ruled out. The defense attempted to put
DR. Mary Parsons upon the stand, but
Judge Bradley insisting that counsel for
Colonel Breckenridge must understand that
she was their own witness, called for cross
examination. the plan was abandoned and
the witness dismissed.
William B. Moore, of the Cincinnati
health Office. testified that no return OF
birth attended by DIR. Mary Parsons in
February, 1883, had been made. He was
not cross-examined. Here the defense abb