The Washington times., 1894-04-10
PLEA FOR THE PLAINTIFF
Calderon Carlisle Makes the Opening
Argument in Strong Effort,
SUMMARY OF INSTRUCTIONS
Eleven Admitted for the Plaintiff and Six for
the Defendant-Miss Pollard Appears as
Usual-Mr. Carlisle Carefully and Quietly
Opens the Battle Of Words.

Attorney Calderon Carlisle, who is more
deeply versed in international law than in
breach OF promise litigations, consumed yes
terday in the circuit court in q review Of the
testimony before the jury in the Pollard
Breckinridge case.
His statement was a detailed dissection Of
the evidence, delivered in clear, dispassion-
ate manner, although at times the lawyer re-
ierred to Col. Breckinridge in very scathing,
but coolly worded terms. The silver-haired
Congressman conducted himself very nom
chalantly, joking with his lawyers during the
day, while Madeline Pollard, sitting directly
In front of him, kept her face shaded by
black-gloved hand most Of the time. Only
once was there any interruption Of the argu-
ment, and that was when Col. Breckinridge
set the speaker right on n point of family
title about which he seemed to be rather par
ticular.
All day the closest attention was given to
the speech by jury and spectators, so that
there was a deep silence in the courtroom.
y, i
not impossible that the speaking will last
until Friday.
There was counter attraction yesterday in
the arraignment OF bigamist Of local celeb
rity, SO that the groups Of curious women
hanging about the courthouse were largely
reinforced.
Madeline Pollard wore her most becoming
bonnet when she entered the circuit court
yesterday morning accompanied by Sister
Ellis and her counsel. She took her usual
chair before the judge, with her side face
turned to the jury. The audience was COM
posed mostly of members of the bar. who were
drawn by the prospects Of listening to pleas
from some Of the strongest takers OF their
number, but it was a crowd smaller than GUS
tomarily assembled to hear the testimony in
the case.
Judge Bradley first announced his decision
on the prayers for instruction. Nine prayers
of the plaintiff were granted in modified form
and five Of them refused; six prayers for the
defendant were granted 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 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 con-
tract was not to be carried out, and that the
statements made in the presence Of other
parties were made with this understanding on
the part of the plaintiff and defendant.
The Judge was anxious to limit the time for
arguments to five hours on each side, but
after both sides had protested against a time
limit he yielded the point.
The instructions granted in condensed
form are as follows:
For the plaintiff:
First-If the jury find from the evidence tina:
there were mutual promises of marriage, as
claimed In the declaration, that would constitute
a binding contract, and if the defendant mar
ried another person, that would be 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, IL
known to him, would be no defense
Second-The burden of proof is upon the de-
fendant 10 show by preponderance of the evil
dence that there was an agreement that merely
the semblance of a contract, not 10 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 defense.
Fourth-The conduct of plaintiff and defendant
at, about, and after the making of the contract
are to be considered in Judging its good or bad
faith
ised the plaintiff in good faith 10 marry her, the
burden of proof rests upon him TO establish, by
n prepondcrance of proof, a defense or re-
lease, and it would not be a defense that he had
Illicit relations with others.
Sixth-If before the contract there was inter- |
course between the two, and the defendant
knew that she was previously unchaste, it con-
stitutes no defense
Seventh-If she informed him that she had been |
impure with Rhodes, that constitutes no defense.
Eighth-The secret marriage does not a consti- |
tute a defense.
Ninth-f promises were not made until after |
the secret marriage, it does not constitute de-
fense
Tenth-If the Jury find for the plaintiff, they |
are to consider the prospective advantage TO |
the plaintiff from the marriage, the injury TO |
her feelings, reputation and chance of earning |
a livelihood by the breach OF promise and may |
award exemplary damage well
Eieventh-lf the jury find that the plaintiff |
was chaste- save with the defendant, and that |
the attempt TO impeach her character was made /
for the purpose of a defense, they may consider
the fact in awarding damages
Instructions Tor the defense:
First-Before the plaintitf can recover the Jury
must believe from all the evidence that a con-
tract was entered into between the plaintiff and
defendant TO become husband and wife.
Second-lf the jury find that statements were
made in the presence of or to third parties that
they were engaged to be married, and SUCH
were made pursuant to an under
sons, such statements are not 10 be taken as
,onstituting or evidencing contract
Third-The burden of proof to establish the
contract is upon the plaintiff
Fourth-If before the contract the plaintiff
vas guilty OF lewd or unchaste conduct with
,ther men. unknown TO the defendant, he was /
lot bound By the contract. or may avail himself
If such defense, whether at the time of his re-
usal he Enew OF the conduct OF not
Fifth-f the jury believe that the plaintiff was
,uilty OF unchaste conduct with other men, un-
,nown to the defendant, they must find fer him,
wen If knowledge did not come to him fntil
Lfter the refusal.
Sixth-The jury may in mitigation OF damages !
outsider the plaintiffs character and conduct,
I the same were bad, and if the plaintiff was
lot seduced by the defendant may consider her
want Of virtue.
Shortly before Ii o'clock Attorney Caideron
Jarlisle opened the argument for the plaintiff
Leaning on the witness box in careless
ttitude, he reminded the jury that all were