The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1894-03-27
A MUCH BE ElROTHED WOMAN.
Deposition Showing that Miss Pollard vas
Engaged 10 still Another Ean.
READING OF DISPUTED DEPOSIIIONS,
Judge Bradley Admits Some ard OYer'"'''
Oihers-A Suggestion 10 the News
papers Proving Alibis.


dragged YEARLY to-day. II was day
Of depositions. mostly intended to es-
tablsh an albi on behalf Of the defend
ant as TO certain dates testified TO by
the plaintiff.
Unlnteresting as the dcpositions were
as rule. there was one new point brought
out. and that was that Miss Pollard had
been engaged TO another man, not pre-
viously mentioned in the case.
This makes the third engagement con-
tracted by her that has been brought
10 lisht. accepting the alleged one with
Colonel Breckinridge, and Miss Polards
partiality 10 elderly men when she was a
young eirl was SHOWN in the testimony
/ of the man in the case who was forty
two years Oid at the time the engage
ment was contracted. Another deposition
/ read was chat of Aleck Julian, Miss Poi
laris "Blud Barnabas," in reference
/ 60 the mock marriage between Miss Poll
/ lard and hlmsel. in 1882. Those in the
courtroom who looked for sensationaiism
/ u this deposition were disappointed, and
on the whole the qualifying remarks of
Julian in cross-e2amination So was not
| very unfav0rablc TO the plaintiff.
- llfn Ifltf niifffHt ~ Niii sfHiiN.
The time when Colonel Breckinridgc
viii take the stand. if at an. appears
somewhat remote. He is not likely t0-be
called upon TO testify in his own behalf
before Wednesday afternoon.
Governor Matthews and his staff. and
the members of the Princeton baseball
team were interested listeners al the trial
to-day
Interest in the morning centered i'm
the decision of Judge Bradley with refer
/ cncc TO the admission of the Ohio and
Kentucky deposti0ns in behalf of COi-
oncl BrcckinrIdge. Many lawyers were
present TO hear the decision. Miss Pol
lard WAS not in court at the opening but
Colonel BreckinrIdge was.
Judge bradlcy's decision was rendered
promptly after the court was called to
order. lIe recitcd statutes 10 show that
Circuit and District Courts of the United
States had ihc power 10 authorize dep0-
sitions tO ho taken dc bene osse and it
could not bc successfully disputed. he
said. that this was court OF the United
States The right of an individual 10
take dcpositi0ns was a right which he
might exercise or NOT, at his will, and
with which the court had nothing TO do.
but when dcpositions were presented 90
the court it became the duty.of the court
to determine whether il WAS ught 10
permit them to be read.
Slight Victor, for the Plaintiff.
This was slight victory for Miss Pol
lard's attorneys who contendcd that the
dcpOsiii0ns had been taken de bene esse.
or subject TO consideration by the court
ass 20 their admissbillty. Judge Bradley
then took up the specific objections made
t1 parts of the testimony contained i'm
tre dcp0siuonsTh first or these obiec-
tonable depositions was that of man
named Brand who refused 20 answer
whether hc and Miss Pollard had main
taired improper relations, q very odd re-
fusal. SO Judge Bradley said in view of
The fact that ne had admitted that.
though "a married man. he freQuentod
questionable houses. What objection the
deponent could have TO answering the |
question iho Judge could not see.
a deposition Of one Kaufman was adj |
mittod. but Judge Bradley said if he |
could have suppressed the dopositions Of |
Brand, Colin. and one Hawkins. on the |
ground that they We're too filthy 10 5e |
read, joe would have done s0 bat unfOr- !
tunately De could not overlook their legal |
rights
The deposition Of John O'Toole was |
overrulea, but DO was based ON hearsay. |
and 80. also were those of Dr Green |
and Dr. Lewis.
The depositions Of Mrs. Miller and W. |
vs.. Resell were not ovcrrulcd. but were /
admitted subject 20 objections TO specific |
questions when they were read.
a sensible Suggestion.
After rendering his decision. judge |
Bradley said: 81 will say here that tho |
court has been dciueed with anonymous |
letters about this case. SO one who writes |
an anonymous letter ought to- expect to |
have any notice taken of it And it IS |
said That person who would write am |
anonymous letter would DO almost any |
other mean thing That humanity viii do. |
There is one suggestion contained I'm these |
letters, however, and the writer is ap- |
parenly actuated only by pure and proper |
motives, and that is directed 90 the pub /
Ncauon by the newspapers OF the details /
OF the evidence in the course of the /
trial. The public should understand and /
assume that the public generally does.
hlt there are some people who do mot.
tnai no court can exercise or presume TO
eKefcis any censorship over the press.
But ! would suggest 10 the correspondents /
and members of The press that 70 IS I'm the
best interests not only of this community.
but OF every community in this land 10
which these newspapers 90. that so far as
possible. and ] think 10 is possible. an
disgusting details OF matters that may
De- deemed essential and material to De
given in evidence In the course Of this
trial, should be withheld from pubiiaa
ton. The publication of these matters
would in nay judgment. be sufficient TO
exclude the newspapers from the use Of
the mails. / trust that In the interest of
the people of Washington. as well as
the interests Of the country AT larue
and the families into which these news
papers 90, that these details be with
held
Mr.. Carlisle took exception to the rul-
ing OF Judge Bradley with reference TO
the depositions that were not overruled.
me decision caused a long wait while
colonel Breckinridge's attorneys went
over the depositions admitted. making
changes IN some of them TO conform 10
the decision Of Judge Bradley
BrecRinridge Proves an Abb.
The first deposition read was that of
James T.. Bailey. Of Versailles. KY. who
Is clerk OF the WO0dford County Court.
VINO produced his records to show that
W. {. +. Breckenridge had been an at
torney Tor r. B. and O. ID. Brown IN their
trial FOR murder in 1854. The record show
ed that the Brown case was up in court
on August 5. 1854. at the time when Miss
Pollard testified that Colonel Breckinridge
had met her at the house Of Sarah Cess.
In Lexington few days after the al
legged betrayal. The deponent said the
case had gone along until August 10th.
when ID. ID. Brown was admitted 10 bail
Mr.. Breckenridge was In court every day.
Bailey's cross-eXaminatlOn was directed
to showing that Colonel Breckenridge