The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1894-03-30

When did you first meet herE
THE FIRST MEETING.
'In the spring of 1884 1t was a cool
morning. on a train between Lexington and
Frankfort. 1 had an overcoat on the back
seat of the car, and as 1 passed down the
aisle to get it, she accosted me in a per-
fectly proper way. 1 said: 4 suppose 1
ought to know you, but young persons grow
up so on US we forget their faces She
said: 4 am Madeline Breckenridge Pol
lard" that her father admired my father;
that If she had been boy he would have
named her John b. AS ii was. he gave
her the middle name Of Breckenridge. She
said she was going to a sister, who dy
ing of consumption. / expressed my SYM
pathy and passed on.
when did you next meet her?'
II do not remember exactly" replied the
witness. II received a letter from her. l
have lost that letter, but the substance of
it was a request that 1 would call on her
at the college some business of great inn
portance to her. The substance of my re-
ply was that il would be inconvenient for
me TO call at the college, but IL 1 could
give her any advice 1 would be glad to do
SO. and If she was in Lexington she might
call
did you receive another letter.
worth, handing up the black-bordered
TT would be affectation for me to ex-
anime that" said the Colonel. Il am IA
miiar with it"
This provoked tilt over the letter. Mr..
Wilson contending that it had not been
proven to have come from the plaintiff and
Mr.. Butterworth asserting that unless the
Supreme Court was in error it was, on
fron 5 after oonei Srec,n
ridge continued. he could not relate the
conversation concerning 1t which he had
had with the plaintiff when he called at
the school few days afterward. He could
not well give the purport OF the CONVERSE
oR co eSnsenng the letter apart from IN the
gan. referring always to Miss Pollard by
the legal term, said, I suppose you were
shoi girl aagSnsy that
pehapS she overexaggerated the Importance
of the matter. Then she said: But all
this time you are standing and invited me
''Now we propose" said Mr.. Butterworth,
''to offer this letter to the jury. that they
may examine II and compare IL with the
writing in evidence. Even Il we had pro
under the ruling of the Supreme Court. It
would be admissible Singularly enough
the ruling which the attorney proceeded to
presiding judge Justice Bradley, of the
Supreme Court.
HOW THE COLONEL LOOKED.
AS the argument proceeded Colonel Breck-
inridge sank back into a chair, apparently
glad of an opportunity to rest. His face
was flushed and while testifying his eyes
frequently had roved over toward Made
line Pollard, or swept beyond her to the
background of eager gaping men. but for
the most part he kept his face turned to-
ward the jury. He had leaned forward
with his right hand resting on the witness
| box and the left elbow on Judge Brad
| leys desk above the level of the worn
wooden box. His tones were mellifiuous and
snvery, but noticeaby tremulous as he
| detailed the incidents of his early life
great wave of snowy hair swept carelessly
his flushed forehead; the beard beneath
| was carefully trimmed, a small black cleri-
cal tie surmounted his expansive shirt front
or gilttering white and the lapels of his
| black cut-away coat were flung open When
! permitted TO take the chair he shaded his
eyes for a moment with his hand, smoothed
MS forehead wearily and leaned back with
MS nead on one side, listening to the argu-
Ex-Judge Jere Wilson replied to Major
9utter~orths arguments as to the admissi-
| 9iHty Of The letter, and began by explain
| ing that he was confronted with an ex-
pected situation, since 1t had been his ex-
pectation that the letter would have been
| offered in evidence at the close Of the ex-
| pert testimony. His argument was that this
case differed radically from one In which
| ument was attacked by a plaintiff Here
| was defendant endeavorIng TO introduce
in evidence letter alleged to be from the
| the court had passed upon the question
| whether 1t was competent evidence the let
| ter could not go to the jury. 1t was a ques-
| tion, according TO the attorneys, between
| the testimony OF the two experts, based
| merely upon their opinions, and the fiat
| denial of one who knew and the only one
| who could know whether she had written
| 1t. This train Of thought led up to the dis
| cussion of the value of expert testimony,
| against which Mr.. Wilson opened the bat
| tereS of his eloquence, fortified by an
| opinion from the late Chief Justice Carter,
of the District Supreme Court; Meantime,
| duty of keeping an eye upon his client be-
side him. whose breast was heaving, whose
| cheeks were flushed and whose manner
| betokened agitation.
One of the opinions quoted by Judge VIII
son dealt with the testimony of expert
| Edwin b. Hay, OF whom the court said
that he gave himself a Specious introduc-
ton. Now we are coming to our friend
Mr.. Wilson remarked. and Colonel Breck-
the rest of the court room laughed. "And
| now we come to that Washburn-Sprnger
report, which you wrote" said Mr. Wilson,
| turning to Mr. Butterworth.
| That was good report but did not
| write it," retorted Mr.. Butterworth MY
| dear friend, that is in your handwriting; I
am expert enough to know that" Mr.. VIII
| son replied
Messrs. Butterworth and Wilson, it may
be remarked parenthetically, were in Con-
The substance of the opinions quoted by
Mr.. Wilson was that expert evidence was
| the most unsatisfactory sort with which
| courts had TO deal, and that experts were
| prone to be warped in their opinions by
| their fees
| JODGE BRADLEY > RULING.
After the argument Judge Bradley said
that the testimony of the experts tended to
show the authorship Of the letter. and in
quired what would there be for the court
to do If there had been no expert testimony
in view of the defendants testimony that he
had received it in due course of the cor.
respondence, and had afterward held a
conversation with the plaintiff based on its
contents. Either the testimony of the de-
fendant or that of the experts, he thought
would justify the admission of the letter
| to the sight of the jurors, allowing then
| to Judge of the evidence for and against
its authenticity for themselves, aided by
| their own powers of observation and com
| pariSon with the admitted specimens OF the
| plaintiffs handwriting. He continued: II
| appears that this is largely a dispute over
a shadow, as the contents of this letter
| have been published by the press, and tn,
| jurors are probably intelligent men anC
| readers. Newspaper enterprise is a gool
| thing, but in this instance Ii enterpris,
| with a vengeance 1t was a contempt o.
| court and was a gross impropriety to pub
| lish IL before IL was given to the jury.
| presume the reporters were not aware O
the improperly of their act which mus
have been committed within the precinct
of the court. The letter would have beer
admitted anyway; but suppose 1t had no
been, and the jury had read it. Grea
harm might have been done by the action.
After these admonitions Mr.. Butterwortl
read the letter which has already beel
| published.
This finished, Colonel Breckenridge ros
| again and described what had become O
the letters. He had kept three files-on
| at his house, one at his office and one part
| IL, Il hfC