The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1894-03-27
RULING BY JUDGE BRADLEY
He Excludes Several Dispositions
and Admits Others,
And Also Lectures Reporters Who Go
Into Improper Details - Trend Of
the Testimony Read Yesterday.

than was the MISUNDERSTANDING trial to-
day. In a front row opposite the jury sat
the Governor of Indiana and several men,
bers of his staff. who had come to Wash
ington to see the sights, and they gazed
ecstatically upon the silvery beard Of the
Kentucky orator, newly cropped over Sun
day, with expressions which betokened that
they had not journeyed here in vain. Be-
hind them was Capt. Philip King, of the
Princeton University baseball team, sup
ported by his warriors, athletes whose
names are known throughout the land.
Further in the background was the usual
mixed audience, with a select sprinkling of
congressman who come and go with every
day of the trial. There were no women,
because the sex is barred from the room,
but after the court had adjourned two fash
ionably attired women slipped In at the
side door under the guidance OF bailiff,
and stood for five minutes staring at Col
Breckenridge, where he sat in consultation
with his lawyers, as children are accus-
toned to stare at the animals In menag
erie In the objections to the dispositions
for defense both sides were even. Judge
Bradley excluded several and expressed
regret that he had no power to Quash them
all because of their needless obscenity. Be-
ing a stanch Presbyterian, moreover, he
suggested that the newspaper correspond
ents should expurgate their reports in the
interest Of public morality.
There was great interest to learn the de-
cision of Judge Bradley upon the admissi-
bility of dispositions impeaching the charac-
ter of Madeline Pollard which the Brock
inridge forces had offered and to which the
plaintiff opposed numerous objections Re-
garding the sweeping denial Of the right
to take any dispositions de bene esse, under
the act of Congress creating the court, the
Judge said that the judiciary act of 1879
conferred the right, in broad terms, upon
any party TO any civil act in any court of
the United States. 1t could not be disputed
that this was court of the United States,
and the fact that the court had always
continuing to enforce it until higher court
overruled the practice. There were other
grounds upon which he sustained the regu-
larity of the dispositions a whole. OBJ
lection had been made to the deposition of
one Brand because he refused to answer
certain questions concerning woman who
had introduced him to Miss Pollard. He
said that he did not want to give away
a married woman, and then persisted that
that Il appeared that, instead of refusing
to answer, the man did not know or was
lying. Continuing, the Judge said that,
while the direct examination of the witness
had brought out nothing derogatory to the
plaintiff, he had refused to answer a ques-
ton whether he had taken liberties with
have had in refusing to answer, If the an
swer would have injured the piaintfff. the
he n %as ses iGm his
sense. admitting that. although a married
man. he was accustomed to visit question
able resorts; The Judge overruled this OBJ
lection, stating that there nothing re-
fecting upon Miss Pollard in the testimony
unless 1t was that she had consented to
associate with such a disreputable charac-
ter as the witness admit himself to be.
THREE DISPOSITIONS EXCLUDED.
+ The deposition of one Kaufman was also
admitted but the Judge spoke very sharply
OF these last two saying that they were
utterly unfit to be read before a court and
that he would gladly exclude them IL he
could, and expressed the hope that the
counsel would see fit to omit the Disgrace
fully obscene matter in them. He sustained
the objections which had been made to the
dispositions Of John O'Toole, DR.. Green and
say. DIR. Lewis is the physician who testi-
fed that Colonel Swope, late Republican
candidate for Congress in the Lexington
district, had asked him to perform a GRIM
tnal operation upon a Miss Pollard The
dispositions of Mrs. Miller and of Roselle,
VINO had been engaged to Miss Pollard
was admitted, the Judge commenting that
the plaintiff had placed her character and
ner maturity, in measure in question by
that clause of the declaration which averred
that she had been led astray by the de-
JehhGanf, , and that she was a mere girl
Each side filed objections to the rulings
against II.
Judge Bradley then made a few remarks
In the interest of public morality as he
said: THE court has been deluged with
anonymous letters in this case" ne began.
anonymous letter should not expect to have
any notice taken of it. and would do al
most anything mean. Some of these letters
however, seem to come from females and
dictated Of
them referred to the publication of details
or the trial, and, while the court could ex-
gested that papers should omit the improper
details, as he thought some of these de-
tails, If published, would subject the pa
pers to exclusion from the mails as OBJ
scene matter. Moreover, 1t was almost a
calamity to the city OF Washington and
the country at large that such matter
should be carried broadcast into its homes
These preliminaries having been finished
Attorney Stoll proceeded to read the depo-
ford county court at Versailles. From the
records OF the court the clerk had testified
that, in 1884. there were indictments for
murder against Ollie and r. p. Brown. and
that Colonel Breckenridge had been one Of
the defending attorneys 1t appeared that
the trial was S,oh in Pr0sTssis, on Avg the
that the Colonel had taken her to the house
of Sarah Guess, in Lexington; also on
of the clerk read by attorney Farrell, OF
Lexington, developed the information that
during this trial, Colonel Breckenridge had
frequently driven over from LeXir gton, re-
turning at night and sometimes bringing
his wife. He had attended the whole trial
OF Ollie Brown, although some OF the law
yers had not. One OF the Lexington law
yers, Edward NJ. Wallace, who had been
associated with Colonel Breckenridge in the
defense of Ollie Brown had deposed that the
Colonel was present throughout the trial,
arguing the and examining the wit
nesses and his statement was read.
COULD EASILY REACH LEXINGTON.
Next came the deposition of Judge Rod
ney Hagart, who had been associated with
Colonel Breckenridge as counsel for the
Chesapeake & Ohio road in cases tried in
August. 1884. The deposition of Judge Jerry
X. Morton TO prove that the defendant was
in Jessamine county, Kentucky, from Aug
q TO Aug 80, 1884, was read and the cross
examination showed that the town was an
hour and quarter By railroad from Lex
ington
Judge Joseph Hunts affidavit corrobo-
rated that of Mr.. Hagart
Theodore Davis, clerk OF the court. de-
posed that Colonel Breckenridge had voted
In Lexington. Aug. 4, 1884. and w. 5. Marsh
corrobCrated his testimony. Nat Rronaugh.
q lawyer, added his testimony that Colonel
Breckenridge had been engaged In the Jes-
samine county court from Aug. q to 80.
1884. but could not say where he (Colonel
Breckinridge) had passed his nights during
that time.
Joseph II. Skain. proprietor OF the Claren-
don Hotel, In Lexington, deposed that Col.
Breckenridge and a member OF his family
had stopped at the Phoenix Hotel, as 10
was then called. in 1884. incidentally. the