Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1894-04-09
POLLARD-BR EGkINRIDGi. TRIAL.

day evening, that he would rule that
the fact that Colonel Breckenridge had
been secretly married to Mrs. Wing be-
fore the alleged promise to Madeline
Pollard had been made Gin the presence
of Mrs. Blackburn and Major Moore
constituted no defense to the suit OF
Miss Pollard for breach of promise OF
marriage.
The lawyers for Colonel Breckenridge
had set this up as defense, on the
ground that as he was already married
TO Mrs. Wing, he could not be held 10
carry out contract TO marry some one
else, which contract, on its face, was
unlawful.
The intimation of Judge Bradley
knocks out one of the main props OF
the defense.
Each side will consume a day in the
arguments, and Judge Bradley will
charge the jury on Wednesday. Law
yer Shelby said on Saturday, when ask
ed by Judge Bradley about the time
needed for the closing arguments, that
five hours side had been suggested as
a reasonable time.
The substance OF the instructions
asked by Maj. Shelby to be given TO the
jury are as follows:
The jury, in order to find for the plain
tiff must agree that the plaintiff
and the defendant entered into a
contract to become husband and wife:
that if there were no actual agreement
to marry, then no statements in the
presence of others can be taken as q
contract of marriage, and particularly
if the agreement were made pursuant
to an understanding for other purposes.
That as improper relations had ex
listed between the plaintiff and the de
PENDANT prior to the alleged promise OF
marriage, the burden Of the proof was
on the plaintiff TO show that improper
relations with other men had not exist
cd prior to that time. That as the de
PENDANT was married to his present wife
on April -, 1898, any agreement to
marry after that date was void. That
even If the jury find that contract TO
marry was entered into, they must take
into consideration whether the plain
tiff had been guilty Of improper rela-
tons with other men unknown TO the
defendant when the contract was
made. and must be instructed that the
defendant had the right to break The
contract on attaining such knowledge.
That if The plaintiff made threats
against the defendant to force him to
marry her, then the jury must find for
the defendant.
That if they find that contract ex-
listed, and thar after the making the
contract the plaintiff, by threats on his
life. placed the defendant in a state OF
terror, such acts excused the defendant
from marriage.
In the argument that followed Mr..
Johnson said that he did not need to
discuss the poin, that the defendant
had The right to break the promise 10
marry if he knew the plaintiff was un-
chaste, for he had testified that she told
him she was unchaste before his i'm
moral relations with her began. and.
therefore, the promise was made with
his full understanding Of her previous
character, and that he need no; discuss
whether there was any act Of unchastity
by the plaintiff subsequent to the al
legged promise, and no such claim has
been made.
Judge Bradley agreed that these
points did not enter into the case, ioi
the reasons given by Mr. Johnson. 1t
was contended that the jury should, in
considering the amount of damages,
consider whether the alleged engage
ment was broken in brutal or other
wise injurious manner, and that if the
Jury found that the defendant was
forced into the contrect by fear of the
plaintiff, made desperate BY the condi-
ton to which he had brought her. then
the jury should take into consideration
that fact and award damages to the
plaintiff for having been brought to
such a condition by the defendant.
Major Shelby made his argument for
the defense, and when he concluded
Judge Wilson argued for the plaintiff
The main issue discussed in the argu-
ments of Major Shelby and Judge Viii
son was as to which side ought to as
sumo the burden of proof in regard to
the conflicting statements Of the plain
tiff and defendant.
Judge Bradley took the matter under
Amusement.
Mr.. Butterworth, who was in Gin
cinnati on Saturday said Had l been
called into the case three days sooner it
would not have been tried if my coun-
sci could have prevented it. And had
been a Judge on the bench I would
never have let it come to trial. There
is no condoning of Mr. breckenridge. l
will not do it. He does not want it,
If Col. Breckenridge loses he will move
for new trial failing in that will APP
peal"
TO-DAY'S PROCEEDINGS.
The beginning of the second month
of the Pollard Breckenridge trial this
morning witnessed the beginning of the
end in the commencement of argument
before the jury. There was few persons
present when the court convened but
the plaintiff was among the spectators
much to most persons surprise.
After some time had been spent in
empanneling new circuit court jury,
Judge Bradley read his decision with
reference to the prayers for instructions
to the jury, which were submitted by
both sides on Saturday. He granted
nine of the fourteen prayers of the
plaintiff, modifying six of these, refused
four, and decided that one was covered
by another prayer, thus practically
granting ten of the fourteen prayers.
Six Of the twelve prayers of the defen-