Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1894-04-04

sell IN saying the evidence ndu only
been discovered sunday it was not ap-
parent that be had spoken for the other
counsel and his client, whereupOn Mr..
Carlisle insisted on adding his assur-
anceS 20 those OF Judge Wilson and con-
siderable asperlty was developed among
the lawyers over the point
Judge Bradley inquired whether If
the letter was IN existence aud Col.
Breckenridge denied &C., Il could not be
produced ia rebuttal, and Mr. Shelby
responded that even under these cir
cumstances it could not since il would
be an attempt under the guise of rebuff
tai, TO prove the case 10 chief. More
argument was made By Mr.. Wilson, who
held that the effect Of evidence could
not be elimited because 10 came out In
discrimination.
Half an hour had been consumed by
this argument when
JUDGE BRADLEY DECIDED THE POINT,
saying there eOuld be no doubt Of the
.Rdmlssiblity Of the letter if il was 10
existence as basis Of croSs-examinatIon.
Although novel case confronted the
court, the authorities seemed 70 Re that
where a paper had been destroyed or
lost, proof or It's previous existence
could be interjected. It seemed TO be
proper, since the croSs-eXaminiug coun-
sci said the paper was not In his pos
session aud the witness denied knowl-
edge of it, TO inJerject proof Of It's ex-
istence as basis OF examination.
ThereupOn Mrs. Louise Lowell took
seat To the WitBess 0oX. she said that
she had known Col Breckenridge since
February, 1856, having become &C
Quainted with him al the House OF Rep
reSentatives, where she had an office 20
carry on business as stenographer and
typewriter ia the corridor OF the room
Of the Committee on POStotdCes.
"Did you DO work for Col. Brec6in-
ridge?" Mr. Wilson inquired.
81 did"
ibid be bring manuscript Of letter
30 you?"
';de did, and 1 copied it in type
writer"
CHOW was that letter addressed?"
81 object" Interrupted two OF three
Of the Breckenridge attorneys, who pro
tested that there was no proof of the
letter having been mailed, but Judge
Bradley said TO sustain the objection
would be to nulify the purpose Of ad-
hitting the witness.
"The manuscript and copy haU been
returned 20 the Colonel" Mrs. Lowell
continued. From 1856 20 1890 she had
copied manuscript, addressed envelopes
aud done Col. Breckinridge's private
correspondence and congressional Work,
always returning the manuscript.
Now, what was on those envelopes?
continued Mr. Wilson.
"AIiss Pollard, ,6 Upper street, Lex
ington, KY"
"Aud how do you remember that?'
'IKEPr A MEMORANDUM BOOK
10 which noted the address"
Have YOU the bOOk?'
81 have" she said, aud the book was
passed around for Inspection OF the
LAWYERS.
Feeling sure that sooner or later 1
would hear more Of Miss Pollard and
not wishing TO trust my memory, made
that memorandum, she explained, and
continuing said: ale (Breckinrldge)
brought me two or three envelopes sep
erately, then package OF dozen small
ones, yellOwed with age, and not such
The question of the substance OF those
letters has objected TO and the oblec-
tion sustained for the present The
first communication said the witness
was addressed 10 my dear sister Lou
ise, " and when Mr.. Wilson urged that
testimony Of its contents should be ad-
mitted, Mr.. ButterwOrth returned that
there was nc proof that 10 had ever been
mailed or received, reminding Mr.. Will
son that il was the ground taken By him
regarding the alleged forged letter Of
Miss POllard's.
"I now give you notice IL you have
that letter 20 produce IL, said Mr. VIII
son TO the defense.
chow can produce the letter II I
sent ii 10 the PLAINTIFF COL Brecken-
ridge inquired in reply, whereupon Mr..
Wilson remarked in his inimitable way:
''You and will
HAVE A LITTLE CONVERSATION
after a while"
The witness, continuing, recollected
that she had copied the letters for Col.
Breckenridge nearly every week but
said she could only prove having done
1907 To-
The Judge having ruled out the ex-
animation concerning the contents Of
the letter, Mr.. Butterworth made a
brief cross-examinatiOn, asking Mrs.
Lowell where she had worked and for
how long. She had kept record Of
the work she did for Congressman, with
the amounts received, In an account
book. She had an independent recol-
a Of
since the matter had made very deep
i'm preston on her mind.
Are you acquainted with Miss Pol
lard?" was asked.
II never saw Miss Pollard until this
morning"
In her books she had merely entered
the amount OF work done, the name OF
the party and the amount charged, so
that no Congressman need waste worry
FOR fear that the ledger will rise up 10
get them into trouble.
Mrs. Lowell said she had not volun-
teered her evidence and did not know
how the lawyers learned the facts.
Colonel Breckinridge was recalled aud
gave emphatic denial 20 the previous
witness statement that he had carried
10 her the manuscript addressed 20 MY
Dear Sister Louise" Mrs. Lowell had,
done tvDewrting for him. He would
not swear be had never given her manu-
script letters TO copy.
Colonel Breckenridge made other en-
phatic denialS covering many OF the
statements Of Mrs. Lowell.
After recess Miss Pollard was placed
on the stand 70 prove that the letters 10
question had been received by her and
t.-.,,,9 Tho dofonqe ohiactpd IN this