New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1894-04-03
"NIY DEAR SISTER LOUISE"
ANOTHER MYSTERIOUS LETTER IN THE
BRECKINRIDGE CASE


roIIARD-IIER ALLEGED ADM
RATION OF GEORGE ELIOT
WASHINGTON. April 1.-The trial of the Pollard
Brccbinrdgc case was Adjourned this altsihOo"
until Tomorrow at the most interesting point OF
the cross-eyamination-a mystery invoiVhs an
alleged letter addressed my Dear sister LOUISE
which the plaintiffs counsel will try 70 prove wa
written TO her in 1856 at time wn'h' "ocoi0'"e
10 his testimony. Colonel Breckinridge had SUE
nended his relations with her and did not know
where she was TIE chief interest IN TINS 'ie
second dubious letter introduced In the case
centres in the name Louise Miss Pollard aVe'S
that she went to Cincinnati in February 1879.
md IN lime Of that year gave birth to chl-u
nj Ct Joscnh's Asylum, at Norwood, near Cn'cW-
natl and that after leaving the asylum she went
10 the house Of physician under the assumed
name Of Louise Wilson. The defendant delleu
positively this afternoon having any Eho"l'Ue'
OF my Dear Sister Louise or OF having give"
q letter BEGINNING that way TO a typewriter 10
copy. ,.,,,
rho cross-exam.nation Of the defendant VIII
b. continued all through tomorrow. ana p'oO-
ably the next day.
As soon as The court met TINS roih'"b NO''i
J;reckinTidce took the stand, and began HIS tHIiO
da,.s +oe,,r,ony. Major Patchwork began by
quoting the testimony tI MIS- 'i'-'''' w.
.rnce to the alleged proposal Of marriage III
.uo,,et 400 which the plaintiff claims took
mace in carriage in this city. Colonel HrecN.i-
r,aco denied aI these statements OF the plahui
ooncorn,r, the alleged conversation during 'he
ride. . ,,,s,
Noior Ruttcrworth made reference 10 "i'S,
ronard's statements that the Defendant H'i
made her give up her child and mat he '"'
talked about his dead wife.
81 mover in any way mentioned to her 'He nam
~ my. wife" he said in answer TO MAJOR ""''Vi
vortb,s ouestion whether this was true. new
lnnw sh, had given birth u Il hving cH''u III"
never asked lev 70 give It up .,.-
Colonel Breckenridge also denied MISS io''''u
statements concerning theT H'ee'i7'
Hoffman House, in New-foTk. , -.
He then told again what took place durl'S Ms
ers, visit n Major Moore in reference 10 ms
aror,tco ~ marry tho plaintiff. Thcre was ~
request to Major Moore that ne shouLH , po9tbcr
dn1sr ont Of r1e-not dollar more LOT hef sup
port" 49,, g . conversation
with Mrs Blackburn. IN WAlch my Eniroes and
che wa shed her hands of the Wh9'c ou''ie .ho
Sid NOT want ANYTHING to do with people VINO
behaved so badly and abused her tn,,
such way; and also OK a long hc,ween Miss
poIler ri and himself to go 10 see NaJor ~ y
Colonel Rreckinri1ge said MISS FOllNu va" ~
tome him to tell Major 1ho".' .'i"N -
man had h2d any improper i0'"''''
but he would not 40 So ,..,, .b,s time
er1 which were covered in Colonel brechll''iOS0
testimony Of Friday were tod over as''''
THE PLAINTIFF EXCITED
,,,.- D,.,or, ,acorno much excited during
Colonel Breck!nridge's recital, and occasionally
$500 20 Mr. Carlisle. as if appealing to him
No. n allow the statements Of the witness 70 20
uncbo1enged She was nervous all the morning
and frequently on the verge Of tears.
Colonel Brackin,idge said he read In I'm
cincinnati paper while In Lexington in July lS9S'
an announcement of his engagement TO MISS l'i-
lard He denied the report. and the dcNal W.
published in the Lexington G2zc,,e' ~, ~ d.
on this statement III The Gazette tnat MIS-
Pollard based her letter to Colonel cKinrloEe
threa tening that unless he sent he sttleHieI.
of their engagement over his signature ne HiIS'
tata "tbe consequences" Colonel BrockinriGge
said there were five or six Of these letters from
the plaintiff. threatening him with Inc pupica-
ton of full account 81 ihclr feIaIyH.i -, az
one OF her letters" said the witness, she threat
ened to go to Lexington and submit t. tn aio.-
trament of my unmarriei dauShter as 10 Wn l.lt
she should do in view OF the former relations
between us" -
Did you have relations with the plaintiff after
the Goth Of April 1892" 0hc date Of the mar
riage of Colonel Breclinridge and Mrs. Wing
asked Major ButterwOrth. .
Colonel Breckenridge hcsitated an instant as II
forming his words and looking squarcly at Miss
size his words. he said:
II did not after the 2sth of April. 1881 did
not have any such relations with the piaintllf
whatever after that date. i is absolutely
false"
by asking Colonel Brecknridee as to MS early
education and social advantages.
Colonel Breckenridge admitted that he was
nominally member of the board Of directors
of the Sayre Institute during period while the
plaintiff was q student there. Colonel Bcecksn-
ridge said he had been brought up in the P;esDy-
terrain Church. and that he was member ,,e oa
that Church now. in the sense 'hd' ms hd"'e wa
borne on its rolls.
HIS INTEREST IN THE CHURCH
"D,d YOU take any interest in church afrairs?'
was the next question.
Eyes did | was 50 far as they needed 1t.
LAWYER of the churches. and rendered such
service or legal advice. etc. without fee FOR 90
doing don't think l attended the meeting OF
the Presbyterian Synod. never was an oIiuti
hut | may have attended such meetings Prop.
ahIv I was an auditor at some Of the meetings.
Judge Wilson then asked: Have You iectured
before young ladies' seminarief! $500, o,sno.so,
"Oh | have delivered diplomas ana adnI'SSe'
before young ladies' collegea
Colonel Breckenridge denied that he was q
rccnbcr Of the Christian Endeavcr Society. Con.
tirming Colonel Breckenridge said he was a
Mason Judge Wilson asked The witness, aItci
no had SAID he knew Miss PoiiardS iather hao
beer an odd Fellow and a Mason II th'Fr Wa
not some obligations on members q theSf 80
rietjcs TO protect the daughters % fe1loW-hein
bers Colonel Thomson objected. and me 90
lection was sustained.
Then Judge Wilson put the defendant throu@I
an examina ton to the range Of his reaHihR
and studies. particularly with reference 10 mon
archs who had not wake T. the moral pathway
and as 20 works that some people consider no
quite proper.
GEORGE ELIOT HER MODEL
"Now" said Judge Wilson, Major ButterworlF
has made so pointed reference TO the plaintifi
reading George Eliot that | thought there mus
he some reason for It. Can You tell me VIVA
that point is?'
IT do not know Of any reason except o'cauS
Of George Eiot's cohab!;oji"n With MI Lewis
did mention this 10 Major Huttsrworth' an'
told hin, that the plaintiff had expressed Gren
od,cir,ton for her and said she would rathe