St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1894-04-10

| To-Day In the criminal court in review
OF the testimony before the jury in the
| Pollard Breckinridge case. His State
ment was detailed dissection Of the
evidence, delivered in clear. dispas-
sionate manner. although at times the
lawyer referred to Col. Breckenridge in
very scatiing but coolly worded
terms. The Silver-haired congressman
conducted himself very nonchalantiy,
Joking with his lawyers during the day,
while Madeline Pollard. sitting directly
i'll front of him, kept her face shaded by
black.gloved hand most of the time.
Only once was there any interruption
OF the argument and that was when
Col. Breckinridge set the speaker right
on the point of family title about
which he seemed to be rather particu
lar All day the closest attention was
given to the speech by jury and spec
tators, so that there was deep silence
IN the court room. Mr.. Carlisle will
continue tomorrow and it is not impOs-
sible that the speaking will last until
Friday. There was counter attrac-
ton today in the arraignment of big
amlst OF local celebrity, so that the
groups of curious women hanging about
the court house were largely reinforced.
MADELINE POLLARD
wore her most becoming bonnet when
she entered the circuit court accom-
panied 10y Sister Ellis and her counsel
today. She took her usual chair before
the Judge, her profile to the jury. The
audience was composed mostly Of mem-
bers of the bar. and was smaller than
| cuStomarily assembled to hear the teSti-
mony in the case. Judge Bradley first
| announced his decision of the prayers
for instructions. Nine prayers of the
plaintiff were granted in modified form,
and five OF them refused Six prayers
OF the defendant were granted in modi-
| fed form, or substitutes granted, and
| five were refused. incidentally the
| judge said that while the burden of
| proof rested on the plaintiff TO show
that contract to marry was entered
| into. it the defendant set up the de-
| Tense that the contract was not made in
| good faith, the burden of proof would
rest upon him to show that there was
an understanding that the contract was
not to be carried out. and that the state
mentS made i'll the presence OF other
parties were made With this under
standing on the part of the plant if
and defendant.
The judge was anxious to limit the
time for arguments to five hours on each
side, but after both sides had protested
against time limit. he yielded the
point.
THE INSTRUCTIONS GRANTED,
in condensed form. are as follows: For
the plaintiff:
First-lf the jury find from the evil
dence that there was mutual promise
of marriage, as claimed in the declara-
ton, that would constitute binding
contract, and if the defendant married
another person, that would be breach
of contract upon which the plaintiff
would be entitled to sue. Illicit reIa.
tons with him, or with others, before
the contract was made,if known to him,
would be no defense.
Second-The burden of proof is upon
the defendant to show by preEonder-
ance of evidence that there was all
agreement thar merely the semblapce
OF contract, not to be carried out, was
| to be agreed upon between them
Third-lf promises were made by the
| defendant in bau faith, but accepted by
/ the plaintiff in good faith, This bad faith
Oh his part would not constitute a de-
| Tense.
Fourth-The conduct of the plant
if and defendant at. about and after
the making of the contract are to
be considered i'll judging its good or bad
| faith.
Fifth-If the jury find that the de-
| PENDANT promised tue plaintiff in
good faith to marry her, the burden of
| proof rests upon him to establish by a
| preponderance OF evidence defense or
release, and it would not be a defense
that he had illicit relations with her. or
she told him OF illicit relations with
others.
SiXth-If before the contract there
was intercourse between the two
and the defendant knew that she was
previously uuchaSte, it constitutes no
! defense.
Seventh-If she informed him that
she had been impure with Rhodes,
that constitutes no defense.
Eighth-The secret marriage does not
constitute defense.
Ninth-If promises were not made I'M
til after the secret marriage, it does not
constitute a defense.
Tenth-If the jury find for the plaint-
if they are to consider the prospective
advantages to the plaintiff from the
marriage. the injury to her feelings,
reputation. and chance of earning a
livelihood by the breach of promise,
and may award exemplary damages as
well.
Eleventh-If the jury find that the
| plaintiff was chaSte save with the de-
/ PENDANT, and that the attempt to i'm
peach her character was made for the
purpose of defense. they may consider
the fact in awarding damages.
Instructions for the defense:
First-Before the plaintiff can recover
the jury must believe. from all the evil
dence. that contract was entered
into between the plaintiff and defend
ant to become husband and wife.
Second-If the Jury find that state
ments were made>in the presence Of, or
TO third parties. that they were engaged
to be married, and such were made pur-
suant to an understanding, for the pur-
pose of deceiving third persons, such
statements are not to be taken as con-
shutting or evdencing contract.
Third-The burden OF proof to estab-
tablish the contract is upon the plaintiff
Fourth-If before the contract the
plaintiff was guilty of lewd or unchaste
conduct with other men, unknown to
the defendant, he was not bound by the
contract and may avail himself of such
defense, whether at the time of his re-
fusal he knew of the conduct or not
Fifth-If the jury believe that the
plaintiff was guilty of unchaste con-
duct with other men, unknown to the
| defendant. they must find for him. even