Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1894-04-10


between the plaintiff and deIenoans 10
become husband ana wife.
2. If the jury find that statements
were made in the presence OIL or TO-
third parties that they were engaged 10
be married, aud such statements were
made pursuant to an understanding Tor
the purpose OF deceiving third persons,
such statements are not TO be taken as
constituting or evidencing contract:
3. The burden of proof to establish
the contract is upon the plaintifr.
4. II before the contract the plalntlH
was guilty of lewd or unchaste cononct
with other men, unknown to the de-
fendant, be was not bound by the con-
tract and may avail himself OF such de-
Tense, whether at the time OF his relusai
he knew of the conduct or not.
5. If the jury believe that the plain
tiff was guilty of unchaste conduct Win
other men, being unknown TO the oe-
fendant, they must find for him, even II
knowledge of it. did not come TO him
until after the refusal.
6. The jury may in mitigation OF dam
ages consider the plaintiffs character
and conduct il the same were bad ana
| IL the plaintiff was not seduced oy the
defendant, may consider her want OF
virtue.
Shortly before II o'clock Attorney
Carlisle opened the argument Tor the
plaintiff. He reminded the jury that
all were fellow citizens OF the District
engaged in the performance OF duty
to the parties in the case and to the
community. He claimed to have made
good and temperate promises OF his
opening statement and more, to prove
them by creditable witnesses othsr than
than his unfortunate client. That there
were
THREE PARTIES TO THE CASE
had been we'll said by Attorney Butter
worth earlier In the case. They were
plaintiff, defendant and community.
The jury had seen in the court room
daily representatives of the press OF
| the whole country. While some OF the
facts and the catastrophe had hap
pened in the District OF Columoi the
plaintiff was resident of Kentucky, OF
the same congressional district as the
defendant who came TO Washington
merely as temporary representative
OF thai State. The plaintiff was a
| friendess woman of humble birth. the
defendant man of nation reputation
Later il would be the duty OF the
speaker to say what the community
! had a right TO expect of the defendant,
and how greatly had it been to his in
terest to find everything he could
AGAINST THE CHARACTER
OF the poor girl. 1t could fairly be as
sumed that all his influence, wide ac-
ouaintance and family connection had
been used to rake up whatever he could
detrimental to her character. The result
had been seen. Madeline Pollard was
the daughter of an humble saddler, =
man of good character, of some learn
| ing, OF taste for books, which he had
endeavored to impart To his daughter
until he died. Mr.. Carlisle, who has
himself been the Master OF one OF the
! leading Masonic lodges OF the city, re-
minded the jury OF the Masonic funeral
of Mr.. Pollard Col. Breckenridge had
known her father. and according to his
version of that first meeting on the
train, had inquired for him, apolog gizlng
when he was told that the father had
died. Ths lawyer sketched the early
life Of Miss Pollard as disclosed by the
testimony, a life free from sander or re-
proach
UNTIL SHE NET THE COLONEL.
Mr.. Carlisle asserted that all the at
tempts of the defense to impeach
the character of the plaintiff had
failed; alludiug briefly to theengage-
ment of the plain tiff to William
Wood. He next invited the attentn OF
the jury to tin type portrait OF Miss
/ Pollard at the period when she hrst
met Colonel Breckenridge, and said:
Look at that girl and then look at
the plaintiff, remembering how little,
the testimony for the defense says, she
has changed since then"
The white haired Kentucky Congress
man sat facing the jury, so they had no
trouble in seeing him as they lifted
their faces as though pulled by one
string. Taking up that meeting In the
train, where first the lives OF the two
came together and where their testi-
mony began to differ, as they said, the
LAWYER remarked, she has told you that
there was nothing improper then in her
conduct, nothing to alarm him."
Before we come to this meeting let US
consieer who this defendant was. He
was from one OF the best families OF
Kentucky, mis- father was prominent
! Presbyterian divine, he was blessed with
all the advantages which training and
education could give, he had great per-
sonal talent, he graduated from college
at the early age of Is, in 1857, ne was
admitted to the bar; in 1859 be was mar
ried TO lady Of
ONE OF THE BEST FAMILIES
| in Kentucky, who early died; in 1861
| be was second time married to a lady
so estimable that here on this witness
stand, in the midst OF this case, he could
not forbear a tribute In his voice to that
women who had been the mother OF his
seven children.
! AS he tells you, he had haSpy home,
was beloved by his wife and children,
ne coufesses that no man ever had less
excuse for what he did, that no man has
had greater advantages, that no words
! could paint the depths TO which he fell.
This was the man who met the school
girl on the train"
From this point, Mr.. Carlisle turned
back TO James Rhodes, who was dead,
he said, and who could not be called.
The letters from Madeline Pollard to
him had been read and disclosed nc
hint Of the relations which Mr.. Breck'
inrldge had attempted to charge existed
between them. Moreover the descrip-
tion given by Mrs. Brown Of mis- charac'
ter and of his Difference toward the
young girl had been heard. 1t was moi
extraordinary that she should fee
alarmed II Rhodes attempted 10 compel