The Washington times., 1894-04-04
His DEAR SISTER LOUISE
Mrs. Lowell's Story About a Letter
She Copied for Col. Breckinridge.
HE SAYS HR NEVER WROTE IT
Envelopes Addressed to Miss Pollard-The
Typewriters Memorandum Book-Judge
Wilson Continues His Torturing Cross-Ex-
animation Of the Kentucky Congressman.

mony In the Pollard Breckenridge trial yester-
day to permit the Introduction of evidence
that Col Breckinridge had carried on type
writer correspondence with Madeline Pollard
from the House of Representatives In 1886.
The demand from the plaintiffs lawyers to
be permitted to follow this course brought
a delicate question Of law before the Judge.
It was conceded that documents might be
brought into case and witness questioned
upon it in cross-examination from which to
lay the basis for contradiction, but whether
the existence Of a missing document could be
asserted and the defendant asked whether he
wrote 1t, was another question, a question
which Judge Bradley decided in the affirma-
tive after listening to arguments and con-
sulting authorities. He held, however, that
the witnesses could not be asked to give their
recollection of the contents of the letters.
Accordingly Mrs. Louise Lowell, who con-
Quoted a business In typewriting and stenog-
raphy at the Capitol in the year of 1886, and
had been discovered by the plaintiff last Sun
day, stated that she had copied the mysterious
letters upon a typewriter for the colonel and
had also addressed for him q package of en-
street. Lexington. Kentucky" having made
an entry of the address in a note book which
she produced, but which did not entirely sub
stantiate her statement because it seemed to
have been used in 1887 and 1888.
Miss Pollard also appeared in speaking
part once more to testify that she had received
the letters in question. During her brief ap-
pearance, the lawyers had their hands full en-
deavoring to make her confine herself to an
swering the questions directed to her, for in
her untrammeled utterances when on the
stand before she scored some OF the most tell
ing points for her side.
Thereafter the programme was a continu
ance of the fencing between the Congress
man from Kentucky and the ex-Congressman
from Indiana. Both Col. Breckinridge and
ex-Judge Wilson are lawyers of brilliant
parts, and no exhibition of its kind approach
ing the thrust and parry of the two when
pitted as examiner and witness has been
heard for years. 1t was enjoyed by an
audience worthy of its merits, for beside the
usual varying corps OF congressional
attendants and lawyers, there was a we'll
known Methodist clergyman In the audience,
and retired Judge OF the District court
luxuriated in seat beside Judge Bradley.
Col. Breckinridge made iron-clad denials
of the testimony OF Mrs. Lowell beside con-
tradicting Miss Pollard at many points. Judge
Wilson was disposed to drop into a vein of
as "a fatherly looking and perfectly respect
able gentleman like yourself He laid the
foundation for more testimony in rebuttal by
obtaining denial that servant at the fash
ionable boarding-house where Miss Pollard
had lived had ever seen her using in his pres
ence that work basket formerly belonging to
his dear wife, which the colonel swears he
did not give the plaintiff. Everybody is
guessing the nature of the new line Of exam
ination which Mr.. Wilson announced that he
would take up this morning.
Judge Bradley does not seem to relish the
testimony which Col. Breckenridge is giving.
The judge occupies chair near the witness
box. but On a raised platform, behind a
ponderous desk. Whenever Col Breckin-
ridge begins to talk the judge wheels his |
chair around so that the heavy upholstered |
back is turned toward the witness box, and |
directs his gaze toward far corner window. |
reads legal documents. or closes his eyes. |
This same position was assumed by his honor |
soon after Col. Breckenridge stepped into the |
box this morning, after hall an hour had |
been consumed in examining candidates for |
the regular April jury and excusing them |
until next Monday.
Mr.. Butterworth ut once opened the ques- |
ton of the admissability OF the correspond
ence alleged to have been held with Madeline |
Pollard in 1856. Judge Wilson in reply as
sured the court that the evidence had not |
been discovered until Sunday and asserted |
that he proposed to put the witness on the |
stand at once that Col. Breckenridge might |
not be taken by surprise and that he might |
have ample time TO make explanation. The |
question was raised by Mr.. Butterworth |
whether the discussion of the proposed testi-
mony should be had before the jury.
The question, said Judge Bradley seemed |
to be whether evidence tending to show that
paper had at one time existed should be offered |
at this time to lay n foundation to contradict |
the witness. Mr.. Butterworth in replying. |
said that while Mr.. Wilson had spoken for |
himself in saying that the evidence had only |
been discovered Sunday it was not apparent |
that he had spoken for the other counsel and
his client. whereupon Mr.. Carlisle insisted
upon adding his assurances to those of Judge
Wilson. and considerable asperity was devel-
oped among the lawyers over the point.
Then Mr.. Butterworth continued to the
effect that the plaintiff was trying to prove
its whole case in rebuttal. and Mr.. Carlisle
responded that since the defendant had de-
MED having written to Miss Pollard in 1886,
anything to disproye that statement was
legitimate rebuttal and the Interpolation of
evidence to prove the existence OF letters
written then for basis of cross-examination,
was manifestly legitimate.
Mr.. Shelby replied that this was clearly
in chief and in no sense rebuttal.
II the testimony were known 20 the plaintiff
it was constructively and legally known TO
her counsel. 1t was fundamental principle,
he argued, that if witness was to be exam
med upon the contents Of a paper it was cs-
;ential that the paper should first be placed
IN evidence, since it was the best evidence of
is own contents.
Judge Bradley inquired whether, if the
etter was in existence and Col. BreckInridge
ienied it. it could not be produced in rebuttal,
md Mr.. Shelby responded that even under
hose circumstances it could not since it