Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1894-12-05
plaintiff SCORED
Verdict for Defendant in Gordon
Alienation Suit.
JUDGE BRADLEY'S CAUSTIC REMARKS
Says the Case Should Never Have
Been Tried.
MIR. LESTER ENUMERATED

1t took the jury just one hundred and
eighty seconds this morning TO decide in
favor of the defendant in the case of Full
ton r. Gordon against Wharton E. Lester,
in which the plaintiff claimed S2o0OO dam
ages because of the alleged alienation of
his wifes affections by Mr.. Lester young
member of the District bar.
The testimony in the case closed Just
after The Stars report of yesterdays pro-
ceedings closed. In rebuttal, the plaintiff
called Albert Bowman, a ten-year-old col
ored boy, by whom it was proposed to con-
tradict Mr.. Lester, by having the youngster
state that he had seen the defendant more
than once at Falls Church. Va. But, on an
objection that such testimony should have
been introduced in chief, the boy was not
allowed to testify. The plaintiff then an
nounced the close of his case, and Judge
Bradley inquired if counsel wished TO argue
the case before the jury. When counsel
Tor the plaintiff intimated that they did'
the court rather disconnected them Dy IN
curing, rs there anything to go to the
jury on?'' Judge Bradley's inquiry caused
sc me politely subdued laughter at the eN-
pense of the plaintiff his counsel remark
ing, with all respect due the court. we
must note an exception to your honors
remark"
Missing Witness.
Judge Bradley wished the arguments be-
lore the jury to commence at once, but he
hnally agreed to adjourn the case until
this morning. When the trial was resumed
this morning the court room was more
crowded gan upon any other day OF the
case A ~ moments We're spent in dis
cussing the instructions to the jury, when
MIR. George X French, of counsel for the
piaintin, explained that they had been I'M
able 20 secure the attendance of one of
their witnesses one whom they had stated
In their opening would testify to improper
conduct on the part of the defendant with
Mrs. Gordon. They had not. said Mr..
French wished to bring the witness into
court on an attachment, but they were
quite willing that the court should punish
the witness for contempt.
MIR. W. q. Johnson. of counsel for Mr..
Lester, warmly retorted that the remarks
of Mr.. French were highly improper, and
intimated that they were uttered to in
fiuence the jury: MIR. Johnson was pro-
ceeding to inform the court that the wit
ness in question present most all of
yesterday, and in easy reach of the other
side, when Judge Bradley impatiently cut
the controversy short by remarking that
the less said about the matter the better.
Mr.. French arose to reply to Mr.. John
son, when Judge, Bradley ordered him to
take his seat. THAT Mr.. French unwillingly
did. and a mSmeht later announced that
the plaintin would waive his opening 10
the jury. 81. 70.
III you do that" said Judge Bradley. Il
shall take the case from the jury"
several Tits.
In the fewest words possible, without
stating on what the plaintiff relied to sub
stantiate his claini. Mr.. French addressed
the jury, speaking but for a minute or two.
Mr.. j. j. Darlington, of the plaintiffs
counsel, sarcastically remarked when Mr..
French sat down, that there had been said
nothing worthy of nor requiring a reply.
TO which Judge BRADLEY aSSented.
Mr.. French iahen said he would note an
exception to the courts ruling that he
should make fuller opening, when Judge
Bradley sternly remarked that the court
had made no ruling in the matter, but had
merely assented to Mr.. Darlington's con-
tention that the plaintiff In his opening
should, in all fairness and honor, 50 state
his case as to acouaint the defendant with
all that he relied on.
Judge Brndley's Charge.
Mr. French then sat down, and the de-
PENDANTS counsel stating that they did not
care to address the jury. Judge Bradley
turned toward the jury, and. In man.
ner which will be long remembered, ad
dressed the twelve men as follows:
Gentlemen of the jury. you understand
this case. If you do not, you are more
dull and dumb than / imagine you to be.
1.-The plaintiff in this case claims dam
ages for the cause of action which Is set
out in the declaration, which you can read
SIRE
I'm order to Justify verdict for tn,
plaintiff he must establish his claim by a
preponderance of evidence. You under
stand what that means-you have served
here long enough to understand that. Take
the case and dispose of it,
The Plaintiff Scored.
The jury marched out of the court room
to their consultation room, and in pre-
cisely three minutes time returned with
a verdict in favor of Mr.. Lester. The ver-
diet returned was the one expected, and
then every one bent forward to catch the
following words which Judge Bradley adj
DIRE ssed to the jury the moment the verdict
was formally recorded:
Gentlemen of the jury, the promptness
of your return justiies the wisdom of sub
hitting this case to you without argument.
l do not apprehend a talk of a month
would have done any more than weary you,
for there was nothing when the plaintff
closed his case, for entertaining more than
a suspicion of guilt on the part of the de-
PENDANT, and | doubt whether it would
have justified that. And the jury could
not If the court had been asked to do so.
base it's verdict on a mere suspicious cir
cumStance.
This action ought never to have been
brought. 1t was Matched in inquity ana it
has been attempted to be carried on by the
most Unfair and foul mems, 50 far as the
plaintiff himself is conc erned. He branded
the whole accusation as a lie by his own
conduct ana by MS own ef1O1 Is IN attempt
ing to induce his wife tC return to i've
with him; and that jury could have ever
been induced, under such circumstances.
after such conduct on his part, to have
brought in verdict for the plaintiff would
have passed human belief
Il have no doubt that you have been i'm
pressed all through this trial with the fact
that this case was never intended to be
tried except in the newspapers, and that
this charge was made against this young
man Tor the purpose of blackeiing his fu-
ture. That itshah not succeeded is due to
your prompt verdict and the fact that the
court, as a msttet of duty on it's part, has
required that. this case should have an
early trial II
Il congI a uaates you that your term of
service is ended rand / thank you for the
faithful service you have rendered.
Mr.. Lester. fwaSl then warmly conSratu-
lated by his fouRsel and friends, and the
trial was thing!Sf the past.
DIDN'T atTAkE PLACE.