The Richmond palladium and sun-telegram. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1907-1939, 1908-04-22
Attorney Study Thinks He
Could Not Be Timid and
Act in Mrs. Smiths Home
AS Witnesses Stated.
ARGUMENTS CLOSED
LATE THIS AFTERNOON.
Attorneys EIoquentIy Present.
ed Their Case in Closing the
Trial and Judge Fox Care
fully Instructed Jury.

Argument was completed in the
sSmith-Vaughan breach of promise case
This afternoon and the jury was given
the question to decide about 1870
n'clOck. There has not been a case
heard in Wayne circuit court in recent
!years in which there was arrayed such
a class of legal talent as has been in
volved in this proceeding. Neither
has there been a case in which such
splendid argument was presented by
counsel of both litigants. Following
the arguments. the court read the in
structiOns to the jury. How long the
jury will labor with the question is
merely matter of conjecture The
time has been estimated at various
periods. but it is likely that unless a
disagreement arises that prevails 10
the end. not any great length of time
will be required.
The unexpected turn in the state of
affairs that arose yesterday afternoon
precipitated matters and Henry t..
Johnson was called upon 10 open the
argument for the plaintiff when unpre-
pared. He met the emergency in A
capable manner. however. and present
ed the details of the case in a clear and
logical manner. He referred in par
ticular TO the claims advanced by the
plaintiff that John y. Vaughan, the de
fendant had promised TO marry her at
various intervals, and it was because
Eof this fact, she submitted to his EN-
braces and terms of endearment as re
ferred to in the evidence.
The court allowed each member of
counsel two hours for argument and
Mr.. Johnson consumed all the time Of
yesterday afternoon. following the an
nOuncement of the defense that it rest
ed its case
Mr. Johnson said in part:
Owing 10 the destruction of my IL
brary fire and the loss of my legal
home and the demands of other clients.
I have been unable TO prepare a
chronological review of this case.
do feel. however sufficiently conver-
Nsant with the details 70 relate to YOU
the facts and certaintes of the case
When a man promises to marry a
woman and later breaks that PROMISE
the woman has legal right to secure
damages She has the right to ask
and demand from magnanimous jus
THAT is this case.
IL,
promised to marry her. The defend
ant says he did not That is the ques-
tion in this case. There is no defense
in this case except from the one man
who Is accused of the wrong pro-
fpose to put this case before you by the
process of elimination. We will get
down 70 bed rock by taking out the
testimony of the witnesses brought in
here by the defense,
Can't Believe Vaughan.
II propose to demonstrate to you
you cant believe one word of the testi-
mony of John Vaughan. don't want
10 call him liar but | propose to
prove to YOU in a parliamentary man
ner that that man has not represented
The truth to you,
Mr. Johnson stated there was the
probability of an error of omission in
the telephone cOmpany's report.
which did not show a toll charge
against Mr.. Naughan'S telephone for
the use as testified to by witnesses for
the plaintiff
He reviewed in detail the points OF
the evidence as brought out by wit
nesSes. Particular attention was paid
the letters alleged to have been writ
ten Mrs. Smith by Mr.. Vaughan. The
jury was asked to consider the testimo-
ny as presented by Miss Bode. the
house keeper. as that OF a woman who
had been employed for fourteen years
hy the defendant and desired TO CON
tinue in the position.
Repeatedly in his argument Mr..
Johnson made the assertion Mr.
Vaughan had reriured himself on the
witness stand in offering testimony as
he did,
Jessup Opens Defense.
Wilfred Iessup opened the argu-
ment for the defense This morning.
He said
The burden Of proof to prove to
the jury the contract sued upon rests
upon the plaintiff. 1t is a contract
of no greater sanctity because marri-
age is concerned than any other into
which people enter. We must OF
course rely mainly on the testimony
of tne plaintiff,
Testimony Changed
Il would call your attention to the
original complaint in this case. 1t
reads blank day of blank year. \ man
Of Mr.. Robbins experience would not
draw I'D. such a complaint without a.