The Brattleboro daily reformer. (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1913-1955, 1915-04-06
81. 900 Verdict Set Aside by
Judge Thomas in Hart
ford, Conn.
CLEARLY AGAINST
WEIGHT OF EVIDENCE
Case Alleging Unlawful Restraint in
Brattleboro Retreat Now Stands Elk
actly as Before Trial - DR.. Smith,
One of Defendants, Dead.
Especial to The Reformer.)
rnrr,rrlN-nrN g. Al

HABIT Ohl. AOHH.s .8IIll ..
Mrs. Elizabeth A. c. Holman of
Watertownville, Me, formerly of Hart
ford, Conn.,, the former wife Of Rev.
Cranston Brenton, who divorced her,
has met with q reverse, Judge Edwin ).
Thomas in the United States court set
ting aside the verdict rendered III her
favor by the jury in the court on June
2l. This verdict was for Mrs. Holman
to recover $4,000 from her former
husband and from DR.. Paul Waterman.
Dr. Oliver G.. Smith, who died last
week, was a defendant in that suit,
but the jury found that Mrs. Holman
was not entitled to recover from him.
In addition to setting aside the verdict
as to Mr.. Brenton and DIR. Waterman,
Judge Thomas denied the motion to set
aside the verdict in favor of DR..
Smith.
Mrs. Holman claimed that the three
had conspired against her, and that as
a result of the conspiracy she was
committed to the Brattleboro Retreat
against her will, and held as prisoner,
and she alleged that the only way she
obtained her release and freedom from
the place was to make a written con
fession that she had had improper re-
wife she now is After her discharge
from the Retreat Mrs. Holman brought
an action for divorce from her hus-
band and he filed cross-bin, charging
his wife with a statutory ofrense. Sub
isequcntly she withdrew her complaint
and the case went to trial under the
cross-bill and Mr. Brenton was granted
q divorce.
l
granted Mrs. Brenton was married to
| Mr.. Holman and subsequently she
brought suit in the United States court
against the three defendants, charging
them with conspiracy against her. The
The trial lasted several days and
the court room was crowded each dav.
/ The jury found for Mrs. Holman TO
recover damages of $4,000 as against
DR.. Waterman and Mr.. Brenton, and it
found for DIR. Smith as against Mrs.
Holman. The lawyers for Mr. Holman
and DR.. Waterman filed motions that
the verdict be set aside and the lawyer
for Mrs. Holman filed motion that
the verdict as to DIR. Smith be set
aside. AS indicated, the verdict
against Mr.. Brenton and Dr. Water
man is set aside, and the motion that
| the verdict as to Dr.. Smith be set aside
is denied.
Judge Thomas, in his memorandum
| of decision, says that the verdict was
so clearly against the weight of the
evidence as to indicate that the jury
/ did not correctly apply the law to the
facts in evidence, or were governed by
Ignorance, prejudice, corruption or
ipartiality. The opinion which the
judge fled is of considerable length
4 and while the motions were argued
some time ago, the Judge says that lie
had withheld his decision until this
time purposely. He says that Mrs
Holman s oral and written evidence is
conclusive against her in the following
particulars:
= Her admission that no force was
used at any time. =
Her conceded voluntary signing of
the application for admission to the
lBrattleboro Retreat, as voluntary pa
tient, and her admission that she I'm.
derstood what she was signing
g Her admission over her own sig
nature in her letter to her then hus
band (Brenton), that she went 80 Brat
tleboro Voluntarily
Her admission, over her own SIG
nature in her letter to her attorney
that she was at Brattleboro voluntarily
and directing him not to help her legoi
ly."
"The contents of all of her letter,
written by her during her three wee ks
stay at the retreat, to her husband
her attorney and her physician, clearl,
indicates that at no time did She re
gard herself as having been influenced
either by force, fraud or by misrepre