Year: 1876

Mr.. Choate shook his head 10 Indicate that he did
not believe he had which created utter In the au-
dlence


Mr. Beach next quoted from sStarkcy on Evidence"
and say that IL the defendant had fabricated
a false theory told improbable and unreasonable
story, his word not be taken more worthy OF
credence than that OF the plaintiff. II he had sworn
falsely he proigate In the nrst place. and In the
second place perJured witness He for jury
TO condemn The plaintiff II they would but TO not let
u be said that the defendants story about his emotions
and feelings toward the plaintiff and his intentions in
her regard is believed by twelve men OF common
sense. There was not man. no matter how free from
the tant OF SIM who had read heard the testimony
given by the defendant, who believed that his
intentions had been always pure In bis relations
iendan, and the plain:ifr She said she fell on the
street aud he to assistance, that he after
ward went 70 her house 70 visit me family while iors
He says that Immediately after the accident she began
TO be proiuse in her thanks and tnat the two chat
ninth to Fifth avenue The defendant said he
followed her because ~ would have been ndecorous
10 leave her while she Was thanking hlmhis service
to her was such great act OF bravery He moreover
said he had exchanged cards then and there and had
day opposite stewarts store Yet he had Also sa,d
thar he had never entertained an impure thought con-
corning her how came i, then that he made an
appointment with q strange girl he the father OF
grown up girls the stately Spanard who had moved
through this suit as II II was outrage to question
bis honor who had detected in the innocent gambos
OF the girl


vIcIousxEss


and who had condemned her in his own house for
sleeping with her door open OF hot summers night!
Why did Del Vale make that appointment He had
explained II by saying that he saw someth ng attract
i've her appearance. He did call 10 address
the card Oh no that would not have been con-
ssient with the rules which govern Spanish courtesy
In counseps opinion u WAS consistent for him
as he had done because his conduct was consistent
with the license OF Spanish courtesy II
ceded that the plaintiff was pure gir before he met
her. Was II not improbable, then, that a girl VINO
was employed as teacher IN respectable families
one OF The worst pubhc resorts In the
cyy Her story confirmed by the test-
mony OF her sister Adele, who had testified
that he brought her nome IN a carriage The plaintiff
claimed that he urged private marriage. She had
testified that whom she was ABOUT 70 ieavc his house in
Poughkcepse he told her he would be her best rend
that the compromise made in CuDa would be removed
and all would be right. When on leaving the house
expected to be The mistress o she had lost
the priceless jewel oil her honor. when notwthstnnd.
ing degradation the Of his love and the
promises oi his iuture protection gave her new hope
was ii wonderful she should have written that letter
in which she said that unuer his roofree she had
passed the happest, and, al the same time, the most
miserable hours oil her ieY What there that
weighed her heart down soy Who had those
miserable hourss There i was in that letter Of June
When she wrote ~ impore you Tor your chidren's
sake not to break your sacred promise TO
me and drive to desperation and the
your enemy, Mr.. Del Waller" What was that sacred
promses What had he done to excite her desperationi
Look ut his answcr-that while he willing help
the distressed he was unwilling TO constitute himself
"proteciOr OF one SO unworthy OF protection. Her
unworthiness was whaty Gong on horseback In the
morning und while reclining innoccntly on sofa
posing pretty foot and ankle aud sleeping of a hot
summer night, with her bedroom door open What
conservator OF virtue-wha hater was this veteran
dcbauchee OF everything that even looked like in
dccency Mr.. Beach here read from DIR. Pacy on cvi-
dencs, and quoted the OF certain well
H., who, historians say, hanged the
day he was condemned. while other historians say he
was condemned on u Saturday and beh.aded the fol-
lowing Monday Yet, as Palcy remarks no reader OF
English history doubted that the individual was
cuted In the lace OF this illustration Of the rule OF
evidence Mr. Beach said that the mistake Of the PLAIN
TIFF as 10 the date Of


THE PURCHASE or THE RING


was quite natural The counsel then took up hur-
riesly, as his limited time was drawing to a close.
and dissec.ed them show tha. they not to Le
believed. He ridIculed the testimony Of Alvarez
his being able to remember the hrst Sunday OF June,
1875, because he had on that day every masses
said Tor a dead friend whose name he did not know
He asked The jury whom they would believe as 10


THAT SCENE IN THE HOTEL ROYAL.


the plaintiff the bell boys Their testimony had
been confronted by hers alone, no had no doubt
the jury had up their minds from The manner Of
those witnesses that they to be believed
The counsel referred to the evidence OF Mrs Quacke
bos and remarked that Il was nothing 10 the dscredt
OF the plaintiff she had testified that did not
recoect tho conversation Mrs. Quackenbos said she
had had with her. 1t may have taken place, and yet
the plaintiff. may have been convinced that she had
heard 1t from her own lips. Mr. Beach here read the
letter OF confession, and asked the jury how
dcnce against her, inasmuch it addressed to q
whom she was engaged to be married. II the
be called by The OF wife; she would 20
desoiale through tho rest Of her liie finally TO lie
down grave lonely and infamous. He closed
by cxhortng the jury verdict in favor of the
plaintiff and by uoing sound OF warning to
all the hbertines and debauchcs they could not
with impunity carry on their niamy IN this COM


The plaintiffs mother and sister were much affected
while Mr Beach was speaking and the pu,ntif herself
curing the closing part Of his address bowed her head
in her hands and wept bitterly


THE JUDGES CHARGE.


Judge Donohue Immediately delivered his CHARGE
which occupied over an hour IN tho delivery He in
struccd the jury that they should leave out all feeling
dence aions-to act exactly they would a
IN which they we're party 10 be judged by Jury Hc
tho plaintiff; tor ner to prove her charge against
the defendant TO the jury's satisfaction, and II they
had any reasonable doubt upon any essential point they
should hold against her There was but issue in
the casc--ihe question whether promise OF marriage
had boen gwen by the defendant the plaintin IL
was admitted both sides that he never intended to
marry her Tho next thing they had TO consider
ihe question of damages. There was feature Of
the case which struck him rs extraordinary. The
plaintiffs counsel conlendcd that the defendant had
devised q plan Tor the seduction OF the plantl and
that he induced her to leave her notners When she
went to the Hotel Royal the drst person she
Gated With was her mother. Therefore the latter
knew OF what the plaintiff doing, yet the mother
jury draw their own inierences whether the
plaintiff being nj the hotel, her mother
tent with The story that she was induced to leave
homo by the defendant, or whether she bad been
forced to leave home on account OF her hthers con-
duct, a5 Mr. Del Vale contended. There another
most extraordinary feature in The case. How did tho
palhtiii come to 20 TO Pouehkeepslcg She claims
that she engaged to be married Del Vale before
Went. He claimed that there was engagement
OF marriage between them that she told him that she
had been driven from homo by her fathers conduct
and that she begged The defendant TO employ her.
Del Vale testified that he insisted, before taxing her
to see her mother about IT. and that he did see her
and that he expressed his regret that tho plaintiff
had lett home and that the mother SAID
It could not be helped THIS testimony OF
the defendant wholly uncontradcted. Tho
mother was not called TO contradict It. The Judge
then instructed the jury that the seduction was no
cause In Itself, but that II aggrava-
ton OF the broken promise TO marry the defendant
had made sucn promise Tho defence claimed that
man contemplating marriage would not take mis-
aiianced bride to such place as Soars, whi.s the
paintis counsel contended that the defendant all
contep plated the hnal seduction OF the plant
The trouble about this view OF the case was the Judge
said, that even II the plaintiff was herself inexpe.
riencea. she had mother who Was n woman OF expe-
renee, resident OF this STATE, whose children had
been born here and who was acquainted with