Year: 1875

preme Court in session at Trenton yesterday the
Noice- Brown trover case was continued Counsel on
both sides allowed half hour each in which to
up the The court room was well filled with
respectable audience the sympathes Of which un-
doubtedly seemed to be on the side of the plaintiff
Miss Noico gave evident signs Of mental well ply
steal suffering, while on the other hand, Mr. Brown,
her alleged betrayer showed his indifference tho
result by being absent on Friday the rst day Of the
trial, he present and testified in his behalf In
the most stoical manner possible The history Of the
is as follows


In April 1873 Miss Noce and Mr.. Brown sailed from
New York for Brazil in the steamship Merrmao After
stopping in the latter country short time they went to
Liverpool, England, where they remained until tho
following December, when Miss Noice sailed for New
York and arrived there after a tempestuous voyage
Miss Noice alleges that Brown took her along with him
the preence of marrying her in Brazil and that he
subsequently changed his mind and said he would
marry her in Liverpool This promise he failed
to keep, but, instead, concluded to send her
back to her home in Princeton. Before starting from
New York tor Brazil he provided her with lux
urious outfit and wardrobe, which he gave her as a
gift This outfit and wardrobe taken from her by
force she alleges, in Liverpool and he compelled her
to embark for New York with scarcely enough clothing
to dccenty cover her. Brown had been married to
another woman, but obtained divorce from his wife



His mother is said very wealthy He and she re-
side in Princeton, does also Miss Noice.


Mr.. Johnson the plaintiffs counsel in summing up
the case made vigorous Speech and at times became
exceedingly warm in his remarks He asked the jury
to give verdict in favor Of his client for


BLACK yILLASY.


He said the defendant had no soul and if he had it
must be leather soul After all his wrong doing to
the plaintiff he into OF justice and wants
to poute its fountain. There is conclusive evidence
given by the defendant himself that has periured his
own soul That the gift given by him to the plaintiff
for good purpose the law must presume for there
is no evidence that 1t was given for anything else Not
a single stain has been tho character OF tha
plaintiff in this trial He asked would any
humane abandon woman within the limits
Of large city, far away from her home, and leave
her unprotected this defendant has done? A poor
defenceless wronged womani He steals $50 from her
and gives her back $40 and calls square 1t writ
every lineament Of his features that when no
was sending her to New York he contemplated she
would be at the


BOTTOM OF THE DEEP BLUE SEA
soon after she embarked. In the month OF December
he sent her from tropical climate New York with
out sufficient clothing He destroyed her life by da
bolical act


After commenting on the evidence and quoting
authorities to sustain his views the of
and conversion Mr.. johnson concluded by reading a
couple of verses of poetic composition which, he said
defendant had at one time written for the plaintiff


Mr. John Frelinghuysen Hageman summed up the
defendants case. He said il this was between
John Denn and Richard Fenn there would be no dim
Guilty in obtaining verdict for the defendant, and
there would be very little embarrass the jury. But
unfortunately the jury will be influenced by exranco,s
Considerations in spite of their of justice But
they aside all extraneous matter. The par
ties here have peculiar relation They are not man
and wfe-they relation to each other-yct both
had lived together in Liverpool and Rio Janeiro He
felt that the had been tried insulicently
and very hastily. There was no question about
the wardrobe In all his sins the defendant did not
endeavor TO fitch away the property he gave the plain
at Stewards at cost OF s7oo The property that is
claimed he does not dispute. He contended that the
diamonds watch and chain and rifle he did not give
her. The plaintiff had valued her articles up
HIGH mGHl mGH


The jury should not believe everything the plaintiff
said. There was conhct between the statements OF
tho two pares and in weighing the evidence the jury
should consider that the burden Of proof the
plaintiff Both of them stand in very questionable po-
stion although their lives and characters remain unn-
peached in this trial They young peope-both in
fault Counsel did not come into this Court to Justify
his client for he had brought suffering on his mother
and family. And the plaintiff has


BROUGHT HER FATHER TO THE GRAVE.


Counsel here analyzed the evidence and explained the
law governing the and asked the Court to charge,
as matters OF law, as follows


ErSt-That If the property of tho plaintiff Is found
by jury have been ntrused by her TO the OF
the defendant IL shall have been lost through his
negligence misfortune this action OF rover is not
sustanable The plaintiffs remedy is by action OF
assumpslt The verdict must be for the defend


Second-That there Is no evidence Of such wrong
full taking othe property of the plaintiff by the defend
ant as amounts in law 10 a conversion.


Tird-That there is no evidence Of any such Illegal
assumption by the defendant Of ownership Of the prop
erty Of the plaintiff in question as will amount to
Fourl-If the defendant came lawfully into the pos
session Of the property of the plaintiff his detention OF
the same became wrongful and amounts TO a
sion only after the lawful demand for the by tho
plaintiff Of the defendant and refusal by him to
deliver the same to her.


Fifh-There lawful demand and refusal proved
in this


Sir1--Thc burden OF proof in the case is on the
In conclusion Mr. Hageman din tho name OF
Justice the jury do what Is Justice Let them draw
I
these parties are wrecked and ruined let them sit
the ashes Let those wayward children return and try
tc do better in the future.


THE CHARGE


The Chief Justice IN his charge 70 the jury said that
| in of its features Il was very uncommon case
| The jury should throw aside all extraneous
| influences and rendor verdict according
to the evidence and their conscience The jury must
be satisfied that the plaintiff took the property and ap
piled il to his own He would charge directed by
counsel in the first and second instructions on the
third and fourth he refused TO charge On the fifth and
| sixth he would charge asked There lawful
demand REFUSAL and the burden Of proof rested
the plaintiff The main question In the case is DO you
believe tho property left with the defendant3
The plaintiff does not stand before you entirely unm-
peached She is grievousy at fault The defendant
| ruined the PLAINTIFF took her abroad, deserted
her on the streets Of foreign city and left her
alone unprotecedthat is if you believe her evidence.
the bench OFT the BENCH the Chief Justice said,
he could not help but TO characterize the conduct of the
| defendant 10 the plaintiff as


BARRARoUsLY CRuEI.


In weighing the evidence you must take into consd-
GRAFTON the standing Of the parties II the defendant ~
the villain he is represented to be OF course ne Is un-
worthy Of belief That you TO decide you be-
cvo the story Of the plaintiff you must find her YER
dict for 900 25 the amount she claims from the time
Of tho conversion Of the property


The charge, though brief was very lucid and pithy
and embraced full explanation OF oil the leading law
points in the case.


The jury then retired, and after an absence OF fifty
minutes returned into court with verdict for tho
plaintiff Of 81 ss7 10. The announcement oi TINS re-
suit seemed to give satisfaction to every one present In
the crowded court room.


Tho defendant Brown says he will 90 TO Jail rather
than nay n cent IL Is rmored that he will be sued
for seduction The breach OF promise Of marriage
between these parties will DO argued on demurrer
before Inc term Of the Supreme Court, which
Trenton on the FIRST Tuesday OF next month


POST OFFICE AFFAIRS.


The receipts al the Now York Post o1ce during the