Transcript of August 13, 1884 Daily Alta California article titled: "Tyler's still talking" - about the Senator Sharon trial
TYLER STILL TALKING.
Resumption of His Argument Yesterday.
MISS BRACKETT ASSAILED.
Mammy Pleasance's Pleasant Prospects Portrayed and the "Sen." Consigned to the Lower Regions.
"If your Honor please," said Mr. Tyler on resuming his argument yesterday morning, "I suppose that if I can show you that Mr. Sharon swore falsely in a material matter, his whole evidence will be rejected by you. I can show you where he deliberately perjured himself twice. In the answer to the complaint the defendant virtually swore that he had no sexual intercourse with the plaintiff, and his counsel, in opening the case, backed him up by saying that they expected to prove that there had been no such intercourse. On taking the stand Mr. Sharon swore that he had had intercourse with her at periods covering an entire year. I think that your Honor will consider the defendant's statement to Mr. Thorne as a virtual admission that he signed the contract. Another virtual admission of the contract is his conversation with Mrs. Pleasance, in which he told her that he could prove that the plaintiff had been in trouble with a dozen men since the signing of the contract. The defendant admitted it again by not denouncing as forgeries the contract and dear wife letters when Mr. Clement told him that he had been them. Mr. Newlands suggested the idea of forgery when he asked, and that claim was immediately set up. Either this woman (Sarah was pointed out), is Mrs. Sharon, or she is one of the most infamous blackmailers that ever lived. She has been denounced by the other side as the latter. If she was each, why did she fail to indicate it in her letters to Wm. M. Neilson, who was her confident at the beginning of this case ; she never expected those letters would become public, and in them she probably spoke her whole mind. That letter shows her good faith, and shows that she feared the great power that Sharon's millions could command, would ride rough shod over her truthful and justified claims. I tell you that letter is the work of an honest woman in the agony of despair, at the belief that wealth would defeat her, although she knew that she was his wife. In three of the five "dear wife " letters, an expert testified that the word wife had been traced. We then introduced two others, and he changed his mind. So with the defendant's assertion that there was no improper intercourse between him and the plaintiff. When forced to the wall the defendant himself negatived this claim.
PLAINTIFF'S RELATIONS WITH DEFENDANT.
"I will call your attention to the testimony of the defendant that corroborates the claim of the plaintiff. Mr. Sharon admits that he introduced her to friends in the corridors of the Palace Hotel, that he introduced her to his brother and visited her grandmother with her. He admits going to the theatre with her. He admits he invited her to his daughter's wedding; at the wedding he introduced her to his son and to respectable guests at that wedding. He admits that he treated her better than any other woman with whom he was associated, and yet, in the face of all this, he claims he was paying her $500 a month to be his mistress. I think you and 1 will agree that such a claim is preposterous." Here Tyler branched off into the exhibits of handwriting that he had caused Senator Sharon to make while on the stand. He claimed that, because Mr. Sharon's writing at his instigation was not like that in the "Dear Wife" letters and other exhibits, it betokened him to be dishonest, and showed that he had not written in his usual hand. Mr. Hyde's testimony was next dissected and compared with that of Mr. Gumpel, who Tyler claimed was the best expert in California. Several of the exhibits of writing across folds were handed to the Court for inspection, and counsel spent considerable time in combatting Hyde's theories of the invariable.
DISTURBANCE OF FIBRES
When the pen moved across a break caused by a fold. He held that the "Dear wife" letters were only a small part of strong documentary evidence that could have been introduced in the shape of letters headed "My Dear Allie." These would have been even stronger to him than the letters containing the word wife. "I myself," said counsel, "always addressed my wife in a letter as 'My dear Jennie', her given name, and she addressed me as 'My dear George.' So it is with nine out of ten of married people. Five hundred letters could be examined and not a score of them would be found headed 'My dear wife,' or 'My dear husband.' The relations of these people were such that Mr. Sharon did not require a receipt from her on the payment of money, but Mr. Dobinson, not aware of their relationship, did. But on Mr. Sharon's return these receipts were always returned to her." The testimony of Robert and Martha Wilson was then attacked, Tyler alleging that Wilson had made a contract with Barnes to pay her to retract her original and true statement. At the close of this branch of argument Court adjourned for lunch.
Afternoon Session.
On resuming after recess, Tyler said : "I now come to the testimony of Miss Nellie Brackett. Notwithstanding that she was our witness, I am going to assail her. I will here say that when she took the stand the last time she swore to a willful and deliberate lie. We knew, because she so stated to the plaintiff, that she sold herself for so many pieces of silver, paid to her father. I believe, too, that there was never a more truthful witness in a Court of Justice than this same girl up to the time she was tampered with. With this comment, I shall enter upon a dissection of the testimony of the most important witness in this case — Miss Nellie Brackett. This girl testified that soon after her acquaintance with the plaintiff had commenced she heard that her new friend was Mr. Sharon's mistress, and was about to sever such acquaintance, when the plaintiff convinced her by an exhibition of the contract and some of her letters that she was his wife." Tyler then read the whole of Miss Brackett's direct testimony without comment until he came to the statement of the bedroom scene when Nellie was behind the bureau, which he claimed was established beyond question by the testimony of both Nellie and Sarah. The letter from Miss Brackett to the Senator expressing her hatred was read as what would be the natural outburst of an impulsive, unsophisticated girl, indignant at the harsh treatment of her friend, whom she knew to be friendless and wronged. Mr. Tyler referred to the scene when Mrs. Brackett was on the stand, trying, as he said, to prove her daughter a perjurer. "But time at last sets all things even," he attempted to quote, but got stuck in the middle of the second line and a stage wait occurred until Terry came to his relief.
LAUDATION OF MAMMY PLEASANCE.
Mammy Pleasance's testimony was read, and at the close Tyler said an effort had been made to impeach her by insinuating that she had furnished the babies, for which Mrs. Bell had got $50,000 a piece. They did not prove it by producing the alleged mother of one of the babies, because a little bird had whispered to him that the defendant was the father of that particular child. From this on the laudation of Mammy was wild, eloquent and high flown. "I have known her for twenty-five years," said Mr. Tyler, "and do not believe that the gold of Ophir (Ophir was quoted in the big Board yesterday at 132 cents) would induce her to tell an untruth. For years she has been engaged in finding homes for the children of friendless women whose maternity was due to the debaucheries of wealthy rakes. I tell you that I would rather my soul would be behind that old black face than behind Mr. Sharon's money bags. All his ten, twenty or thirty millions, if put into his coffin, will have no effect in obtaining a passport from old St. Peter, for up beyond the pearly gates there is a great kingly Judge, whom gold cannot corrupt, and who will render justice to all. I say here that I believe I shall pass those pearly gates, and shall see that good old black soul, still retaining her kindness of heart in the act of passing a cup of cold water to assuage the burning thirst and torments of the man who has come into this Court-room to traduce her."
TYLER'S EXCORIATION.
Having consigned Mammy to a front seat on the throne, and the Senator to eternal hell, fire and damnation, Mr. Tyler passed on to the introduction of Sarah by the defendant to the latter' s friends and guests. He said that if she was his prostitute, as he claimed, and he had introduced her to a member of his (Mr. Tyler's) family he (Mr. Tyler) would have taken him (Sharon) by the neck and never released his hold until he had scourged him onto death's door. In referring to Cushman's bitter evidence he said that the ex-Secretary had been wronged, and it was only natural that he should assist the plaintiff, thereby obtaining his revenge. The defendant was severely excoriated for having called Neilson a "--- blackmailing --- --- of a ----- ," and then took up the testimony of Rodney, and drifted from that into that of the defendant. Sharon's statement he considered very defective, because it did not show how the plaintiff got the bank paper on which the contract was written, and because he did not explain how she came to be in possession of such a document with his signature attached. He was still occupied with his dissection, which was a repetition of the preceding day's argument, when the hour for adjournment arrived.
Downloaded from California Digital Newspaper Collection CNDC.edu.cdnc
Resumption of His Argument Yesterday.
MISS BRACKETT ASSAILED.
Mammy Pleasance's Pleasant Prospects Portrayed and the "Sen." Consigned to the Lower Regions.
"If your Honor please," said Mr. Tyler on resuming his argument yesterday morning, "I suppose that if I can show you that Mr. Sharon swore falsely in a material matter, his whole evidence will be rejected by you. I can show you where he deliberately perjured himself twice. In the answer to the complaint the defendant virtually swore that he had no sexual intercourse with the plaintiff, and his counsel, in opening the case, backed him up by saying that they expected to prove that there had been no such intercourse. On taking the stand Mr. Sharon swore that he had had intercourse with her at periods covering an entire year. I think that your Honor will consider the defendant's statement to Mr. Thorne as a virtual admission that he signed the contract. Another virtual admission of the contract is his conversation with Mrs. Pleasance, in which he told her that he could prove that the plaintiff had been in trouble with a dozen men since the signing of the contract. The defendant admitted it again by not denouncing as forgeries the contract and dear wife letters when Mr. Clement told him that he had been them. Mr. Newlands suggested the idea of forgery when he asked, and that claim was immediately set up. Either this woman (Sarah was pointed out), is Mrs. Sharon, or she is one of the most infamous blackmailers that ever lived. She has been denounced by the other side as the latter. If she was each, why did she fail to indicate it in her letters to Wm. M. Neilson, who was her confident at the beginning of this case ; she never expected those letters would become public, and in them she probably spoke her whole mind. That letter shows her good faith, and shows that she feared the great power that Sharon's millions could command, would ride rough shod over her truthful and justified claims. I tell you that letter is the work of an honest woman in the agony of despair, at the belief that wealth would defeat her, although she knew that she was his wife. In three of the five "dear wife " letters, an expert testified that the word wife had been traced. We then introduced two others, and he changed his mind. So with the defendant's assertion that there was no improper intercourse between him and the plaintiff. When forced to the wall the defendant himself negatived this claim.
PLAINTIFF'S RELATIONS WITH DEFENDANT.
"I will call your attention to the testimony of the defendant that corroborates the claim of the plaintiff. Mr. Sharon admits that he introduced her to friends in the corridors of the Palace Hotel, that he introduced her to his brother and visited her grandmother with her. He admits going to the theatre with her. He admits he invited her to his daughter's wedding; at the wedding he introduced her to his son and to respectable guests at that wedding. He admits that he treated her better than any other woman with whom he was associated, and yet, in the face of all this, he claims he was paying her $500 a month to be his mistress. I think you and 1 will agree that such a claim is preposterous." Here Tyler branched off into the exhibits of handwriting that he had caused Senator Sharon to make while on the stand. He claimed that, because Mr. Sharon's writing at his instigation was not like that in the "Dear Wife" letters and other exhibits, it betokened him to be dishonest, and showed that he had not written in his usual hand. Mr. Hyde's testimony was next dissected and compared with that of Mr. Gumpel, who Tyler claimed was the best expert in California. Several of the exhibits of writing across folds were handed to the Court for inspection, and counsel spent considerable time in combatting Hyde's theories of the invariable.
DISTURBANCE OF FIBRES
When the pen moved across a break caused by a fold. He held that the "Dear wife" letters were only a small part of strong documentary evidence that could have been introduced in the shape of letters headed "My Dear Allie." These would have been even stronger to him than the letters containing the word wife. "I myself," said counsel, "always addressed my wife in a letter as 'My dear Jennie', her given name, and she addressed me as 'My dear George.' So it is with nine out of ten of married people. Five hundred letters could be examined and not a score of them would be found headed 'My dear wife,' or 'My dear husband.' The relations of these people were such that Mr. Sharon did not require a receipt from her on the payment of money, but Mr. Dobinson, not aware of their relationship, did. But on Mr. Sharon's return these receipts were always returned to her." The testimony of Robert and Martha Wilson was then attacked, Tyler alleging that Wilson had made a contract with Barnes to pay her to retract her original and true statement. At the close of this branch of argument Court adjourned for lunch.
Afternoon Session.
On resuming after recess, Tyler said : "I now come to the testimony of Miss Nellie Brackett. Notwithstanding that she was our witness, I am going to assail her. I will here say that when she took the stand the last time she swore to a willful and deliberate lie. We knew, because she so stated to the plaintiff, that she sold herself for so many pieces of silver, paid to her father. I believe, too, that there was never a more truthful witness in a Court of Justice than this same girl up to the time she was tampered with. With this comment, I shall enter upon a dissection of the testimony of the most important witness in this case — Miss Nellie Brackett. This girl testified that soon after her acquaintance with the plaintiff had commenced she heard that her new friend was Mr. Sharon's mistress, and was about to sever such acquaintance, when the plaintiff convinced her by an exhibition of the contract and some of her letters that she was his wife." Tyler then read the whole of Miss Brackett's direct testimony without comment until he came to the statement of the bedroom scene when Nellie was behind the bureau, which he claimed was established beyond question by the testimony of both Nellie and Sarah. The letter from Miss Brackett to the Senator expressing her hatred was read as what would be the natural outburst of an impulsive, unsophisticated girl, indignant at the harsh treatment of her friend, whom she knew to be friendless and wronged. Mr. Tyler referred to the scene when Mrs. Brackett was on the stand, trying, as he said, to prove her daughter a perjurer. "But time at last sets all things even," he attempted to quote, but got stuck in the middle of the second line and a stage wait occurred until Terry came to his relief.
LAUDATION OF MAMMY PLEASANCE.
Mammy Pleasance's testimony was read, and at the close Tyler said an effort had been made to impeach her by insinuating that she had furnished the babies, for which Mrs. Bell had got $50,000 a piece. They did not prove it by producing the alleged mother of one of the babies, because a little bird had whispered to him that the defendant was the father of that particular child. From this on the laudation of Mammy was wild, eloquent and high flown. "I have known her for twenty-five years," said Mr. Tyler, "and do not believe that the gold of Ophir (Ophir was quoted in the big Board yesterday at 132 cents) would induce her to tell an untruth. For years she has been engaged in finding homes for the children of friendless women whose maternity was due to the debaucheries of wealthy rakes. I tell you that I would rather my soul would be behind that old black face than behind Mr. Sharon's money bags. All his ten, twenty or thirty millions, if put into his coffin, will have no effect in obtaining a passport from old St. Peter, for up beyond the pearly gates there is a great kingly Judge, whom gold cannot corrupt, and who will render justice to all. I say here that I believe I shall pass those pearly gates, and shall see that good old black soul, still retaining her kindness of heart in the act of passing a cup of cold water to assuage the burning thirst and torments of the man who has come into this Court-room to traduce her."
TYLER'S EXCORIATION.
Having consigned Mammy to a front seat on the throne, and the Senator to eternal hell, fire and damnation, Mr. Tyler passed on to the introduction of Sarah by the defendant to the latter' s friends and guests. He said that if she was his prostitute, as he claimed, and he had introduced her to a member of his (Mr. Tyler's) family he (Mr. Tyler) would have taken him (Sharon) by the neck and never released his hold until he had scourged him onto death's door. In referring to Cushman's bitter evidence he said that the ex-Secretary had been wronged, and it was only natural that he should assist the plaintiff, thereby obtaining his revenge. The defendant was severely excoriated for having called Neilson a "--- blackmailing --- --- of a ----- ," and then took up the testimony of Rodney, and drifted from that into that of the defendant. Sharon's statement he considered very defective, because it did not show how the plaintiff got the bank paper on which the contract was written, and because he did not explain how she came to be in possession of such a document with his signature attached. He was still occupied with his dissection, which was a repetition of the preceding day's argument, when the hour for adjournment arrived.
Downloaded from California Digital Newspaper Collection CNDC.edu.cdnc