Chicago daily tribune. [volume], December 14, 1860, Image 3

About Chicago daily tribune. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1860-1864

Image provided by: Library of Congress, Washington, DC

                
Cijiwjjo
FRIDAY, DECEMBER 14,1860.
THE; BURCH DIVORCE CASE!
The Closing Argnment of John Tan
Arman Eaq., foe iha Complainant.
EIGHTEENTH DAY OF THE TRIAL.
[Reported Expressly for the Tribune by William
' Blair Lord of New York.]
[fionfimiidfran Tuuday'e Tribune .]
AFTERNOON SESSION.
The Court resumed Us session attwo o’clock
Mb. Van Arman continued his argument as
follows
Now there is a letter written on the 28th of
January, 1800. ten days aud more alter she left
Chicago; written not to her husband, but to
her friend, Mrs. Thomas Burch; that woman
whom they arraign here as a spy and try to
make you believe is hostile to Mrs. Bnrch
Aud why? Simply because she stood hero on
the stand and swore that she bad received that
letter; nothing else, nothing else whatever.
Mrs. Thomas Burch—yon recollect the ladv,
her face beaming with goodness, with piety,
ami with intelligence. A more attractive lady
of her years cannot be found in any country.
A life or more exemplary pietv, of greater use
fulness, of greater virtue, does not illustrate
the virtues of the sexto which she belongs.
Yet she, too, must be traduced and villified;
her name mustbe attacked, and her reputation
tarnished, if possible, to subserve the purposes
of this defense. What is that letter?
*’ Wretched and fallen as 1 tun, I cannot let
you lor one moment think that I have ever
connived at or wished the ruin of vour daughter
Fannie. Beg Mr. Bnrch not to‘think so anv
longer. 1 have given him Just cause to think
there is nothing too vile for me lo counten
ance.”
I beg yoa to think of that, M I have given
my husband good cause to think that there Is
nothing 100 vile for mo to do or countenance.
He believes that I have connived nt an attempt
to ruin year daughter Fannie. He believes
that 1 was so base as to pander to the base
lusts of the villain who had seduced me, and
make me the Instrument of an attempt to ruin
my husband’s tieice that was iu her house. I
have given him good cause to believe so.”
Now can human language express a deepersen
tlmentof sclf-abascmcirt, of self loathing, than
Is here expressed ? What mutt she have done
to justify her husband In believing her the
wretch which she says he had the right to be
lieve her? “,I have given him good cause to
believe it 1 beg him not to believe it, but I
hare given him good cause to believe it.” The
counsel for the defence here have attacked Mr.
Burch, and dealt upon him the hardest of epi
thets, They have heaped upon his head every
species of abuse, because he did intimate to
Mr. Coming that he did suspect Mrs. Burch of
being indifferent to the welfare of his Deice.
Now what docs Mrs. Boreh say about it ? «* Hn
had good cause to believe h.” She does not
blame him for It. She implores him not to b<».
lieve it, but she admits that she bad given him
good cause to believe it And had be not good
cause to believe it, when be was told In the
first place that she had deliberately stood bv
and seen Stuart take liberties with this young
girl, such os the resented, such as could have
been intcrprctcc In but one wav, such as clear-
Iv Indicated a design on his‘part, that Mrs
Burch had seen it and laughed? And not only
had gone to that girl aud Implored her not to
let her unde, Mr. Burch, know It, to keep It a
secret as she did. When he was told of that
I ask you was she not right In saying that he
Bad good reason to believe her capable of doing
“ Mrs. Bnrch, tdl your daughters from me,
that If they have any love of admiration to
check It now. Had Xhad fewer friends, and
liked admiration less, I should not now have
been an outcast and a wanderer, ImWht al
most say, a beggar. My rain was’commenced
by excltingmyjealougyrcgardingmv husband,
and then, I see it now, flattery did its work ”
ThU Isncfiace runs thmo&L all l.er confirm*, and
•tamps Uiem all m LnraSic tells Mr.Faranm thpiamc
Inc, Mr. valentine. tL«art* he ns«d t«excite mr leal
cosy, and to flatter me." It ii rrod-elr the lancuace
she paed to Mr. t alentlnr; Jan the lancnaceshe uses
Mr -J’A rQon, ‘ 1 hrouchont all her confessions she
“&a.2Sy dSdiSSSk'! CICI,InE m 5, «nd
,lm ” j l .- 1 * ft™” ft •• tiler would
from thedread simoom. 1 hare been too thonchtless I
? eU^, raU '‘ 1 7 into ruin. Oh.no? Indrert
jnarenoLWiicn t think of the creat, the dreadful
DKf do !! e m I fiosKmrf, It seems as thouph I
raiddaqt live and sutler. Then. too. my fin «caln*t
en J‘ o P™!- n P7 oa - Mw- Bnrch. think lie
j'l , L ro s c * l T ? me -, . I (**ve been all alone since
Thursday, and have Lad time for thonsht I have
prayed, 100, praved for forrlvene** of God. and have
prayed that Sir. Bnrch would In tlmeforplveme. Ide
serve all this goffering, and 1 pr*v thaUt may be th**
means of bringing me nearer to mv God."
Would yon have thon-tht it possihlo. wonld von have
•apposed that It was within the comnast of poeslbllltr
after writing these letter*, that within twenty davJ
thereafter, suer hating so repeatedly admitted these
crimes, after hating so repeatedly acknowledged the
mndaeasof Mr. Burch, the humanity of Lis condncL
after hating thus dilated upon her own guilt,
aod begged the pardon of God and man for It, after all
tnue. 1 havcnodoobt.sennlne expressions of penitence
and contrition— would yoa have deemed It possible
Uiat any belts iabam&n shape could have nad the
heart to take that wretched woman, and add t*> her
•In. add to he • misery—for sin is always miacrv—by
compelling her to sancradd perlurv to ber oUicr
rnme*. and to deliberately swear before High Heaven
that all «f these were false, and that she
was perfectly Innocent. Would yoa have believed U
possible that tMa woman could Lave been bought hv
any stratagem or power of mao to do this thing ? Did
yon ever In your life until now expert to meet a man
that without bla«hlne coalrl -land before yon and hear
these letters, and then tnm around and attempt to
make you bollern that Mr. Boren, compelled
bar faf»cly to make there «nnfi-s«lon<, compelled her
to write these letters, that tMs Is all a fabrication, sud i
that all tills time -be was perfectly lononent and en
tirely wronged, and that Mr. Burch was the on) v guilty
party? Did yon ever expect to sc* such a da»V Oen.
iirmen. no man here, no man of ordinary ability, no
man of common means, would ever have vectored
upon this defence. No one bat a man who after long
experience had learned what great personal Influence
aid'd by money could do, would eve* have dreamed i
of making snen a defence. It would not Be within t*>e
thought of any common roan to suppose that It was In |
tbe eompass of possibility tomakesuch a defence with
•access. And yet you are to br made tue twolt. the
■apple tools, for the pnrpwe of stultifying not anlv
f oaraslvea but the community around yon. Yoa are
o be mode to nay horn among your neighbors, and bo
fore the world, that all these letters and confessions
were the work of Mr. Burch :thaitUese letter* writ cn
hundreds of miles awe v.written wuLoalM* knowledge
written without the possibility of Ms knowledge, that
all these letter* were hU work: that this womsn was I
twrfWHly Innoernt. and that Mr. Darcb Is thegolltv 1
wretch wbo compelled her to sign these confearnns
and write these letter* against her will, he knowing i
them to be false, and then drove ber from her home. I
These letters will be read the world *ivcr; you will
read them thro-gb yonr lives, and then yon will read |
letter written bv Dr. Patterson In answer
to the one he received ftom Mr*. Bnrch; i
"Mbs Bearn:—l ebonld do Injustice to myself and 1
to yon, were I to withhold the expression I now make
of my deep and painful sympathy with yon In relation
to the distress which has falh-n npou yon with such
crushing weight. 1 cannot. If I would, forget the pas.
total affection which 1 bare for oo man> years delight
«d to cherish toward* yon. I feel persouallr afflicted
aad bereaved in aud by the great change wMch Las **o
g.tldenly taken place In yoor relations and prospect.*,
v* creat could have more utterly confounded my
thoughts. I could not at first believe It. and when the
reality ■•ame home to my heart, 1 could only carry you
In earnes? prayer to the mercy seat, pleading that the
comnaaslonMe Saviour would be gracious to yoa. I
determined to write you. before receiving your Miter
of Jannarr 2Tth. which came tu hand on the Xttb Inst.
1 do not allow myself to feel fora moment that yon re
no longer to be numbered among those f«r whom 1
tnsr nrwv In faith and hope; and in this letter I wish to
nenorm the dutv which 1 owe lo you as your Christian
friend and pastor, that I may pray the more bopcfnlly
that God will be merciful to you. lou know I dare
notsav one word that would *eem to extenuate the
•Ins over which you lament. I know yon have bc« n
cruelly deceived aud betrayed bv one of the most art
ful ag'nu of the great destroyer "
You see what construction Br. rallereon pula upon
tuc/w yon have been cruelly deceived and betray
ed by one of the roost artful agents of the mat de«-
trover and vet I know, a* you kuow, that had you duly
watched against temptation, you would have sbnsned
the first steps In tbe path of cviL Ido trust that you
will be enabled so fully and deeply to repent at die fret
of Jreno. that He will *ay to you In his wonderful grace,
"Go and slo no more."
It Mems that the Doctor did not scruple to apply to
thl* lady tbe oame passage of scripture wMch she ap-
"^trust^thsi*von already do repent, not alone l>e
csooe ofthe present cm-cquences ofyoaratn, but he-
Sow of It* Inherent animosity, and 1U offenslrenres In
the Olthl Of your God and Saviour. Ohl .o not let
you lo suspend your hearty practical
i££StknCe on the question whether or not you may
SnSmnrcr back to tue reped and confidence of
in toil world, I Beckwith did what Dr. Patter
•ocl®*r j . K-tan could do.] For weal is human
on?i£ e
2?d£e nreduut ft* they seem, to the Interest* of eter
nttv? (jf coarse there is merry for you still Ifvou bat o
ess sacs
woa% bS mercifully accepted and cherW.edaa a dsar )
lambln his told, and y<m "snail never pcrltti. But If t
ft is roar eutefdeslre to recover what vou Lave lost for 1
this world, yon will i»«t obtain the Wlvjmeaa* for
Which yon pray. 1d • beseech the bartour that be will
enable yon to dike hold upon Mra by faith and clears
to him Tor eriJTdty. whatever your fellow creatures
mar think of you. or do for or against yoa. AndtMl
construction which Dr. Patterson pot* on ber act* the
•coalesced in for about three month*, and even until
Sedgwick wr >le that auxiou* letter of inquiry de*lr-
Ingtoknow what«*ue had wrltteu.
These, with one exception, are her letters. They ran
*v.l„ngU a period, extending ftom the d*y of her de
from Mr. Burch's Louac. which was oo the lath
pa*?®** -f down to some time about the l*t of thru
-lof from ten to twelve days. They are all
•Pi * -liar tenor, each out* containing adUlluct
of them of ota- of the lact of tMsadnllery. i
worse than Idle to spend your time
Now 4 fee) be , non tnemeauWg of these letter*. '
here la - ;
•Utte«> d dluliteSiSiu W uwcvcau
SSSrtfSaMfa aws
that 1. ncrposlUoa. Under
ssg&s’So~ ?itdS<S!rt» w UK
£3S?SSSr“ if irea It mar 5 "“ ‘“U'S
“ ° -Ytttl* lisrsh-tlial be was even a 11 Uie severe with
1 deiiy-bnt suppose that did ap
that show that he did not believe her guilty,
have any tendency any way? Suppose
41Jofthli kind that you were uying, you
Sbs that u'« woman vs. m-doubiedlyjnulty of
the some t. me fladuiot the
h<£n pill ■: r of misconduct, what would
S?^s2£ I SIS£S“ S WoiiiJ M-* misconduct aaectyour
Mr Burch Should not have commenced Ms *ull so
•AAA i The reason of what be did Is perfectly manifest.
IfestfMm Mr. Burch’s whole conduct, apd lt wpsnoci
irplMfi-tbatsocnshould be the
foe Disown honor and reputation, for the w vlfare of Ms
own AmS as well as out of consideration for Tier and
the£-illends. to keep this matter secret. H wmMs de-
WuStoa divorce, but not without the kaowl-
For within two or three dayjrafter
?.WifcSiiUYii’Lhe sat down and wrote to Mr. Frayn
•Sd ST thM he wa* tryloc to obtain a di;
oad the whole thlnu terminated before aw ten uere.
Why, then, did he commence suit at IJfMUmc. bMiply
forUdireason: Ifbe had waitedjnntll ttflu adlgnum
Sute, so that he could not get service upon hd r hyoaD
pmoa, he would have Been obliged. l» QTOtr
to comply with the law. to publish the pendency of thS
•ult, and thna make the fact known to the whole world.
This be did not wish to do. Therefore, before she left,
be simply served anon ter a subpsna. and commenced
tbe soli, and then instantly informed her friend* of
what he had done, so that they could defend It if they
wished, -Of course he did not expect them to defend
It. Ue never dresmed they would defend 11. He had
not tbe slightest Idea that U Uy within thelfinltt of
PosslbUity that anybody conld ever t-ilnfc of defending
It. Would any of you hare thought they could? Take
thesecoofeulonsu wciang; ta*:e tliese letter*; take
whoiohehod sold to Miss ranuie Burch; take wliat
tbs had sail to Margaret O’Hara: Uke her open eon
fesriona to Ur. Farnau and to Mr. Valentine: take all
thla boom of written ana verbal ertdence—wouldtteyer
navt entered Inpj yonr mlndko conceive that any hu
xnaobelngwouldtfilnkofadcfeLseof'UChacaae? it
was toUCy wltfioat hU expectation that any defense
wonld be attempted, and It wo* not until two months
toots defence was ever dresmed of.: ■- .
yhterye what follows. Mr. Bnrcb stt* down sad
writss that Utter to Mr. Brava which 700 have beard .
informing him of all particular*. TTiey ssythat letter
conrleta Wm offalrehoort. I will, at wme time before
i iit close of my argument, call your attention to that -
tors moment, and snow vou tuat that letter everr
i'ae of lt.i statement !>y sUtcmeut, 1i true-lit*
trally true—and that ll U « mo*l lucid explanation of
all the creots from the first to the l&t-t. And vhat
next? He had feat to Mr. Corning to come on hire
And while I am upon thl* point I wish to explain an
other thing. The* complain that Mr. Burch obm • d
this confesdon of Mrs. Burch br promltinc her that he
would take no steps until Mr. Corning cute. Ki-u- I
h.v. no doubt Ur. Huron tuieSSd th« “nj
should stay here until Mr. Coming came. Why uld
he not do it ? He received a dispatch from Mr. (vn».
UW OfJfiSSj- «M corns. M be WM rtcut to
Ma. BnowsixcH-There Is no proof of that,
Burch ,ie received a dlspatcli
Irani «ie eft ™‘ aC * kon ** taUn C that Ids father was
h»ow»-Tbat Is not proved In thh cue.
,'*> Autiji - But 1 bee of yon to
;?°K r ,f or a moment at the Mtustlon fie wt*
l n *. woman was under his root, If he
rohabltod with her for a night, It ww a condonation of
i.ie poense. of course he took the advice of hU friends
pflila lawyers. Any lawyer would tell him, -‘Every
'•'WJ™ Keepherunder yonrroot yon ran the hazaril
«r their setdig up condonation against you. If you
permit her to lodge under your roof for one night, you
mill beobllged to prove positively that you did not co
-s»P*s with her, for Uie presumption would be that yon
old, she being under your root and yon yourself mu*t
prove positively to the contrary." it Is i>anre*ted to
me that 1 should explain to yoa what I mean bv "con
donanun. Itlsthls: Ifaman discover* the fact of tin;
adultery of his wife, and afterwards cohabit* with her.
tf for but once, Uiat cohabitation works what
wo la the law call "condonation," forgive
ness. In fact. If he forgave her. It works
coodnaatlon. if .Mr. Burch had agreed to co
habit with his wife, or keep her In his hont>e after this
offense. U would be said that St was a proof of his for.
K" i Teccfis, He could not keep her there with any aafetv
Im should aHow her to remain there for one night,
at all event* far auv considerable length of time, you
would have heard the counsel upon the other aide say
“‘M he had forgiven her. They would Lave said,
»hy did he not tend her away at once ?" And then
they would have gone Inti a lengthy argument t«
prove to you that no living n an would ever consent
*°/tav a day In the house with a woman »ho had com
muted adultery. They would have magnified and am.
piffled upon the conduct of the man who should do
that which they now pretend to blame Mr. Bnrch for
not doing, and would bare said that if he allowed l.cr
to stay a day after he had found her to be guilty of this
crime, be had forgiven her. had connived at her adul
wry.
tit most send her a war. What difference doe* U
mak« In this cose whether be sent herswayon Monday
or Tuesday, or any other day? are yoa to suapena
tbta caae npon the /act whether he sent her away one
or two days, or sw«ek after be bad found out her
gallt? Has that anything to do with her pallt? Are
not toe deciamattonsof counsel upon the otberalde ut
terly tenaelees.ro faras theyepplytothlscnse? What
b material to ttibcaee? Nothing 1* material except
that which tends to tuow the troth as to whether she b
polity or Innocent? Now. would the lact of Ms send
ing her away Monday tavtead of Tuesday, or Wednr*.
aay instead of Thursday, Lave anything to d» with
that anbjecl? mainly utt- Ills infinitely aide from It
nod has no conretion with It. But co a little farther
Tbe next step In tals case Uml Mr. Corning took after
Laving gone to New York and hack-fori think that
afterrecelvlnc Mr, Burch's telegraph he went out of
town to New Yore city—aftor his return hn telegraph
ed to Mr. Burch to meet him at £• apenrion Bridge
Mr. Hatch did meet him there. The exact date of this
meeting 1 have tonrotten; hut I ’Link It won the Tues
day of the week after Mra Bnrch strived at Albany,
w elk what occurred there ? Mr. Corning brought out
Mrs, Burch with Min, Jle Lad already seen the letter
that Mr. Burch Lad wrltt*n to Mr, Frays, clrtng all
the details of tbb case. Mr. Coming meets Mr.iiorch
at Suspension Bridge, and there the; hare an Inter
view. Mr. Burch t-Uabim thatthecharge bebosmadc
against his wife Is true: an I goes on to explain to him
ail the clrcmnatancefi, Janas he Lao explained them
In thei letterto Mr. Proyn. Mr. Coming says that he
cave him the tame explanation that he cave to Mr.
Prayn, except that he added to It tliaf one of the
means by which be had obtained the confession was
by shaking Ida fist In hrr lace.
GcnUen<en. that Is a canons piece of evidence—a
most remarkable plrte of evidence. It may aoem
strange to the friends of Mr. Coming that 1 should ven
ture to apeak here aealnst the truth of anything that
he state*: it may aeezn very ttrauce to them indeed.
Bat 1 bra Mr. Corning and all Ms trend* to Know that
powerful as be I* and numerous as Ms friends are,
that will nolle the slightest decree affect my convic
tion of the truth or faulty of anything he states
Great men are not alwavs good men. ItG not always
tree that a man’s popularity Is In exact pro
nortlon to hit actual merit. Mr. Coming had
become deeply interested la thU case, lie la
a wilful man. That cannot be questioned: a
very determined man. His passions have become
eaclted and aroused and enlisted lo this case If you
con supjKwe that Mr. Corning believes thottnls woman
Is Innocent, as long os he believes that, his desire to
pmtect her and defend her from Injury la most credi
table. 1 agree wth the counsel upon the other tide
Inst either if she Is Innocent, or he believes her to be
innocent, Mr. Coming deserves the thanks ofeverv
honest man for protecting her to the full exp nt nf her
rights, and exerting all Ms power to do so. But if on
the other Land Mr. Corning knows her to be gulllv. or
believes her to be guilty, and Is attempting lo force
htw back by mere power into the reluctant arms of her
Injured husband; if, because Lv thinks he Las got Uie
pou cr to do It, he says t<» Mr Bareli. "You shall take
back this woman or 1 will rain von;" If he aavs, “ Do u«
I bid yon, accept this shame ana ignominy and conceal
It la your own house, or 1 will destrovyou-." If he aavs
that. Knowing her guilt or oellevlng It, then Mr. Coro
lngt»atyrantaswella*adUhoiiest man. For one. I
have a great reluctau-c to submit to any specks of
tyranny: bat most of all am I reluctant to submit to a
moneyed tyranny. To me the moat odious of all ails,
tocraeles is a vulgar nioneved arlstocracr, anil It 1*
upon money and moneyed Interests that Ufa y realties*
of this class of men U based. There is a sort of aris
tocracy In the world for which 1 have some respect, an
aristocracy of intellect and character. I shall never
pgy any parUculor court to or laquey the ste a of your
money .king. There are enough others to do that. We
have seen h-re laqneylng the footsteps of this moneyed
Hrtstucrat.thii mooey-.lug, this railroad giant—from
the time he came West—the united toadyism of sßChl
rago. He doe* not need my poor homage, and If he
Imagines that I will not dl*cu*s Ma testimony, and that
too with the same freedom that 1 would the testhnonr
of the poorest man (hat Mgs In the ditch, and net asu
Ida pardon for doing so, he Is much nil-taken. 1 say
Ms *tory I- moft Mghlr ImnrobahM. Mr. Bnrch went
there to assert the guilt «.f Ms wife to Mr. Ccrojip. Be
did assert her guilt to him. as he had p evlou-ly ae
herted It to Mr. iTuyn, aud It is most unacce .i,table
taut he should tell Mr. Corning—the Cither by adoption
of tills woman, ber best and most powerful friend on
earth—lt U most unacconnuble that he ahmld say to
i.lm that he had shaken Ms ost In her face for the pur
pose of extorting a confession; U Is most miraculous
that be should have said any such thing; and 1 do not
bcrnplc to bay that 1 verily believe that Mr. Coming
has a Bale mistaken the purport of what Mr. Bareli
said to Mm. in bhort, lam not convinced that he ever
did say It; It Is so tumls against him to have bald It.
He would be likely to say that all that he charged
against her was entirely true; and. that he <diould have
gone til ere asserting the guilt of hi* wife, aasertlne tbe
validity ot these coufesslou*. asserting that tn y were
honest eonleadotu, voluntarily made, and then ssv that
he shook Ms list lu her face for the purpose of obtain
ing them. Is moat wonderful. If thatstateiccnt le true,
it U of no conacqnencc; but U is most marvclon* that
Mr. Burch should Lave told it to Mm.
Mr. Van Abbas st this time, five o’clock, was terv
much cxhaui-ted, speaking with tbe greatest difficulty.
He Informed the Court that it was physically impossi
ble for Mra to speak for even a half an hour longer,
and as he could not dote Ms argument la that time, be
must a*k tbe Indnlgence of tbe Court to be permitted
to condudc It on Monday morning.
Tbe Court adjourned accordingly until 9 o’clock on
Monday rooming.
NINETEENTH DAY.
Moxsat, Dec. 10, IRCO.
CONCLUSION OF THE ABOCMENT FOR THE COM-
X’LAJNANT BT JOHN VAN ARMAN, ESQ.
Gentlemen op the Jury :—I made an
apology to you on Saturday alternoon for
speaking math longer than I had intended to
m this case. But it is quite unnecessary for
me to explain to you the reasons why a counsel
iu a case like this, whatever may he bis feel
ings or desires relative to the result, would be
anxious to fulfil bis duty in the case. He
would be untruthful to those who employed
him if he did not. My responsibility, howev
er, is much lighter than yours. When 1 shall
have finished my argument, provided I shall
have said all that seems to be right aud neces
sary forme to say before the world, In the es
timation of my employer, and to my own con
science, I shall have done all to secure the
rights of my client that lam required to do.
And, whatever may be your verdict, 1 shall
have done my duty.
With you It Is somewhat different You have
the duty of judgment—final judgment—be
tween these parties. The length to which this
trial has been protracted; the unusual excite
ment in the public mind; the interest that Las
been taken; the sympathy which has necessa
rily been aroused; aud the peculiarly impressi
ble nature of the human mind, and*of the hu
man heart—for vc all, as by contn.ion, catch
the sympathies that float In the air around us,
and the influences that circle about us—these
causes being allowed their operation, which
soever way they may tend, are all of them hos
tile to the exercise of sound, unbiased judg
ment, Public opinion Is never a safe guide;
especially the first opinion formed under ex
citement, How has it been here? A man
comes in and listens to half a day’s testi
mony, aud goes away satisfied one way or the
other. Another man comes in and hears as
mnch on the other side, and he also goes away
satisfied. And thus Is public opinion formed.
It is a tyrant, and the man who submits to it is
the slave of a remorseless and venal monster
What it approves to-day, It will condemn to
morrow; it is never of even, consistent tenor;
it Is vnln and frivolous—founded upon small,
and often changed upon the slightest and most
trivial, considerations. *-
“Vain as the leaf upon the stream.
And fickle as a changeful dream.”
Trust it not; beware of it. The public are
not responsible for your verdict, Vou arc re
sponsible to the parties, to your countrymen,
for the just administration of the law; but
higher and above all, arc you responsible to
that Being who is the personification of justice
and of right, and who hates a lie and detests
iniquity. I feci myself warranted in making
these remarks in any case In which similar out
| side circumstance* prevail. 1 ask no aid from
i public opinion. 1 expect nothing from public
! sympathy. 1 expect, nay, 1 desire, that the
I lady involved iu this case*shall have all that;
I not sympathy, natural, human sympathy alone,
I but that principle of manly honor and chival
ry which I should dread to sec extinguished in
the human heart, warrant her the public sym
]iathy. But if the lady bod been the wife of
some bumble neighbor of yours, residing here
In your midst, and had been guilty of the same
thing, or If the same proof bad existed against
her —had the wife of one of your neighboring
farmers, In the firat place, gone to the verge of
udu tcry with one lover, and then, after a two
years intimacy with another lover, carried ou
I by stolen interviews, letters, meetings, sought
■ In the absence of her husband—lt, offer tdl
\ that, she bad then repeatedly confessed herself
j guilty of adultery, I submit to you that she
could scarccld have appeared before you with
! the Imposing front presented by this*defence.
I For never have I seen, in the course of a long
i practice, a party appear in court with so high
t handed, audacious, aggressive a front. Instead
| pf apologizing for her own conduct, which she
i must admit to have been almost as reprehensi
j Me in any event os actual adultery—conduct
which is admitted before you—instead of of
-1 fering any apology for that, or admitting even
1 the slightest humiliation or contrition on nc
! count of it, her counsel have assumed the ag
i grcsejve, and stand here dealing every species
{ of anathema find insult upon the injured bus-
I band. The position of the accused and of the
* accuser arc reversed. They assume the offen-
I sire, and in tbe most high, Insulting and
1 haughty terms arraign him, and make him the
i criminal. Would not a little more humility
: become them? Would not a lower lone have
: been more in taste? If your neighbor’s wife
I bad been In similar circumstances, how would
i she have appeared before you? How
would it become her and them to ap
-1 pear? But we have no such per
i son here for a defendant, by no means.
I •» piste sin in gold, and the strong lance of just ice
I harmless breaks;
! clothe It to mips and the pigmy straw will
j pierce It”
! Bo it is always when you flare the
1 wealthy, and high, and powerful for parties
|ln court. They come like the feudal barons
i of old, when men were bought and sold like
t chatties in the market They come with their
j bands of retainers at their heels, and with a
I show of power and influence seek to overcome
1 us. Will that do? will it serve? That Is to
I be tested. It has been supposed, perhaps vain
i ly, that the classes In our country from which
i jurors are principally drawn, especially in the
1 country, where each is severely of his own
j little kingdom, dependent upon no man for all
J that he needs, for the support of himself and
j family, has been supposed that men thus
I circumstanced, could be trusted, that
! neither the urtbp of wealth, the frown
j of power, nor any allurements that might
! be held out to them, would pway them
from the just exercise of those functions yhmfl
i the law Ln* entrusted lu their hands. 1 know
1 quite well tbe eulogies that have been pro
' nonneed upon this lady and her conduct. But
; at the bottom of them all lies this fatal record
; which cannot be gainsayed, cannot be denied.
First, the intimacy with Boyd running to the
very verge of adultery, next, this long - and
strang# intimacy wUfl otusrt,. This cannot be
galnsayed. Now, as I remarked before.' If that
record had lain against some humble woman
liero, instead of being caressed, and flattered,
ami-followed, and fawned around, they would
hare stood back from her os a thing accursed,
in the actual thing itself, in the real thing it
*di, in the matter of right and wrong, and vir
tue and vice, I ask you if there Is any differ
ence from the meanest connexions ? Qf»n it
make, shall it make, will yon allow it to moke,
any difference to you that this person is of
high position, and lofty clrpomsirniAA* npq
™ c |j hy men of great wealth and power?
bnail that make any difference with yon f Docs
it become your manhood, does it consist with
your own self-respect ? I oak you if it consists
with the character of an American Jury, that
the circumstances of the parties welsh in
the balance?
florid pro pc, nor honeyed lines of rhyme, ’
can blazon evil deeds, or consecrate a crime.*’ •
I care not how high or low a man or woman
he; it Is the conduct that must be weighed, the
character that must be estimated.
kest I might forget it, and I sbon.d be very
to do ao this morning, before pro*
«ceding with the subject, I beg to refer to a
matter of no manner of importance, and I shall
therefore attention for but one
moment with it. For some purpose, what, I
cannot apprehend, when Mr. Stuart was called
to the stand, It was thought necessary bv
the leading counsel for the defence hero to
to draw from him the fact that at one time he
v.ns on some kind of terms of intimacy with
me. lie called at my office, and what the wit
ness said, was In substance, in all regards but
one, strictly true. I think he said that he and
I had been friends; and the counsel upon the
other side has magnified it into a friendship of
twenty years. Now, I would not deny a friend.
It would be an act of baseness for me to do so,
let him be even guilty as well os unfortunate.
But the truth is, as the coanscl well knows,
when he made his statements to the contrary,
I am sorry to say, that we never were friends
hi any such sense as supposed here. We came
from the same Stale, a hundred miles apart,—
He never crossed my thrcsbhold. I never
crossed his. We met a comparatively few
times In the course of a long residence in the
snmc State. 1 never knew him; was not his
enemy. When this matter arose, I was absent
from the city. On my return to Chicago, he
called upon me, and told me just what he tells
yon he told the public, no more. He called
upon me as he called upon every man from
the State of Michigan; told me in secret noth
ing but what he told everybody. He showed
me this famous letter, and that was all, ex
ccjit that he desired me to be employed for the
defence. I was a lawyer, that was my business:
I knew and cared nothing about the case; I
knew neither of the parties; and of course was
quite willing to be employed upon cither side,
uml informed him • so. He seemed to
be anxious, and I waited, as be tells
you, three months; at ms solicitation
thinking,ln all conscience, I gave him all the
opportunity a man eould desire if he wanted
my sen-ices. But what is a little singular in
this is, and that is what Mr. Beckwith is care
ful to draw from the witness, that they did
not want my services. If they did not de
sire my services, what on earth did they
waul? What did they want? Could they
expect that to deprive Mr. Burch of my
poor abilities could gain anything to their
cause? It seems to have been thought
so, for that was their sole object. It is agreed
that It whs early understood between them
that I was not to he employed. Doubtless
when the gentleman says he refrained from I
cmployingme on account of my friendship for '
Stuart, charity to me required that he should
j*ay this, if he cared for my feelings. But it
means that he could get better counsel than
mt —so he thought—and so you see he has.
And I should not feel very badly if he had said
in plain terms, for I never was so vain as to
compare myself with the counsel It would
not have hurt my feelings if he had told the
truth,lnstead of giving a false excuse. These
arc the facts a« they appear here. Why the
gentleman should bring them before you Is a
little mysterious. If he desired some quarrel
with me personally, I beg to decline. 1 really
have not time; nobody would pay me for it;
It would not gratify me in the least. Another
thing: now! have a peculiarity about that.
1 alwavs select my enemies with Just the same
careful discrimination that I select my friends.
In a friend, 1 require truth, candor, sincerity
and honor. In an enemy, I wautaman of some
considerable qucluies, 1 really do, before I can
afford timeto quarrel with him. I want to he
quite sure that he is a man ot some measure.
And really I do not know enough of the coun
sel who sought this quarrel with me to be able
to put him with either class. I certainly do
not know enough of him to seek him fora
friend. And until he lias done something
more manly than tohringa petty thing of Ibis
kind into a court of justice, 1 cannot even dig
nity him to the rank of an enemy.
One or two other th.ngs have been alluded
lo here that have no relation to this case. It
was asked by counsel upon the other side,
where Is Mrs. Burch's dower? and 1 allude to
these things now for fear I may forget them,
as they urc wholly irrelevant to the case.
Where is her portion that she brought Mr.
Burch? And one counsel has told you, in
answer to his own query, that it was locked
up in Mr. Burch's bank, drawing ten per cent,
or more. Well, he would get rich rapidly on
Hut. Now, the counsel, when he uttered that,
ho knew just as well as I know that she never
brought him adollarin the world, except some
furniture that Corning gave to her, liberally
enough, more than Mr. Burch wanted, or Mr
Coining was under obligations to give. Idc
not want to do Mr. Coming injustice. No
doubt but he Is a liberal man. This passion ij
not avarice. He gave this lady a liberal sup
ply of furniture, not lo put in the bank, but
m the bouse; and the counsel upon the other
side well know that every article of that furni
ture that has been left aboveground was pack
ed up and sent home to Mr. Corning. There
is no money question between these parties,
and never was. So lar from that, the very
home In which her mother lives this day, one
half of it belongs to Mr. Burch, bought for her
use; and he pays a stipend yearly lor her sup
port, bos done it for years, does it to-day, aud
us done it since this suit was commenced.
When be makes a question of money with tM«
, >oor woman, he can have no services of mine.
S’o such question was ever made, and the
counsel knows It as well as I do. I ask, for
what purpose is it that these things are brought
here? 1 will not degrade myself by applying
tbe terms liar and rascal to anybody. It is
enough for me to show yon that j*ou have been
cheated la this respect, how your feelings have
been attempted to be wrought upon.
Another little thing has been brought up
here, aud it will famish you a test of the sin
cerity of counsel They very flippantly tell
you that we brought this case away from Chi
cago to this place, relying upon your simpli
city, and thinking you Iguorant of the habits
of city life, aud the freedom allowed between
the sexes in elevated society, and that you
would magnify little circumstances and give
them undue importance. That is what the
counsel told you, did he And yet the
records of this Court show, and I will road
them to you if they deny it, that this suit was
commenced in Chicago by Mr. Burch, In the
very city where these things occurred, aud
where the people would estimate them proper
ly. Yet they themselves tiled a paper in that
Court, that the people of Chicago were
prejudiced against the defendant, as they af
firmed ; and it was the defendant, and not the
plaintiff, removed that case Irom the city to
the country. Now I ask you if there Is any
kind of honesty In their coming here and falsi
fying the fact lor tbe purpose of making some
little capital against the complainant ? Ido
not suppose that it will produce any effect,
bat they must have hoped it would, or such
means would not have been reported to.
-Again, and what is of somewhat more Ini'
portance, one of the counsel toU von that Sir.
Burch in his Idler to Mr. Frayn had under
taken to say that Mrs. Burch in her confession
had admitted some intimacy with a Mr. Ar
nold, a Mr. Tighe, and perhaps another n.ap,
They said that that was what Mr. Burch wrote
to Mr. Pruyn, and tliat that was one of the
lies be was convicted of. Now tliat letter will
be in your hands; you will find In it that Mr.
Burch distinctly tells Mr, Prnvn that Mrs.
Batch has not confessed those things; that she
has confessed her intimacies with Stuart and
Boyd, and that be has been informed by others
that she had intimacies with Tighe and Arnold,
and refers Mr. Pruyn to Mrs. Burch's own
mother for the tact. That again was cast up
here for the pur; rose of creating some prejudice
against Mr. Burch.
Another thing that has been very much
dwelt on here; it is not In proof of and should
never have been referred to; because yon are
not to try a case here upon matters not in evi
dence, but having been brought in here by tbe
defence, it behooves me to reply to it. It most
have been intended for the purpose of affect
ing your minds with a prejudice.- Now what
do they say in reference to this trial? Thev
say that Mr. Burch is responsible for this triair
that he Is responsible for all the publicity giv
en to this allair. At the same time they say
that when this confession bad been extorted he
undertook to get secretly a bill of divorce up
on It through the conns of Chicago. Thus,
at one moment, they charge him with under
taking to carry this matter through secretly;
the next, they charge upon him having given
it publicity. Now let us see what the acts of
the case are. If Mr. Burch has proceeded Im
properly, and too hastily, to procure a divorce,
would that be a defence in this case f If a wo
man is guilty of adultery, one man may pro
ceed in one way and another in another; one
man is passionate,hasty, and violent; aud an
other is cool. Mr. Burch may be one or the
other. No two men ever act exactly alike.
One man. If he has a thing to do, will proceed
to do It on the impulse of the first thought of
the first moment; another acts deliberately.
lam perfectly willing to submit Mr. Burch's
conduct to you, not that it has anything at all
to do with the issue. It is quite immaterial
whether he proceeded in n month, in a week,
or a day, or on hour. The question fc not
what Mr. Burch did,but what this woman did.
Nevertheless, 1 am perfectly willing to explain
the whole of Mr. Burch’s conduct in the mat
ter, and, as it has been dragged in, I mast ex
plain it. Mrs. Burch was in this State. They
tell yon that Mr. Corning knew that re-union
coaid not take place between these parties.
They tell yon that there was no expectation of
any such thing in the future. They tell you
tliat a negotiation took place to the end that a
bill of divorce might be obtained privately.
Now I must let you know tbe facts, part of
which appear upon record, and the other part
not of record, but which, nevertheless, are
tree, as Is well known on all sides. She was
here lu this Shite. If she left it without a salt
being commenced, there was but one way in
which it could he commenced, and that was by
advertising In the public newspapers tbe pen
dency of the suit. That would infallibly make
the whole thing public. Mr. Bnrch, Instead of
allowing her to leave the city and then adver
tising the suit, thus making it public, served a
snbpmna upon her before she left, and then
immediately wrote to Mr. Coming and Mr.
Pruyn, explaining Justhowmatters then stood.
And you will find in the letter to Mr. Frayn a
full statement that bo has commenced and is
{iroceeding with a suit for a divorce; thus giv
ng Mr. Coming an opportunity to unite with
him or to defend her, Jost as be chose. What
followed ? They blame us that we did not ac
cept some propositions they made to avoid
publicity and allow tbe divorce to pass with
out public notice. £»ow the-counsel for the
defence here did not tell yon what hit propo
sition was; he would blush to do It. I will
tell you what it was; and really it wu the only
one that could be made. If any was to be made.
It was that Mr. Burch should go Into the State
of Indiana, or lowa, or some otyer State, end
there procure a divorce on some ground other
than adultery; because even there a divorce
upon the ground of adultery would hi Just as
fatal to her as if obtained here. Mr. Burch
came to me very, anxious to do It, If it were
possible.- I said to him: u Ycs; you can do it;
there are only two. difficulties in the way. In
the first place youmust swear to a He; and In
• the next place, you must get a half a dozen
men to do the some thing. These difficulties
; surmounted,yoncancetu-divorce. You must
; swear, In any State where yon apply for a dl
i vorce, that you arc a resident of that State.and
: have been for a year, or some other lime—six
months. 1 think, is the least required in any
State. Tu the next place, you must swear to
some other cause for divorce except adultery.
You know there Is no other cause. You must
swear that your w fe has been cruel towards
you, or that she has deserted yon, or t’*at there
Is incompatibility of temper between you.
You know sbe has never deserted you; you
know that she never has been cruel to you,
and you know that there Is no Incompatibili
ty of temper. Now, if you can commit these
two perjuries, and if you can get other persons,
to do the same, you can get a divorce.” Mr.
Burch, they say, is a most wilful nod obstinate
manTllr. Burch did tell me In the most wilful
nod obstinate manner, that he would do no
fuch thing, and be stuck to it. He told m«
that if hecouldobtain a divorce upon the truth,
os it was, he would bare It. Now the only
truth there was in the case was the very truth
which we have been proving here. He said
that If he could obtain it only by'perjury,
cither of himself or of others, be would not
have it at alh This 1% I doubt not, a most
censurable instance of wilfulness and stul>-
bornness ou the part of Mr. Burch, for which
he has received, ever since, the denunciation
of the counsel who proposed it. How welllie
deserved that denunciation, 1 have no hesi-'
tancy in submitting it to von. Now, from the
history of this cose, was it possible to obtain a
divorce upon any other ground than adultery?
There were other propositions made for the
purpose of getting over this suit on this very
ground,' without publicity. And alter Mr.
Burch found upon investigation that be had no
other ground for a suit, without perjury. The
counsel upon the other side know who is re
sponsible for their being defeated. I will not
go IntoHiesc matters. I will go no further
than to follow the counsel In bis statement.
What I slate here to you in reference to this
matter will be published. I will stand by it,
and stake my veracity that that was the propo
sition, and that that was our answer to it.
Mr. Beckwith. —My proposition was that
they should get a divorce upon the ground
that they could not live happily together.
Mb. Van Arman— Could not lire happily to
gether!” There Is no snch law in any State of
the Union. Incompatibility of temper, quar
reling, that was the ground. They never did
quarrel from the day they were first married,
for the twelve years they lived together. The
counsel well knew it, and the proposition was
a most infamous attempt to induce Mr. Burch
to commit perjury, and to get others to do the
same. Mr. Burch was not prepared to do that.
You are mea of intelligence. You know
whether a divorce can be obtained in any State
of the Union without any ground for lu Men
do obtain it by perjury, by rnnninglntoaState
and swearing to a residence there. Now what
docs residence mean? It means that they go
there and intend to remain there; not that a
man has gone into a State for one month, or
two months, or six months, for a certain pur
pose, and as soon as that purpose is accom
plished means to leave. Does the counsel
mean to stand before you and say that Mr.
Burch should have done that ?
Mb. Beckwith— Mrs. Burch offered to goto
Indiana and lire there, and make her residence
there, in order to comply with the statute.
Mr. Van Arman— How would that complv
with the statute? The party asking for the
divorce mast have a residence there. Mr.
Burch must swear that he has a residence
there in order to get a divorce. There is no
dodging it. The counsel can not get around
it A more infamous attempt to Induce a man
to commit peijury in order to save family
pride never was made. Now It may tie greatly
against Mr. Burch that he did not do it. Bnt
he mast swear wherever he went, and you
knew it, Sir. Beckwith, when you made’the
proposition, that he was a resident of the State
in which be made the application. It is all idle
to talk ot swearing tohfs residence in any oth
er State than this. His residence in a State
means that be intends to remain and live in the
Slate. A man who goes into the State of
Michigan, Indiana, or lowa, and swears that he
is a resident of that State, when he intends to
leave it when he has accomplished some spe
cial purpose, haejeommitted perjury. And be
cause Mr. Burch would not he driven to this
infamous conduct, he has been persecuted.
Now, if the couusel upon the other side de
sire to make any correction of my statements
In the conrsc of my argument, as they have no
reply, they arc welcome to do so. If I say
anvthing that isnntruc they can correct me. ’
Mr. Beckwith —The proposition was that
Mrs. Burch should go into Indiana and take up
a residence there, and get a divorce. We then
believed she could get it according to the stat
utes of Indiana.
Mr. Van Arman— lndeed! indeed!! How
could she get a divorce without perjury ? Had
she auy grounds upon which she could obtain
a divorce without perjury?
Mr. Beckwith—Yes sir; upon the ground
that 1 have already mentioned.
Mr, Van Arman— Upon the ground he lias
already mentioned! She bos committed adul
tery, and therefore she could get a divorce!
In order that she could get a divorce she must
swear against Iter husband that he bad abused
her; that there was incompatibility of temper
between them, and that she could not live
with him. Mr. Burch was asked to consent
to that. Now I ask you to draw the distinc
tion between swearing to a lie yourself, and
consenting that your wife shall doit? I beg
uny of you who arc nice casuists, who may be
perfect masters of sophistry*, to sum up the
difference between perjury nnd subornation of
perjury— between telling a He under oath your
self, and inducing some other person to do so.
The gentleman cannot get out of the situation
In wruich he has placed nlmself.
Mr. Beckwith—l have no desire that you
shall improperly misrepresent me. I stated
distinctly, at the time, that the divorce would
he granted upon the ground that they did not
lire happily together.
Mb. Van Arman— You know that there is
no ground for divorce in Indiana or auy other
Slate, ot that sort—none but the fact ofTneom
patlbllity of temper. The fact that they can
not live happily together Is not in the statute,
and the gentleman knows it. If he disputes
it, 1 wilt read him the statute. It tnuH he
shown that they had quarreled, repeatedly
quarreled. Now that was a lie; they never
had quarreled; and the gentleman know it,
and 1 knew it.* And Mr. Burch would not
consent to any such proposition. Now, if you
think he ought to have done it, then yon will
agree with Mr. Beckwith upon the subject.
’Something was said about a deed of bin
property that Mr. Burch gave to Mr. Fornum.
Now 1 would like to know what that has to do
with the question here of the gnilt or inno
cence of this defendant? Whether Mr< Burch
made a deed of his property or not, what has
that to do with it ? It may he wrong; it may
prove him to be more tender of hi* pecuniary
interests than he ought to be. But does it
hare the slightest tendency to prove whether
tlds defendant is gnilty or Innocent? But be
fore you condemn Mr. Burch in this respect,
even though it has nothing to do in the case,
I beg yoor attention to his situation just then.
He was a banker. The use of bis property
was requisite to his bonking business. He
was subject to the exigencies that overtake
all men in that business, and might for imme
diate and Indispensable purposes wish to make
use of any real estate h« possessed. Was it
singular that he should desire to have it under
his own control. They, have no right to com
plain. It was no wrong to her. It was his
property, that he bad earned with his own
hands. All that was hers he sent home. And
I am not at liberty to tell you what proposi
tions have been made to support this woman.
Mr. Burch is anxious aud willing to maintain
her in anystylc she desires. Ills not money
that divide* them, and we cannot litigate that
question in this suit. And the gentleman Is
most uujnst to bring anything of this soit
here, for the very reason that be know* that I
am not at liberty to bring In proof to answer
it. He knows that it could not be done; that
such proof would be inadmissible. That mat
ter yon most dismiss entirely from your con
sideration, bccansc it cannot be litigated here.
We cannot prove what offers Mr. Burch baa
made to support this woman. Wc cannot
prove that be has always stood ready to give
any reasonable amount of money for her sup
port In life. I cannot offer that proof here,
for it wonld not be admitted. And yon must
see how uqjust it is for the other side to briug
anv such considerations into this case.
I will proceed now to close my argument.
Mrs. Burch, on Wednesday, the 18th of
January, 101 l her husband's bouse lor Albany,
for the home of her unde, Mr. Coming, under
the escort of a clerk, a married mao. She
must have arrived there the latter part of the
week: perhaps Friday. I think its was
on Friday. Mr. Coming says, I think,
that on her arrival there he was either
absent from home or went away from home
immediately for a short time to New York.
At all events, on the Tuesday of the next week,
having notified Mr. Burch by to egraph to
meet him at Suspension Bridge, be and Mrs.
Burch left Albany aud proceeded to Suspen
sion Bridge, leaving her at Niagara Falls, two
miles above the bridge, and returning to the
bridge .and there awatiog the arriving of Mr.
Burch. On Tuesday night Mr. Burch arrived
and they bad an interview. Before that inter
view* Mr. Cominghad seen the letter Mr. Burch
wrote to Mr. X’ruyn, .in which Mr. Burch had
Informed Mr. Frayn of the misfortune that had
befallen him, the guilt of his wife, and In gene
ral, narrating to him all the circumstances, as
well os the means by which be had pro*ured
her confession. Mr. Coming says that in that
Interview Mr. Burch bod reiterated what he
had written to Mr. Frayn. And you will re
collect what he added as to the mode of obtain
ing that confession, that he shook his fist in
her face. Now Mr. Coming . savs no
more of that |int.rvicw of which he
tells you, than I have stated. The counsel upon
the other side did not choose to draw out of
him anything more of that interview, it there
was anything more. Nowl beg yonr attention
closely to what followed. Mr. Coming savs
that oiler that interview he returned to the
Falls and there rejoined Hr*. Burch; that he
told her that Mr. Burch, in addition to the
charge of adultery that he had before mode -
against her, also charged her with having con
nived at an attempt to ruin Mis* Fannie Burch
by Stuart. And be says that that was all that
he said to her, or she to him on that snbject.
He says he did not exchange' dne word with
her In reference to her guilt or innocence, nei
ther before he started from Albany—l beg your
attention to that—neither before ho started
from Albany, neither on fals way from Albany
to Niagara Falls, nor at his Interview with hsr
at the Falls alter the interview with Mr.
Burch, nor on the way back from Niagara
Falls to Albany—not one word. Evemhing
that passed between him and Mrs. Burch dur
ing all that period, was that he told her that
Mr. Burch chanred her with conniving at the
min of Fannie Burch. And I think he adds
that be never bad any conversation with Mrs.
Burch on the subject of her guilt or innocence,
until he bad got back to Albany, alter that in
terview with Mr. Burch.
Mr. Beckwith.—l think you misrepresent
the question, though not intentionally. He
did hot say that he went up to the Fills with
Mrs. Bnrcb.
■ Ms. Van Arman.— Nor did I say so,
Mb. Beckwith,—He says, as I understood
• him* that he did not go up or return with her.
Mr. Beckwith.—lt-- ....» *
her to Albany.'Her brother v:; -
Mb. Van Aim an.—l thaui. *o.-
correcting me, if I am wroLg, fur 1 may fe lia
ble to mistakes, os this ease is a very lengthy
one. I. would be obliged to him to correct me
in that or in anything else. I will admit that
he did not return with her to Albany. And it
makes no difference whether Mr. Coming went
with Mrs.- Batch to Suspension Bridge and
then up to Niagara Falls and left her there, re
taming to the Bridge, or whether he went first
to Niagara Falls, leavixfg her there, and then
down to the Bridge. That Is perfectly imma
terial, Bat be says he saw her at the Falls af
ter the interview with Mr. Burch, for he says
that he there told her of the additional charge
made against her at that Interview by Mr.
Burch. It is certain that she sits down there
and writes a letter to Mrs. Thomas Burch, and
it 3s evident tbat Mr. Coming must have seen
. her there at the Falls, because it was there
that be told her of thlsadditlonol charge. Now
the Falls and Suspension Bridge are but two
miles apart. He went to the Falls to see her
after the interview with Mr. Burch. Now Mr.
Coming went out there forthc purpose of this
interview with Mr. Burch. This lady bad ar-.
rived at Albany the Friday before, with the as
tounding intelligence of what? Either that
she had been guilty of adultery, 'and for that
reo-on was expelled from her husband’s house,
where she lived for twelveyear?,andbad come
back to her mother’s roof to hide her shame
and disgrace, or that that husband with whom
she bad lived In peace and happiness for that
period of time, bad first extorted from bertha
false and injurious confession of her guilt, and
then driven her from bis house. One of these
two stories she had to tell on her arrival at Al
bany. Tint can admit of no doubt, can it?
Now if she bad admitted her guilt on her arri
val there, and Mr. Coming had beard of It, no
matter whether from her or anybody else, I
coil easily suppose there would *be little to be
said. If he knew that she admitted her guilt,
if she did not deny it, if as she had admitted it
to Mr. Burch, so she admitted to her mother
and friends in Albany, there was little to l>c
said; the less said the better; there would be
minced of discussion or investigation; there
would be nothing more to be said about that.-
Mr. Corning might want to ace Mr. Burch for
the purpose of determining her future desti
ny, what should be done for her, how she
should be supported, and whether a divorce
was to be obtained, and upon what terms, and
when* and when. But as between Mr. Corning
and their friends and Mrs. Burch, If she con
fessed the crimethere was to he codfrcnssion.
But if on the other hand she denied it. and
charged Mr. Bnrch with baring extorted that
confession from her wrongly, or by force, os ,
fhe charges here; If that wai&re charge then,
there was very mnch indeed to bedone. Now
I*t ns see what followed. Mr. Coming look
Mrs. Burch with him up to Niagara Falls and
left her there and went down to Suspension
Bridge. ‘ Of course it is understood that they
went there together, or met there. She went
to Niagara Falls, and he went to Suspension
Bridge, for the purpose of that Interview with
Mr. Burch. Now, when he arrived there at
Suspension Bridge, if Mrs. Burch had denied
this guilt, aud charged Mr. Burch with having
obtained this confession falsely, wrongful!?',
and by force, when Mr. Burch came there add
affirmed her guilt and restated all the circnra
s-ances, I ask yon if Mr. Coming, with Mrs.
Burch within two miles of the Bridge, would
not have confronted these two persons and
tried to elicit the truth ? How would he hare
acted, I ask you, if Mr. Coming had doubted
Mr. Burch’© storv—if he did notbclieve it ?He
was there with Mr. Pruyn and with Mr.
Batbbooc, her two warmest, nearest, ami
most influential friend?. Mr. Famarn, from
Chicago,was there, and be os well as Mr. Burch
t*»ld Mr. Coming that this woman hail confess
ed this adultery fully and freely. If Mr. Cor
ning doubted it, if Mrs. Burch denied It. and
the was then within two miles of him, I ask
you, would he not have confronted them ? At
least, would he not have asked her whether It
was true or not? He met her there at the
Vails afterwards and had a conversation with
her, but he did not say one word to herbv
way of inquiry as to whether that was true or
not; not a word. He went back without ex
*hanging a syllable with her on the subject of
her Innocence. I ask yon if that will bear?
Ton know his anxiety In behalfof this woman;
you see the interest be takes in herbvhisef
lorls here; you know his relation to her. ttat
of an uncle, and of father by adoption. Now,
1 ask yon if he would pass through tbat whole
week or ten davs without making one Inquiry
whether Uris woman at tbat time actually de
i.icd or admitted her guilt, if he had any
doubt about It ? Could tbat Interview at Sus
pension Bridge have passed: could Mr. Bareli
have there charged to this father i< hors and
tocher friends that this woman was guilty of
ibis crime, while she was within two miles of
t hem, denying the charge? And yet you hear
no word of denial from Mr. Coming, for you
may be sure Hr.*, if he had denied it lie would
have told you so here; yon may be sure of
that. But vou hoar of no such thing said here.
Ile heard Mr. Burch’s charge in profound si
lence, and now what do they next do ?
Mrs. Burch returned to Albany. What was
the nest step taken in this case? She knows
now, at least, that her husband did not intend
to live with her any more. If she had enter
tained a lingering hope that through the inter
vention of Mr. Coming she might reinstate
herself in her home and live therewith Mr.
Bnrch as his. wife, this hope sbe now
Knows is cut off, and that their separa
tion is final. Now, at least. If she is
not guilt}', she has no motive whatever
to pretend longer to he guilty. Yet, after
?he returns to Albany tbc, first thing she docs
is to write that letter to Mrs. Thomas Burch
which you have heard read. I beg vour atten
tion to the fact that that letter, ns well as the
letter to Mr. Valentine and the letter to Dr;
I’attcrson, were written after this interview
between Mr. Coming and My. Burch,
:md after Mr. Buach had gone back
to Albany. The letter to Mrs. Burch was
rent lu one to Mr. Valentine. And in the let
ter to Mr. Valentine she inclosed a slip re
questing him to hand to Mrs. Thomas Burch
the letter she bad written to her. saying,
“ There is nothing in it which I ought not to
write. Ot course I shall not write again.” I
will not read the whole of this letter to Mrs.
Thomas Burch, but I will read passages from
it simply to show you that it contains a defi
nite and distinct recognition of her former
confession; and a? clearly as in any confession
she had made, admits her guilt of the crime
for which she had been expelled from her
homo. I beg you to remember tbat this letter
was written after her return to Albany, and af
ter this interview at Suspension Bridge.
“ You wIH.I trust pardon me for writingyou
at this time,” “wretched, fallen as I am. I
cannot let yon for one moment think that I
have ever connived at, or wi-Ued the ruin of
your daughter Fannie.” “ Beg Mr. Burch not
to think so any longer. I have given him good
and just cause to think there is nothing too
vile for me to do or countenance.” “Mrs.
Burch, tell your daughter Fannie, that if they
have any love of admiration, to check it nov.
Had I had fewer friends and liked admiration
less, I should not now have been an outcast, u
wanderer, I might almost say a beggar. My
ruin was commenced by exciting my jealousy
regarding ray husband,'and then, 1 sec It now,
plotting did its work. Tell thcgiristoshunU,
Jly from it as they would from the dread si
moom. I have been too thoughtless, I have not
deliberately rushed into ruin. Oh! no, indeed
1 have not. When I think of the gnat, tbc
dreadful wrong I have done my husband, it
►corns as though I conld not live and suffer.
Then, too, my sin against God has been so
great. Do you, Mrs. Bnrch, think he wPI
ever forgive me?” “I have been all alone
since Thursday, and have had time for thought.
I Lave prayed, too; prayed for forgiveness of
God, and have prayed that Mr. Batch would in
time forgive me. X deserve all this suffering,
and I pray it may be the means of bringing me
nearer to my God.”
Now what construction arc yon to put on
that letter? You cannot forget when it was
written; yon can never forget these expres
sions. One of two things is true—that letter
bears upon both of them—one of two tilings
Is true: either that letter was written by a
woman who had committed adnltery and was
penitent, and in that let'cr cxprcsses*ber peni
tence of that crime, or that letter was written
by a woman who had been driven from her
house most wrongfully, cruelly and wickedly
by her husband after he had extorted a false
tonfissiou from her of the crime of adultery.
Now there are but those two constructions to
be put upon that letter; there is no third one.
One of those two things is infallibly true, and
you on your consciences must say which. If
ibis Idler contains a confession of her guilt, if
it refers to a confession she had previously
nude of the guilt she had therein confessed, it
of course settles this case. No man can gain
say that; that admits of no controversy. You
mast take this letter, aud the letter to Mrs.
Famarn aud say whether they contain merely
general coutesshms of general delinquency, or
whether they refer to this particular crime.
In the letter to Mrs. Faruam, she writes:
“ Were you told that that awful man said, I
was not beloved by my husband but that he
loved another, and she him? Yes, and again
Ibis last lab be said tbc same thing, and said
‘she is a she devil, never have her in vour
house again,’ then too, be made me thlakyou
all loved her better than me.”
Iu another part of her letter she mentions
by name tbc person whom her husband loved
better than her. as sbe was told; mentions her
name “Mary,’’and also says that she at one
lime thought “Mr. S. I? right, that my hus
band does notlovcme, and vet I tried to think
that he did nut love her. Now I know, oh!
so well, that he never loved her, and yet how I
have sinned against him.” In this letter she
mentions tbc persons by name. Now is there
any room for argument at all on these letters ?
Tbc idea that llicy were procured by any fraud
or force; letters written In Albany to her
friends, unknown to Mr. Bureli, unknown to
any human being that had any interest in hav
ing them written; such an ideals totally out
of the question. And either of these letters is
just as perfect a confession as is the original
confession In .express. terms. Now 1 ask to
know upon what cauthly grounds you can
avoid the effect of these letters? .
But togOA-litUefunher in tbesamccoonec
tion?'Howcaa yon escape the testimony of
Mr. Famam upon this subject ‘ Is there any
pretence that ha is false? i hey asked him,
when on the stand, and 1* beg yonr
attention to it —they asked him. Did
yon tell Mr. Corning that you did not
know anything about this case V*. He said
that be did potycll him. to, bnt that jie did tell
Mr. Corning'lust Mrs.- ‘Bnrch had confessed
this offence to him. And for the purpose of
laying the foundation to impeach him, they
asked him, “ Did you not tell Mr. Corning
that she had not confessed to yon ?” Wh«t
was his answer ? “No, sir, I did not I told
Mr. Coming that Mrs, Burch had confessed to
me, and I told him what she confessed.’* Mr.
Coming was on the stand here. Why did not
they ask him whether Mr. Famam did tell him
that he did not know anything obont this case,
and that Mrs. Bnrch bad not confessed to him?
They bad laid the foundation to impeach Mr.
•Famam. Why did they not Impeach him by
Mr. Coming?, Plainly, because he did nottell
Mr. Coming so, and Mr. Coming knew It and
they knew If ’
Now some of you know Mr. Famam. And
I ask you whether there Is anything against
him on this record? Is there anything against
him anywhere ? • Is he not one of the most
honorable men In this State, one of the most
respectable? He tells you that this woman
confessed all to him. The effect of her confes
sion to him in substance is just os perfect as a
.written confession. She told him of the means
by which Stuart overthrew her chastity. She
.«■ V-.
V:’-t!-!* tldnr, besides
- ‘ : r . V '• >'..U les
-1 lave lieu* ,M.- : ..-h.ution
to ?eaich farther. No argument can possibly
servo here if the simple reading iff these docn
meu sdo not serve. If you have resolved that
this testimony ahall rwi convict this woman,
argument Is useless, if your minds are open
to conviction, these letters must work convic
tion without any argument from me. And I
have done little more than present them in
their order, and show the circumstances under
which they were written. They are stronger
than all argument; the language in which they
are coached referring constantly to events that
have passed, and connecting these letters nat
urally with her previous confessions; telling
Mrs. Famam that she felt better since she had
confessed, referring to the confession she had
made; telling Mr. Valentine that she had long
been upon the very point of confessing, an 3
deterred only from the fear of being separated
from her children; speaking to another wit
ness in the same manner; writing these letters
afterwards, and referring to that confession
aud endorsing Itall these are strongerthan
an v argument.
Vr’hat are the objections that arc alleged to
these confessions ? One of them is tbat they
were made under the influence of phvslcal
fear. Another is that they were made under
a promise tbat she should be allowed to re
main at Mr. Burch’s until Mr. Corningarrived.
Now, the desire of remaining at home until
Mr. Coming arrived certainly coold have no
effect after she did leave home; could lure no
effect after she knew she was to leave home
before his arrival. Margaret O’Hara say?, and
all the witnesses ►ay, that on Tuesday she
stated to them that she knew she was going
the next day.- If she had been induced tu
make this confession on the false promise that
the should remain hero until her uncle Corn
ing arrived; if that bad been the means bv
whichhcr confession had been procured; if that
had been the reason ot her confession, when
she knew she was going to leave before lie ar
rived , she would certainly have recanted her
confession, or at least not have repeated it.
> Bat you find her late at night repeating U to
Mr. Valentine; you find her on Wedncsdav,
when she was preparing to go, repeating it to
Fannie Burch; and yon find her, aftershe had
gone, ou her way, and for ten days after her
arrival in Albany, repeating the same thing in
her letters. Now, the influences which they
allege as having produced the confessions are
not competent to produce them. Is it not
silly to pretend tbat for the mere privilege of
staying till Mr. Coming came, she should be
induced to make these destructive confessions
at all ? Is it not idle, in tbo first place, to al
lege that? And is It not idle to allege that
Hie same influence operated to make her re
peat the confessions after she knew she was to
go, and after she had gone ?
And so far as the argument In regqrd to
physical force is concerned, it can haW no
earthly reference in any way to any bnt one
contusion. She conld not have been under
any such Influence of force when she signed
the last confession in the presence of Mr. val
entine and Fannie Bnrch. And certainly no
influence of fear could have operatedupon her
when she made these oral confessions in the
house, and the subsequent written confessions
by letter. Then what follows? Whv, that the
influences which they say produced these let
ters could not possibly have produced them;
because they were written after these influen
ces had ceased, when she had become lotailv
disconnected, and out from under these in
fluences. Aud now, if these confessions were
voluntarily made, I ask you, what follows?
•.an there be any donbt of her guilt? Now,
what the law is, both in this country and Eng
land, has been shown to yon. It Is that a con
fession voluntarily made is as effectual to con
vict in this as in any other case.* It Is only
where it is made from collusion that the Court
rejects it. No such argument can be alleged
iu this case.
I have a few words to mv in regard to the other
evidence in this case. I shall be brief in my re
marks upon that subject. In the discussion ui cir
cumstantial evidence my associate went prettr
throughly over it, and but for one circumstance,*!
should not refer to it oil. I have no desire to re
iterate what has been said before, for 1 hare ob
served the attention you have paid the counsel
who have addressed you, and Iljave no apprehen
sion of yoor lorgeUincanything that relates to anv
portion of this case that U at all material, and I
shall not weary yon with the repetition of what has
already been said. I shall trust to vonr recollect
ion, to yocrcandor. and voQrde*ire'to Inveeil-aie
Mis case by tbealdof all the lights that have &ea
furnl-hed you. and In connectin'; these circum
stances I begyoouo recollect thatlt|aapec>dlatitv
of circumstantial evidence that when von dissever
me circumstances, os counsel for the defence here
have Idly sought to do, you destroy their force.
Take any case of circumstantial evidence. Take
for Instance the case of a man who is accused of
marderupoDcircumstantialevidcnce. Tbevprove
against him. for instance, that there was a quarrel
between him and the deceased; that be had uttered
threats against the deceased; that he had made
preparation, such as obtaining some weapon of an
unusual character: they will prove that he was
seen su-plclunsly near the vicinity where the act
wa* committed, or where the body was found:
they will prove that subsequently to the death of
the deceased and subsequently to the alleged mar
der, in short, lied hastily and changed his name, or
did some other act Indicating that Tie was operated
upon by a sense of guilt and the impulse of fear.
Now, take all there circumstances together and
they make a strong case. Separate these circum
stances, take anv one of them alone, and it amounts
to nothing at all. Instead of a chain of evidence
competent to fix guilt upon a man. it would be a
mere meaningless. Isolated incident. luring no
tendency or tlgnidcacny whatever; and so it is al
ways with circumstantial evidence. Now 1 ask
you if there is any sense. If there is auy logic, if
there Is any rcasoiuln counsel standing hero before
yon and saying. “Why, Mr. Stuart called there on
such a night and at each an hoar, and fora brief
period was alone with Mrs. Burch*" Now. gen
tlemen of the jury, does that amount to anvthint:.
is there any guilt in that* Cannot a married
man spend an hour innocently with another
plan's wife* Arc you of »o jealous a dispo
sition that yon will aasome that because there
was un opportunity for wrong, therefore that there
was wrong* And then the counsel tarns around
and charges as with having asserted before you.
that if a man and woman, not married to each
other, could be shown to be in any degree attached
to each other and fund of each other’s society, and
then prove the opjiortanity. you must then Infer
adulteiy. We never asked vou to infer uny such
thing. We simply read to you a rale of law, and
the rule which we read to you applied so well, that
the counsel un the other side said that Mr. Burch
had hunted It up before he obtained this confes
sion. and before he knew the circumstance? from
which he could manufacture this evidence; and
then that bo made tbi« case to fit that rule.
It I* a pretty sufficient evidence that the
counsel thought the rule fitted this case,
because be said that the facts were manufactured
to tit the rule. If the rule were pertinent to the
facts, of course they would fit it. Bow probable
that reasoning is 1 will nut stop to discuss. Bnt
the rule insisted on here upon that subject is the
rule of common tense: wb! his the best role in
the world. No man walks «» sure as be who walks
bv the light nnd guidance of good old-fa-hloned
common sense, just ns it has existed In ullages.
We do insist here and we shall insist, and we have
no doubt with the most entire success before you.
tiiat if a man. and a married man especially, seek
the society of a woman not his wife, and docs it
beyond the limit of ordinary civility and ordincrv
friendship, continually seek-* her society alone; If
it appear from their conduct that there is a passion
al attachment between them, it becomes suspi
cious. A passional attachment: you understand
the difference Itetween that and ordinary friend
ship. Mere f iendshipis one thing. You’have un
doubtedly among your neighbors many a man that,
from appreciatin'; the good qualities of vuur wife,
entertains toward her a sincere friendship and re
gard . But how will he manifest it ? The signs and
tokens of It arc as plain asthesaaat noou-dav.
An honorable, high-minded and chivalrous friend
ship between a man and woman, no matter that
they may nut be married, 1? as harmless as friend
ship between man and man. No man can be de
ceived as to the character!.-tics of such a sentiment.
Ifa man has a sincere admiration for your wife, for
her good qualities, how will be manifest It ? Will
he eueak into your house In your absence every
time that after watching your footsteps be finds
you are gone* Will he go there and get that wife
In a room alone, and set there hour after boar, ex
cluding all other persons from the room * Will he, in
-hurt, by the mode in which be seeks her socletr,
by the mode in which be enjoys that sodetr, man
ifest the fact that be fears yuor presence and mine ?
This was the kind of intimacy- that ! referred to
when I spoke of luti oades Indicating a i»ass!onal.
guilty attachment. The signs, and syraptoms.and
indications of that passion are just as manliest as
the indlcatlonsof the other. If 1 have an honora
ble attachment to my friend’s wife. If I admire her
tor her intelligence, or her virtue*, or her good
qualities, most assuredly if mr friend know* it. lu
stead of being offended be wilt feel himself flattered
if he has any opinion of my judgment. If Igo there
openly and boldly, in broad daylight, meet her in
his presence and in the presence of others, 1 may
seek her society never eo often without exciting
any suspicion. Bat the moment that the thing as
sumes the character of secrecy. the moment that
instead of meeting her openly and by daylight. I
seek opportunities of the absence of her husband,
the moment that we make secret appointments,
the moment that 1 proceed little by little to take
those indecent familiarities and liberties with her
which indicate the excess of passion, that moment
the t bing instantly changes.
Now, I ask yoa what was this attachment be
tween Jjtnart and Mrs. Burch* The counsel here
admit it: they do not deny, they cannot denv in
the face of all this evidence, that there existed an
Improper attachment between Mrs. Burch and Sm
an. They say he had allured her affections from
herhnsband; that 1 understand to be frankly ad
mitted. But Ido not care whether it is admitted
or not; admissions upon either side will weigh
very little with von. Take this evidence; have
vou any doubt of it? Is it not proved that they
’-ought each other’s society secretly ? But I need
nut rehearse all these circumstances: yoa me-t
view her conduct with .Staart In the light of her
conduct with Boyd and also In the light of her
confessions. They say we have proved bnt
little. X ask you bow murk we could have proved
of the intimacy with Boyd* They say if she had
Indulged In any deep decree of intimacy with Sta-.
art we could have proved it more fnlly. And yet
for three months that woman admits, and her.
counsel admit here for her, that ahe had been in-f
duicicg In the most indecent liberties with
anaer that roof, and we could not have proved a
single thing except by Boyd, so adroitly had she
managed it by signs, signals, by secret appoint
ments with him, by meeting him at street comers,
bv admitting him at night when her husband had
gone away; she had so avoided and escaped notice
that even her intimacy with Boyd hid gone to the
very verge of adultery, and Mr. Burch could not
prove the least thing about it, except that she bad
walked with him In the street. And if she could
do that with Boyd, if she was so adroit in those ar
tifices by which secret meetings were obtained, if
she was in the habit of cheating her husband and
escaping notice In her intercourse with Boyd, can
you. nbt believe that she was In the habit of doioc
the same thing with Staart? She said she cared
nothing for Boyd, that he was indifferent to her.
Aud she admits that Staart was the most fascina
ting man she ever saw. The counsel admit that
she was deeply attached to Staart. I ask you in
the ligbt of her conduct with Boyd, in the light of
tbese confessions, what must you say * What do
our witnesses say! Yoa are told that Mrs.
.Burch saw Mr. Staart passing by on Wednesdays*
.she was looking out of the window, and calling
Fannie Borch*»attentionto him. she said, “there*
goes the villain; I will get Mr. Valentine to write
a letter to that young lady’s father that he is with,
and warn him that be will rain his daughter, if she
is allowed to associate with him. Ana what does
she say to Mr. Valentine when be goes in
there to see her * She pronounces Smart a vil
lain and a wretch, aud wishes somebody would
shoot him, and is anxious that Mr. Valentine shall
writ*to that gentleman about bis daughter and
warn him against Stuart. The counsel would have
yoa believe that all this means nothing, that while
this woman was saying this to these persons, she
and Stuart had notbeen Intimate at all; that noth
ing had ever passed between them. If yon believe
Smart's oath yon most believe that he was totally
guiltless of any familiarity with Mrs. Burch trans
cending common friendship.
Bnt to proceed farther. Take these letters which
she wrote. What in the meaning of these chases
which 1 have read to you* Ido not ask yon if yon
wish to arraign her by them. Bat these letters
mast have some explanation. There was a cause
for these letters; there was a cause for all these
letters and the verbal confessions. And 1 ask you
If it will bear to say that they amotmt to anything
less than a fall admission of the deepest Intimacy
with Staart ? In the light of these confessions, in
the light of her conduct with Boyd.: proving -the
fact that with this man Boyd, on a three months*'
acquaintance, she went to to the very brink of
adultery; In these lights yon most read these cir
cumstances and say what they signify. Now, if
she would go these lengths with Boyd, if she old
go these lengths, if she practised all these artificer
and deceptions to secure private interviews with
Boyd, can yoa dooht the testimony which goes ; •
•how that she dm the same thing'with Slaar-
And can anything be more obvious than that shed •
seek secret interviews with Stoart ? Now, so far- *
k P ro °* which supports these circumstances goes
there Is no discrepancy of any importance la It. It
was entirely Idle and gratuitous for the cocm-el on
the other side to attempt to heap suspicion and
calumny upon that yoanu lady, Miss Fannie Burch,
xou may strike her testimony out of the ease en
tirely, and It does not weaken at all the proof of
these facts; theyare fixed Just as well without her
tfftbnony. The conduct of the counsel towards
Miss Fannie Burch wi* entirely an act of auperro
gation and of brutality. -I can characterize it by
no other name. That young lad v was the bosom
frlesd of Mrs. Burch, bbe has etied asibitter tears
over her fall m any person living, except her own
husband. She would have gone as Lit to serve her
as any person living would, and so would Mary
Spalding also. Unfortunately for Fannie Burch
she was residing In the bouse where these occur
rences happened. She was compelled tocome upon
this stand and testify as a witness; she could out
do otherwise. 1 ask yon how she ought to have
been treated under the circumstances ? If she has
testified Cilsely, that is another thing. Your daugh
ter. sir, ermine, might be compelled to testify in
a court of justice in similar circumstances. Imag
ine that she were your daughter, and had been
brought, without fault of her own. into coart, and
compelled to testify in a case as delicate as this;
aad imagine that the counsel in the case should
treat her as the counsel In thU case hare treated
Fannie Burch, what would be your feelings ? It U
by bringing these things to our own homes, and
applying them to ourselves and our families, that
uc appreciate the justice or injustice of them. If
that orphan girl, Mary Spalding, whose honest fi c
you looked upon here, as pure and as high-minded
a girl as lives In the West or a-.ywbereelse. if she
hod been the near relative of one of you. what
would hare been yonr feelings at the coarse of coun
sel towards her here In this ca-e. Counsel have
gr&it privileges; but have they the privilege of ut
tering slanders and the most unfounded calumnies
against a respectable witness. They tell you in the
end that they believe that these witnesses have told
the truth substantially: though they think that
being relatives of Mr. Burch, they may be a little
swerved, but that they have told the truth on the
whole, or meant to do so; they admit all that In
the end, and yet with the lowest Insinuations
about alary Spalding's conduct at Saratoga or else
where. They sav; -If we coold only investigate
tuem; if we could only go into them." Why, thev
could have investigated them, every one of them';
it was open to them to investigate all; they might
have entered upon any kind of examination they
plea-eii against Mr. Burch and Mary Spalding, or
anybody else, and proved it. too. If true. Thev
could have made any Issue with ns that the law
permits. But when they have not cbo-en to make
it. when they could not allege anything wrong
with Mary Spalding, when they have proved no
thing against her. I ask yon, is tt manly. Is it
honorable, is it Indicative of any confidence in their
case here, that they should come forward and with
out any foundation attack her character? They
say that Mr. Burch gave her a thousand dollars.
So he did. and I honor him for it. Yon have seen
that girl before yon. and you have some Judgment
of human nature. You have beard her account of
her own conduct and of the conduct of Mrs. Burch
and Mr. Stuart, and I hare nut the slightest scru
ple in submitting her to your criticism and your
candid Judgment. Now. do you believe, have you
the slightest suspicion on your mind, that either
the giving of that thousand dollars, or any other
thing that has been shown to have been done in
this ca-c. was based upon any improper motive?
She was tinder his roof; she was poor: he was
maintains her and supporting her; he had some
stock in a railroad company that was drawing a
small interest: it was a fund which if laid aside,
the interest of which would uearlv maintain her;
and Mr. Burch very judiciouslv. and verv properly,
and very liberally, and much against the character
they give him—fur they say he is a great miser and
a very stingy man—gave her this laud placed at in
terest, for the purpose of furnishing her a portion
of her support. Now they warn you against sus
picion. \V bat sort oi a temper would that man
posse-s who from on act of geueroaitv of this kind
sbonld Infer an Improper and guilty’ attachment?
The truth Is tbat men who act from guilty attach
ments), the rake, the man that goes about seeking
to ruin a woman, seldom makes as munificent a
gift as that. They are seldom liberal meu; they
ure too selfish for that. A guilty attachment be
tween two persons i» seldom accompanied with in
stances of real generosity and benevolence. Mr.
Stuart never gave a thousand dollars to any of
his victims, lie presented them withgew-gaws,
rings, lore-tokens and little things of tbat kind.
1 say again it is all idle, and worse than idle, for
the counsel to attack these witnesses. I ask you
to take the testimony of their own witnesses, in ef
fect ; because so far as Margaret O'ifara and Uou
ora Cook arc concerned, and especially so far as the
witness Ann Eggleston is concerned, the testimony
D their own evidence. Yon coold easily see what
the feelings of those witnesses were. They do not
pretend to deny, they cannot denv. that their feel
ings were strongly enlisted for the defence. If It
was true that Margaret was at some lime inclined
to favor Mr. Burch, she Lad got all over that before
she came here. I would Just as soon you wuuid
take her testimony alone as any other testimony In
the case. What docs her testimony prove! I will
not go through and enumerate’all the circum
stances. But one thing you will remember, tbat
Mr. Stuart and Mrs. Burch were seen in the act of
kiting. So Margaret swore when she gave her
deposition. The second time she swore in effect
to the same thing. There is not the slightest va
riance In her testimony on the two occasion*, ex
cept that they gel her here to say that she did not
see their lips meet, or bis face touch hers. Vet she
s lys sbe was within twelve or fifteen feet of them,
taut Mrs. Burch had her bonnet ou. aud Margaret
says she thought they were kls-lng. Now bow
many chances would there be for her to be mista
ken? TheywerecomiuglQtothcha:i; thev passed
within ten or fifteen feel of her; and she said she
saw them in the act of ki-slug. When she was
cross-examined here she said that she did see them
Li the attitude of ki-siag; sue conld not see their
lips touch, or Stuart's lips touch her face, because
she bad her bonnet on. Do vou think vou could
be mistaken under such circumstances, within ten
or fifteen feet of them? And then recollect the
explanation that Stuart suggests; he seems to
have a very convenient recollection. He save be
may have put his hand upon her hack to help her
Into the bouse, or something of that kind. Now
this will not do. Margaret say» they were Joking
and langhingwbcn they came in. and she saw bis
arm around her shoulders, or something of that kind
and they were in the act of kissing, and she saw
Mrs. Burch’s hands up as In the act of keepiugbim
off. That certainly was not helping Mr#. Bnrch
into the bouse. That will not bear. Either Mar
garet has told a falsehood, or there was something
very like kissing between these parties.
Another case: Mary Spalding testifies that
while they were silling alone together in the
library, having occasion to go in and sec Mrs.
Burch for something, she opened the door, ran
in hastily, aud lound him sitting in from of
her with bis arm around her waist. Now is
that true or false? If this young lady had
been intending to swrarto a lie,and assist Mr.
Burch to carry this case, she would have gone
much further than that; she would nave
sworn to some act much more decisive than
that, and it would have been just as easy lor
her to do so; fora Be Is a lie, and whether a
great or a small one, docs not matter, so far as
the wickedness is concerned. And Stuart has
forgotten this, also, though he says he thinks
t here must have been something in it. Whv ?
Because he says that after he had heard that
the tiling had been told by Mary Spalding, be
mentioned It to Mrs. Burch, and told her he
eoald not understand it, that he had no recol
lection of such a thing; and ©ho told him of
an jucidcnt, or brought it to his recollection,
1 hat made him think there might he something ;
iu it. He says she told him that one day lie
attempted to take from her a portmonuaic,
and she thought the story might be founded
upon that. Now, unluckily lor this whole
yarn, take her answer made upon oath, and
yon will find that she there tells a different
story about this transaction; she undertakes
there to attempt to explain it, not to denv it.
Her sworn answer In this cose—and if {her
deny It I will produce It—states that one day
Mr. Smart was there in the house, and they
were alone together in tbat room, and Mr.
Stuart Insisted upon her telling liim something
she bad beard about him and bud mentioned,
and she refused; and he attempted ©till to co
erce her to do It, and she laughingly tried to
get away from him; and as she attempted to
spring, he caught hold of her arm, and just
then Mary Spalding came in. Now that was
her story: nothing about the portraonnalc,
nothing about the reticule, hut a totally differ
ent story. Miss Spalding’s storv is not recon
cilable with either of them. She says that
instead of Mrs. Bnrch standiognp and attempt
ing to get away from Stuart, or being In the
act of getting away from him, they were sit
ting down iu chaira, Mrs. Burch in an arm
chair and Mr. Stuart in a lower chair, iu front
of her, with his arm around her waist. Tbat
is tbc attitude she places them in. Her testi
mony is positive, and contradicts totally
Mr. Stuart’s recollection. However, I will
come to his testimony pretty soon.
In addition to these two circumstances
of personal familiarity actually proved,
you have one circumstance that I con
sider very significant indeed, testified to
by Margaret O’Hara. She says that one
night when Mr. Smart came there, and
as he was about going into the parlor or
lihrarv, it docs not matter which, as be and
Mrs. Bnrch were going In together, and were
about to close the door, Stuart thrust out his
head and looked tip and down the ball. If I
misstate 1 hope the counsel will correct me.
Margaret says that after they had entered the
room, Stuart thrust out bis' bead and looked
up and down the hall. Now, the counsel upon
the other side attributed that to near-sighted
ness; that he was very near-sighted, and that
it was necessary. In order to find his way into
the room, to mm around, after he had got in,
thrust his head one of the door, and peer up
and down the hall. Now, what has hia near
sightedness to do with bis putting his head
out of the door and looking up and down the
bull? Bnt tbat is just as good an explanation
as the counsel can give; aud I presume, from
the high opinion 1 have of his talents, it is as
good an explanation as any one can give, ex
cept the true one; but I think he underrates
your intelligence. What did Stuart, In fact,
do tbat for ? Here was Mr. Stuart, going Into
room for the purpose of being alone with
■tills lady. He deliberately turned around, pat
Us bead ont of the door, and looked suspi
ciously up and down the halt What was hU
motive? What could it have been, except to
be sure that he was safe from intrusion? In
all reason, must that not be the sole and only
motive tbat yen'can attribute to his conduct?
And if that was his motive, is It not most con
clusive of the character of the transactions in
tbat room? Perhaps the crime was not then
'committed. But is it not conclusive that he
was seeking tSat interview and tbat meeting
for the purpose of indulging In familiarities
with this woman, which be did not wLh to
have observed ? It is not necessary for me to
insist that the circumstances attending this
interview might not possibly fill short of
proving actual adultery, if they stood alone.
Bat I submit to you that this one transaction,
if nothing else was In the case, this one fact of
a married lady entering a room with a man
who had paid her as many attentions as Smart
bad previously done, and'that vnaq then thrust
ing bis head ont of the door and looking
around in tbat manner, then going In and re
maining an hour and a half with closed doors
—I say It is conclusive, beyond all possibility
of donbt, tbat there were transactions prac
ticed there which they did not desire any one
to see.
Then on another occasion we find that she is
there in the house alone with Mr. Stuart at
night. That is the night of the 23d of Dec.,
I&>7. After all Mr. Stuart’s Ingenuous ex
cuses, U there any earthly donbt inyourmlods
what the intercourse between these parties
must harcteen ? There is no concealment
about the fact. 3fr. Famam was an intimate
friend of that family. Stuart and Mrs. Burch
were there alone together In a room with
closed doors. There la a knock at the door,
and the servant girl, Margaret, while going to
the door to answer it, asks Mrs, Burch if she
will receive visitor*. Stuart must have been
on terms of the deepest intimacy, most have
felt very confident ot his position, very sure
of the ground be stood on, to assume the re
sponsibility of telling the servant that nobody
should be admitted. It shows the highest de>
gree of confidence In his own position in that
ousc, it shows that be felt most completely
at home there with her, when he undertook
to assume the responsibility of telling theser
vant to admit no one—that they desired to be
alone. -And Margaret understood the extent
of his authority and privileges, for she did hot
wait for the directions of her mistress- -she
bad his wishes; he tells her in effect, “No,
admit nobody.*’ Mrs. Burch smile* and sstb
; nothing; she submit* It to Stuart to »aj
whether she shall receive company or not that
night, and Stu.rt tell* Margaret to admit no
body. Margaret goes to the door, and you
recollect what she said. la*k what was the
motive of Stuart and Mr?. Burch in refusing
Mr. Furnam admittance ? Wo* It, us he said
because the was sick ? Then why should she
receive Stuart, and stay with him all the even
ing, and play checkers with him? Would It
require any better statu of health to receive
Mr. Faro am, who had called kindly to ask
about her health—would it require any
stronger state of health and condition to re
ceive him than to receive Mr. Stuart? Gentle
men, it will not bear; that Is no reason. She
was, as he very eloquently terms It, In
duhdbille, that is to say, as he says, not dressed
to receive company, 'indeed! but be was not
at all surprised that he wa* received. N# mat
ter how she was dressed, or whether she was
dressed at all or not. A* was received. Ho
says he wx* not at all surprised that he was
received. But she could not receive Mr. Far
nam, a man sixty years old, her nearest neigh
bor and her Intimate friend; her dress was cot
fit to receive him. Yet Stuart wa* already
there. Now, what complexion docs that bear
I ask yon ?
Bat to go on a little farther. A pretty good
idea of the intimacies that exist between per
sons can be derived from the view taken of
them by the persons who are In the same
house. Now one thing b very certain. Thcv
undertake to tell you there was no
suspicion «n any side of any Improper intima
cy. Quite the contrary most emphatically ap
pears. It is as manifest here as evidence can
make It, that thev were suspected !>v every
member of that household, except Mr. Burch
himself; and it is more than likclv that he had
a degree of uneasiness about it. 'I will prove
to von, beyond a possibility of cavil, that thev
were suspected by every member of the house
hold, except Mr. Burch. In the first place
how was it with Margaret O’Hara? I do not
say they were suspected of actual guilt, that
there was any conviction on the minds of these
servants that they were guilty, because other
wise they would have taken a different course.
But that Margaret O’Hara, that Honora Cook,
that Miss Mary Spalding, that Mbs Fannie
Burch—all of them actually suspected an Im
prudent intimacy there, b perfectly manifest,
and that they were convinced of a strong at
tachment between these parties, is perfectly
manifest. What people pay here on the stand
from motives that Influence them now may
sometimes admit of question. But wbat per
sons say at the time without anv motives of
mu-statement, b pretty good evidence of what
b true. There arise* in thb case a piece of
evidence that cannot he manufactured, that
was created at that time,more conclusive than
anything else In the world; the letter of Mary
Spalding to 3lra. Burch, written in the fall of
IbW, written when Mary Spalding supposed
Mrs. Burch to be an innocent woman. She
supposed her to be au imprudent woman. It b
true, and told her so in effect. That letter was
written long before any expectation of thb
trial or any of these events ever entered the
mind of any human being. What b tliat let
ter? Mary Spalding bad heard that .Mrs.
Bareli was oflonded at her. Thb she had
heard from her aunt who Lad been vbiting at
Mrs. Batch's, and who hifortncd heron hern
turn that for some reason Mrs. Burch was of
fended at her. She sits down at once and
write* a letter to Mrs. Burch; and I beg vour
attention to it. 1 will repeat the substance of
It from memory. You will recollect It you
Lave heard it read.
“ I knew at once what Is the cause of the
olTcnec yon have taken. A long time ago I
followedAlr.Burrillout ofyourhouseonceve
nicgas he wjis leaving it, and when at the
door i paid to h m, “Isaac. you do wrong to
carry messages from Mr. Stuart to Mrs.Burch.”
He»aid nothing; did not deny it. I cannot
tell what else. "I changed him besides, with
carrying the letter from you to Mr. Stuart.
But at the end of the interview I said to him.
“ Now, Mr. Burrill, what would vou sav, and
what would yon do. If a man showed himself
as fond of your wife as Stuart docs of Mrs.
Burch ?”
Tins Mary Spalding said long before this
suit was ever thought of, when no other mo
tive bat truth could have influenced her.
Here she wus appealing to the conscience of
Borrill, to his mauhooj; to all those motives
that should influence a man. She was asking
him what he would do; she was putting the
quest ou to him upon his honor and con
science. She says to him, “ What would you
say, what would you do, if a man showed him
self as fond of your wife as Stuart docs of
Mrs. Burch?” And what does he reply? She
says that he replied to her, “ I would shoot
him death” Now, Is that statement of hcr’s
iti this letter true ? Did fhe thus follow Bur
rill out ? did she thus charge him with taking
notes from Stuart to Mrs. Burch ? and did Bur
rill mike that reply ? Most undoubtedly. In
the tiret place, this otter was written by Mi?*
Spalding when she had no motives to slate
falsely ;'lmig before the event became of any
importance.' Mr. Burrill was called here to the
stand, and he dared nut deny one word of it.
If It lud been false, he would have denied it.
It l> proven by the direct oath of Miss Spal
ding; It Is supported by this letter, which
cannot He; it is not denied by Mr.Burhll when
ou the stand. That fact, then you can take us
granted. What does it prove? I ask you,
coaid Mary Spalding have been deceived In re
gard to’ the character of the Intimacy
between these parties? You can nev
er prove, you could never swear to.
not one of yon could ever swear to one-half
you kuow about the intimacies of two persons
who meet in your presence. Let a man and
woman meet in your presence often, who
are attached to each other. Ten thousand lit
tle things that you can never describe influ
ence your Judgment as to their relations.—
Thcir’looks, their tones, their Jcstures, their
movcimmts, a thousand little thing* that are
perfectly indescribable, influence your opinion.
Alary Spalding had witnessed all this; she
knew the state of feeling between these par
ties. And what dees she add in her letter to
Mrs. Burch? She says: “I knew that Mr.
Stuart was a bad man. I knew that be was the
most fascinating man that I ever saw. I knew
that he was seeking to gain a control over yon
through your affections.” She supposed, when
she wrote that letter, that she was writing to a
woman still honest. And *ho tells her, U I
knew- that Stuart was seeking to gain a control
over you through your affect ions, so as to have
yon in his i*ower. I knew he w;is a bad man,
and that his purposes were base; and I told
Burrill that he ought not to carry messages be
tween such a nun and you. I have nothing to
regret In what I have done; I ouly regret now
that I bad not talked to you still more frankly,
os a sister should address a sister.” That is
what .Mary Spalding says in that letter. Now
that proves what 'her real sentiments were
about that intimacy. And can vou, I ask you,
have any doubt about It yoursefves?
Let us go a little farther in this matter.
What did Burrill think of that intimacy ? HL*
answer shows his opinion still more etnnbatl
ea.ly than MUs Spaldin t'sshows hers. He was
token! what he would do if a man should exhib
it the same fondness for his wife that Stuart
il d for Mrs. Burch. What was his opinion of
it? It was that it was of such a character that
it deserved death; for ho said that he would
shoot that man dead who should take the
same course in regard to his wife. And not
only does this testimony furnish a standard by
which to ;udge of the Intimacy between Mr*.
Burch aad Mr. Stuart; but shall I show you
scon that It furnished a prettv good standard
by which to Judge of Mr. Burrill himself?
lure he was earning messages,tokens of love;
flattering remarks, from Mr. Stuart to Mrs.
Burch. He did not deny that, in all hi* testi
mony, and dared not. Mary Spalding accused
him of it. Mrs. Burch in'that letter which
they have brought in here—and which I will
comment npon in a few moments—in that let
ter she accuses Burrill of bringing flattering
remarks from Stuart to her; she makes him
out a go-between. Mary Spalding accuses
him of beluga go-between. And lu bis reply
to her he exhibits his total heartles*ness.
What Is the effect of that answer when proper
ly translated? Why It Is this; “If a man
should do the same t blog to my wife that Stuart
Is doing to Mrs. Burch, I would shoot him
dead; hut because she is not my wife, I will do
all I can to forward these relations between
them: lam willing to be a go-lietwcen ami
help along a transaction so infamous that if it
related to my wife I would pursue the man to
death.”
This illustrates fairly the characterofßarrilL
Do yon want any better estimate of a man’s
character, any bolter standard by which to
Judge him, than to say that he Is capable of
carrying from one man to another man's wife
complimentary r« marks and messages, for the
purpose of carrying on a guilty intimacy be
tween them? l)o you want any better stand
ard to Judge him by than that ? He admits, in
substance, that he did all that, for he docs not
deny it. He says that he carried three notes,
and only cavi’a about the number. He nDosays
he earned other notes from Mrs. Burch to Mr.
Stuart. He says that Mrs. Burch visited bis
office at all times through the winter of 1857.
He wIU not say that she came as oftcu as once
a week, but be says that she came there a great
many times. Now, what was she at his office
for that winter? What business had she with
Burrill except In connection with her liasur i
with Stuart? What occasion bad she to go
there ? He says that she wanted to send some
message to bis* wife; and yet It turns out upon
investigation that his house, where bis wiie
was, was nearer Mrs. Burch’s bouse than his
office was, and it wonld be easier for her to
carry a message to ButriH's house than
to go to bis office with It And not only that,
but be can rememberbut one message that she
ever sent to his wife, aud that was a short
message. Now, all this took place at the very
time when her intimacy was closest with
Smart, when this adultery was committed. Is
it explained why she was so often runningto his
office? And you will remember that be says
that at the same time he was visiting her at her
bouse os often os once a week, therefore, they
' were meeting as often as twice a week all the
while. Now take that in connection with the
fact that Mary Spalding accused him of being
a go-be-tween between Mrs. Burch and Stnari,
which he docs not deny, and, that he admits at
the same time that the Intimacy wassceh, that
it* it bad been his wife, be would kill the man.
Take that evidence, and what do von make of
Barren?
Then take what followed u soon ns thl* salt
was commenced. Mr. Burr ill and Mr. Stuart
at once became almost one. Sir. BurrUl bad
in his breast a secret which would either rare
Stuart or rain him, as Stuart thought. And
you find that while one of them is a man pcs*
teased of a high order of intelligence, a man
of taste, and some genius—l re.er to Stuart—
BurrUl is a man of no sort of consequence, no
intellectual development, no cultivation; yet
yon find this ill-assorted pair always together.
As soon as this suit commences they are con
stantlrin each other’s society. Before that
BarriU bad been the tool; after that he became
the equal and companion of Stuart. Such is
always the effect of confiding a guilty secret to
a man below yon: the moment he gets yonr
secret he becomes yonr master. BurrUl was
Stuart’s master; and how deeply and how far
he has used his power over him, yon cannot
know. Bat yen see that from the time that
this suit commenced be and Stuart were con
stantly in company; they consorted together;
they played card* together; they played bill
iards together. He is there at Stuart** boose,
or Stuart at his bouse, all the time. And-at
last as this trial approached, Stuart, fearing
the light and trivial character of BnrrUl, ana
that no would develop what he ‘knew/
took him home to‘bis boose where-'be
could keep him safe ; took him ; and
his family Into his house. Do yon believe that
fitoort takes boarders? Then what has be
Burrlll In Ids home f.. r , except that ho feared
to trust him clcewL*.n*? Furamonth past,
the trial approaches, he ha* found it uccts
f .try to take him home where he could see to
him. Take these £ic(a, and can you make out
of Burrill anything less than au accomplice *
In weighing these circumstance* I beg yon
to recollect once again, that whether they are
of one character or the other—whether they
are Innocent and harmless, or whether they
tend to guilt—depends entirely upon other
circumstances. If the Intercourse b open and
avowed; If, In the case of a married woman
and her alleged paramour, bb visit* are mode
In the presence of her hasbaud as often '■» oth
erwise, Is Indifferent to the presence of other*,
then you may Eiirly Infer innocence. But If,
on the contrary, he obviously seeks secrecy, it
matters not whether you can prove any act* of
familUrityor improperllbertii’s between them.
In ninety-nine cases in a hundred you
could not prove any such thing, bap
p*»sc there h.ul occurred adultery be
tween Boyd and Mr.-. Burch; wc could not
luive proven one act of intimacy between
them, not a single act that occurred when they
were aloue together, they had managed tho
matter so prudently. And ao It happen* iu
ninety-nine case* out of one hundred
where adultery b charged either nron
confession or otherwise. You cm not
prove any act of actual familiarity. Women,
who have any sense of modesty, or
even of prudence, do not do these things pub
licly; neither do men. What do vuu excect
us to prove In any case ? What do’vou cxnect
will be seen In any case more than has been
seen In thb? On three or four occasion* acts
decidedly passing the limits of propriety have
been shown; ou other occasions have occurred
long private Interviews, night after night, fur
a considerable length of lime, for a great
length of time, running through a period of
two years in fact, at interval*. And! submit
to younownponthb proof. In tbeU’ht t flier
Intimacy with Boyd, la the light of h*-r confes
sions, wbcthcrthcdcfondaut’seounselhavc ad
mitted It or not, there can rest no doubt upon
your mind* that there wa* guilty, improper,
and illegitimate attachment between the par
ties*. continuing at least for a period of two
years.
What follows from that? It may not fol
low conclusively from the circumstances* alone
that there must have been adultery, it might
not evcn.with thealdofall the 10-timunv,about
her conduct with Boyd, prove adult r\ r . It b
not necessary for me to urge that i:' would.
But when thi* protracted intercourse between
them bproved; and when it b shown that she
has gone with Boyd to the very verge of adul
tery ; then, when it b further •li.iwu, that at
the end of thb two years* close Intimacy with
Stuart she had openly contused adult* rv with
him and admitted it, and had repeatedly con
fessed it for ten da vs alter she had left her
Lome, and only bogie* to deny U alter ibis
suit has commenced, and after Mr. Coming
his forbidden her any longer to admit it. a*
luotras she was left to hem If viuitimullv*ad
mitting It, and only denying it when Mr. Com
ing compelled herso do so, after he had taken
from her band* tho letter which Dr. Pat
terson had written to her, and Tot h ti
ding her to write any more; mur deuvieg
It until long after thb suit w.is eimtncnccd
continuing to confess It for at least ten dav*
after thb suit wa* commenced—l a-k vou.'lf
thb does not make a case upon which we can
control the verdict of a jury, what docs? that
b the question I want now : to present to you.
Con you conceive a case stronger th in this?
Would one eye-witness make' it stronger?
Would one witness on the stand swearing to
the fact of adultery, be halt as strong :w thi-?
Would It not be easier to believe thru ;1..u wit
ness was corrupted and bribe*?, than to be
lieve that all this ma>s of evidence \va.- manu
factured? Which would Ik* the easle-: of be
lief, that Mr. Burch had extorted ao thc-ceon
tVasino* and manufactured all thf-evidt nee,
or that he bad bribed one or two mm : <•* me
here and swcarfabcly? Which would be must
probable? And if you will not t;;ke this tes
timony, would you take anv? A:.d if von
would take any’ what,in the'name of Heaven,
will you take?
And will you say that this is an odious law,
audthat you will no; execute it? Will vou
say that a man shall not have:» divorce u.r tills
kind of wrong? I know that in some portion*
of the Union they are vervnluciar.t; .none
this remedy. In the Southern Stares.a I have
had occasion to observe, among the el.,valrv,
it b thought dishonorable :m«l unmaniv for*a
man to seek legal redress, or injurou-’ t.i hb
honor, especially of thb kind. The dm I, the
bowie-knife, and pistol, are the substitutes for
juries with them. And even hire there b a
large class of the community who ]••«»!; with
disfavor upon a man's seeking to right a:; hdury
bylaw; itb thought ntiehivitlrous and dishon
orable.
Yet if the man who seeks this rctmdy at
your hands, and who has been induced and
slandered and villltlcd a* you have lu ard bore,
if this man had met Smart on the s-irtet aud
had shot him in his tracks an luvra'b-r he had
learned of this, these very men would I; ;v<> ,ip.
planded him for the act, and have ju.- ■;»;! 1 him
in it. Kefuse a verdict for the com; L’.iaatd ami
you proclaim the bmvlr-kndV and th.* deadly
pistol Such is the injustice of pt:Mlc opin
ion. They will refuse am m bi-b gal remedy;
they will accuse him of morsing ur>>m:d and
hunting np testimonyagain.-t h«s wife. Now
how cun a man proceed in such a ctoe as this?
Must he not examine hi* servants, those in
his own house where the crime wa* commit
ted? Must he not look up the testimony that
exists, if he is proceeding fora divorce ?’ And
because he docs this, they say he is a mean
man ; that it is an unmanly thing hi him If be
looks Into hi* wife’s fault-*. That means when
translated, that he shall not have a divorce, that
no redress shall be given him for tI;U kind of
Injury.
They say Why did he not take hi* rejn-.* in
hi* own hands? Will.it depends np.-n juried
more than any other cUf* of men in the World
t« settle public moral* and public manners.
Let the juries in the North rr m**- oar legal
rights aud remedics.and the same false notions
of honor, the same course denied from the
code ofchivalrv, or some agency of that kind,
will be adopted. Let the people bo dipriv«d
of their right* in any such case as thk-. and
they will resort to the knife and the pistol.
This Is a class of wrong that men cannot suf
fer, tliat they cannot endure; they must and
will have redress. It 1* for you to say what
that redress shall be; it L* forym; to ?.;v wheth
er they shall have redress or vengeance;
for one or the other they will have. Audit*
redress can ever be obtained, If a wrong can
ever be righted, if a Jury arc ever com-
f >elled by the absolute Impossibility of refusal,
t seems to ms. gentlemen of the Jury, that
you are so situated. What morn c mwedo?
What additional proof would be possible in
any case on earth?
But they say that ourrasels overthrown en
lirely by the testimony of Mr. Stuart. Now,
before speaking of the reasons why you should
not believe him, 1 will speak of or** thing that
ha* been paraded here with great triunqTi.
They say he baa been sustained uj a mat: of
truth and veracity. Among other* to .-n.-taiu
him, came a poor tool, one Mr. King, who has
somewhat astonished the public by sayingthat
be is a lawyer, aud who also said (hat when
Mr. Dexter railed ou bin: for Id* knowbdge
about a certain letter, that he tried t.» mislead
him, motberwords, voluntarily faNiiu-d. This
Air. Klug *ay* of himself; could any one »•!-«
say worse? Wc bad never pretended that ho
wad a man sunk so low in the scale of society
os that bis oath In a court of Justice, in an or
dinary case, would not be receiveil 1: would
not have benefited Air. Burch to have shown
that he had admitted into bis house a man so
low in the scale of being that he could bnvo
been impeached In a court- of jo-dice. You
kuow how low a man must get before hi* tes
timony can be Impeached in court. You have
seen it done, and you know upon whom it car.
be done. Now I have no doubt that Mr. Stu
art's testimony would stand reasonably well
with any jury where he was known, in a ease
in which he was not interested. He has been
in high life; he ha* been a man connected with
men of the highest distinction; he ha» even
once been elected to Congress. And the coun
sel on the other side tell you that these facts
stand against the character that we give him
for chastity. I ask yon If they do stand against
It? Therel* no use ofshamso.-fabeprctensca
here. Is it true that the seducer, even the no
torious seducer, I? expelled from the best fo
ciety In the land? The reception winch Air.
Stuart, after all that 111* been proved against
him, met here, before you. aud from this com
munity, shows how much this vice hurt* a
man lu the estimation even of women. The
mother and daughter arc seen doing battle for
the seducer and destroyer of female chastity.
It is amost deplorable wet. but it Is neverthe
less true, that a bad character forehastitv decs
not damage a man as it deserve* to. It is a
vice which, in the estimation of bo k scxc», la
treated as venial; and it is a burning shame
and disgrace to the female sex of our laud that
they do lake this view of the subject. The
vice most of all dangerous to them, except
perhaps drunkenness —the vice that sink*
lhem,thcvice that most Injures their future
prospects and welfare In life, that vice they,
too, insist upon looking upon a* venial; :ma
even here supporting. Especially iu the more
fashionable walks oi life, women would rather
court the society of the accomplished seducer
titan that of a plain but houot man. Is not
that true ? and it Is a proof rather against Mr.
Biuart’scbastlty, and iu lavor of hi* being a
rake, tlisit he "was so well received lu more
fashionable life. I have seen something, at a
distance, of that thing fashionable society ; I
would not wish you to understand that 1 nave
been very near it. I had a* much to I cam
abont those highly intellectual exercises
as any one here; such esciei?e> a* rooting a
ring out of a pile of flour with one’s nose, and
other like elegant and refined performance#,
which are so much practiced In fashionable so
ciety. When I come here I knew no more
about those things than you did. I hud never
been engaged in them. I bai always by the
circumstances of my life been excluded from
that charmed circle. It gives me great pain’
and causes me great humiliation to admit it
before you. I would not wish you to Infer
that I have been excluded on account of my
chastity. I have no doubt that if 1 had becu
a hundred times as good looking a man as E
was, and a great deal more wealthy, and as un
chaste as even Stuart, 1 might have met with
as good success as he has; and I might by this
time have been as accomplished a; even coun
sellor Caulfield has shown himself to be in all
those elegant accomplishments that you tare
been instructed In. It has been a great loss
tome, as you perceirepthat 1 have been thus
excluded.
But I ask yon now, all badinage aside, is it
true that an unchaste man is always excluded
from society or from olUce; or that it weighs
a feather In tvvor of In* chastity that be has
been to Congress? I wish yon knew half as
much os I have learned in regard to the morals
of that body. The counsel here have whined
over the scandal cast upon the name of the
daughter of a very lony man. Well, If the
daughter of a lofty man chooses to associate
with a rake until her name becomes a rep reach
to her family, it is her owm fault; and the
higher she is In the world the more she de
serves her (ate: - 1 have a tbou«md time* more
sympathy for the poor and ignorant who fall
victims to the art of the seducer, than I have
for the rich and educated. 1 may bare a very
vulgar taste in this respect, but It is natural to
me.
And they say to yon that Stuart has been
supported nere. Now, let ns see bow he boa
been supported in the matter of truth and ve
racity. w bat do* their witnesses ray? - That
h.s character for troth-and veracity has not
been called fn'question/- The counsel sav—
“ Why do you not Inquire into his chastity?”
The reason is, tad the? knew it, that It would
Bolheadmlssableherefwe could not do It; wq