The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1844-07-31
that he had received them from Deacon Drake, OF

that he had received them from Deacon Drake, o
Phillips Church, South Boston.
Mr.. RIDDRIL here stated some facts IN relation
to the early part Of the history OF the developme nis
in the case, and what led to them, and as Deacon
William Lovejoy Of East Boston had been alluded
TO, he stated that geneman's connection with
Rhoda Davidson, and how he came TO take an In
terest in her welfare. Deacon LoveJoy stated 10
hun that he had known Rhoda some years ago,
that he was a native Of town adjacent to the one
where she lived. On visit there about eight years
ago, he met her mother, and in course OF CONVEX
satioD, she requested him TO take the girl into his
family and bring her up till she was Of age, and
wishing to do such favor, he consulted his wife,
and they concluded to receive her tor an Indefinite
time, and they either brought the girl home with
them or she came into their family to live soon alter
when they found her another place, and she
LETT. But they felt an interest In her, welfare
and she occasionally calling TO see them, an
acquaintance was kept up AT length she returned
came report that she was the mother OF an Ille-
gitimate child; that it was not known who the
father was, except that he was minister. Deacon
L. did not suspect any particular person, I'll. the
result of the investgating committee at South
Boston. and Rev, Mr.. Phelps gave him letter.
Knowing where the girl had lived, that in a con-
versation with Mr.. Charles Homer, upon the sub
ject OF Mr.. Farchild's case, he mentioned what he
one Of the Deacons OF Phillips Church, South
Boston, and told him of the rumor, and the idea
that prevailed that the father OF the child was
minister. Deacon Vinton mentioned II to Deacon
Drake. He knowing that the young woman oman; had s
went out to see him and inquire what ne knew
about it, He urged Mr.. Shaler, If he knew where
she was, to see her, and induce her to say who the
father OF her child is., lie then spoke Ct the sub
which she revealed the name, and her declaration
was put in writing.
Mr. FAIRcHILD-Did you not learn that the CIR
was cousin of Mrs Lovejoy!
Mr.RIDDELL-I don't remember hearing any thing
OF thai kind.
Mr. FAIRcHILD-That fact will come out in the
evidence.
Mr.. RIpDELL now read to the Council the state
ment Of charges brought against the Rev. Joey n
Fairchild, which were
That sometime in the summer OF lS4O, Mr.
Fairchlld did seduce and have criminal connection
with young woman, by the name OF Miss Khodi
Davidson, OF Edgecomb, Maine, while she was
September, 1912, had criminal connection witt
hers that she had an illegltimate child, and tina
she afrms he is the father.
To prove these charges Mr.. Rlddell stated tina
he wasno ready to Introduce N lss Davidson, he
sister, Mrs. Mary Eastry, and the Rev Mr. Shaler
of Brookline These witnesses, he remarked, hat
been examined by the committee, but ne did no
think IT proper 10 use any documentary evidence
or papers, but had brought the witnesses them
selves for the purpose of giving Mr.. Falrchlld al
opportunity to cross. examine them. Before tn
witnesses were introduced discussion arose as Il
the course which the Council should adopt IN re
latlon TO evidence, and the propriety OF using no
thing as in the investigation, but coed and vallt
testlmony-and the committee thought that such
course was more important IN this case In conse
quence OF legal investigation which had takeI
place in Boston. DIR. Beecher remarked that the
District Attorney, Mr.. Parker, i'll speaking Of TIN
subject, objected to the general course taken BY
Ecclesiastical councils in introducing much tina
was not evidence, and had urged upon HIM thu
importance of being cautious how evidence wa
taken.
Rev. Mr. EMMERsoN remarked that he ha'
heard that the Grand Jury of Suffolk had found
bill, and his opinion was. if that was the case, tina
the trial before the Circuit Court should proceed
that Of an ecclesiastical council as the former ha
the power of compelling the attendance OF witnes
SEES, and obtaining thorough investigation, an
he enquired if bill Of indictment had heen tonnd
DR. BEEcHER remarked that if a bill had beei
found the council ought not to know il, except II
formal way. He could make no statements tina
should go before the public he had heard at ON
time that bill had not been found and al anothe
time that one had been, and he supposed Their
had
Rev. Mr.. ADAMS said, that the District Atorne
seemed to be disposed to defer the action OF tn,
Grand Jury till after the decision oil the council
rather than MIR. Fairchid should stand before lher
| in the position OF cuprit.
Mr.. RIDDELL said, the committee did not lnten
| to Introduce any documentary evidence, excef
tor the purpose OF rebuttng documentary evidence
A desultory conversation now took place upo
| the subject OF administering oaths, and whether
oath could be legally administered. An appes
was made to Judge FarYar, who was IN the room
He stated that it was no offence to administer
oath in that way, although there was no legal Va
lldity in such an oath, and that II would NOT SUI
ject the party to an indictment tor perjury.
| Mr.. PHELPS said that the evidence he had wa
not strictly legal; he should produce number {
afIidaviis from Maine, that would show moral
not legal bearing
Mr. FAIRcHILD remarked that his evidence, e,
cept IN one case, was obtained from professors
religion and under oath from Justices OF the Peace
Mr.. ADAMS said he should rejoice at any ev
dence Mr.. F. might obtain bearing upon the trul
of the case.
| Mr.. RDpELL thought that in order to insurr
confidence in Ecclesiastical Councils, we shoul
use good and valid testimony. Mr.. Falrchid DC
lleved he should suffer for the impression made J
relation to the indictment. II was easy lot IN
one to go before Grand Jury and make state
ment-an enemy might de IT, and u was we
known that only one side was heard. lie though
hat the indictment was mentioned 10 intiHidal
him and throw out obstacles in the way
Mr.. BEEcHRR stated that Mr.. Parker sug2este
that the Ecclesiastical trial should go on, and tina
legal measures be adhered TO.
| Mr.. FAlRcHILp remarked that as II was state
| by Mr.. Rldde how the course marked out by IN
| Committee in their Investigations here, and ina
| DR.. Beecher was to sum up the evidence, he woul
| ask DR.. B. if he is to advocate that side OF IN
/
| Dr. BEEcHER replied, that as member OF tn
Suffolk Association, and as member OF IN
Church of Christ, he should state the truth, let
cut where il will twas now agreed that the VIII
| nesses should be examined, and to prevent an
correspondence from taking place between them
while one witness was under examination, IN
other should be out Of the room.
| Mr. BURGESS again renewed his motion that tn
Council have a secret session. This caused NOR
discussion and waste of time, and was decided Il
the negative, almost unanimously
(The principal witness, Miss Rhoda Davidson, o
| Edgecomb, Maine, was now called in. She cam
| in with the wife of the Rev. Mr.. Shaer OF Brook
| line, and took the oath prescribed TO her IN IN
name Of God, by Mr.. Parsons, one OF the delegate
| from Rye, N. II. Miss Davidson IS now ~ year
OF age ; she is in form and features, handsome
with face indicative of intelligence, and W.T.
manners peculiarly winning. She gave her tesii
mony very ntegbly, and with apparent cando
and iirmness Under the circumstances, consider
ing the number Of hours she was upon the stan
c,oss . ' q ,n;nation abe endured Tor the defenc