Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1860-06-01

oordon,r,d ,,,o, .ccordlngly tins suit was
brought, the same awyers appearing against
the @irI that haJIpon the former trial prose
,.',to5 i, h"r "a Or Mr. Hatch was taken from
,,r;Son AID .ppeared before the grand jury,
ino, ,vL;,G testimony the present bill of in
Ji,tn,on, was found. AT the sitting of the
Curt he was taken again from his confine-
,,a,s at hard labor, and allowed to testify
a,dnst his former prosecutriX. His testimo-
ny, corroborated by that of his wife and many
Others, disproves the evidence upon which he
was convicted, and brings to light state of
facts T. f the most astounding character, which
will involve the girls parents and others high
in authority, in one of the most extraordinary
conspiracies on record, the principal points OF
which are these Several years since the IA
ther OF the girl suddenly rose from poverty 10
comparative wealth, and averred that his prop
erty had come TO him by the death and will
OF a distant relative. This story was believed
by all who knew him. In 1851 Mr.. Hatch was
appointed chaplain to the Wadsworth house
of correction. While in that position he
was often called upon 10 pray with a con-
Wet who prOtesscd to be in deep distress
concerning the condition of his soul. In
one Of these interviews the convict commune
Gated to him the fact that Plummer had OBJ
tanned his property through the commission
Of crimes, involving theft, burgarieS, highway
robbery, and even murder. Not putting i'm.
plicit confidence in the fellows veracity, how
ever, Mr.. Hatch deemed it proper to await
further developments before imparting his in
formation to the authorities. In the mean
time the convict died, and Mr.. Hatch was
alone i'll the possession of the facts
Plummer, mistrusting that from Hatchs
position as chaplain to the institution he had
learned the clue to his ill.gotten wealth, pro.
tessed the most extraordinary friendship for
the minister's family. The Plummers often
visited the Matches, but their visits were never
returned except by Mrs. Hatch. AT length
Mr.. Hatch was induced to take the elder of
Pummer's children 1.-THE one mentioned above)
into his family as scholar in August last.
She remained but two weeks, when she was
removed by her mother; alleging as the rea.
son chat the fare furnished by the minister's
family was not good enough" There it may
be noticed, that the young gentleman who
possessed an income of 9l5,000, and her mar
riage was fixed to take place upon her seven
teenth birthday. After Miss Plummer's re-
moval from Mr.. Hatch's house, the relations
between the two families ceased, and Pummer
commenced the action against Mr.. Hatch,
upon which the latter was convicted i'll March
last. 1t now appears that the little girl was
placed in Mr. Hatch's family for the purpose
OF decOylng I'M into snare, adrOltly set by
her father, in order to get him (Hatch) out of
the way, hoping that the punishment would
be Punishment from England. On this trial
every item of evidence on the part of the girl
at the former trial was disproved, so that in
stead of her marrying her betrothed in few
years, she will probably be convicted of an in
famous crime and her fathers igained wealth
will not save him from his gallows. In legal
view of the case, the whole action is is sin.
gular The taking OF Hatch from prison and
allowing him to testify in his own behalf is
unprecedented. The testimony of Mrs. Hatch
in this city, Also is directly at variance with
the rule against permitting wife to testify in
behalf of her husband. An appeal will be
taken, probably, to higher court, should the
girl be found guilty of perjury at the present
trial, upon these supposed intormalites and
if the course now pursued is sanctioned by
the Queens Bench, it will inaugurate course
OF procedure which will materially conflict
with the established principles Of common law
and criminal prosecution