Cincinnati daily press. [volume] (Cincinnati [Ohio]) 1860-1862, 1860-06-07
The Great Burch Divorce Case In Chicago
Mrs. Burch's Defense Alleged Outrages
by Her Husband. f.Hf Nl..a

Mrs. Burch, wife of the Chicago Banker.
has recently published her defense of the
charges of adultery made against her by her
husband, and il her statements be correct,
she is the victim of an outrageous conspiracy,
and has been most foully wronged She
emphatically denies all criminal Intercourse
with any one, and petitions for change of
venue, on the ground that Mr.. Burch, on ac-
count of his position, exercises undue influ-
ence over the people Of Cook County, the
minds of the people being prejudiced. Yam
Among other alleged abuses and outrages,
she states the following, under oath: ar0a :
This defendant, (Mrs. Bureh) had had no
sleep whatever for twenty-four hours last
past, and but very little for a week, and had,
during that time, eaten little or nothing, and
being worn out with the complainant s abuse
and ill-treatment, and seeing no escape from
impending ruin and disgrace, except by the
arrival of her uncle, to whom, she thought
the complainant would listen, and who she
thought, would satisfy him of her innocence,
and relying upon the complainants promise
that no one should ever see the paper, and
that he would never mention il to any one,
she consented to write such a paper as the
complainant desired. The complainant then
placed before thisdefendant writing materials.
and she wrote paper as the complainant die
tated it, sentence by sentence and word for
word as the same was dictated to her Tho
CO.
as well as every other part of said paper were
each and every one of them dictated by the
complainant and written down as he dictated
them, and when the number Of times which
this defendant had been guilty of criminal
conduct was mentioned by the complainant,
she protested against writing it, as IL was so
terrible and was not true, but she only
brought upon herself the most severe and
abusive language-and 10 appease the COM
plainant said to him. Lett 90 50, TtOiu write
"When the paperwas completed.and before
she bad signed il, she again said TO the COM
plainant, how can you make me sign such a
paper when il is not true2 and she again,
upon her knees, assured him of her inno-
cence, and begged and implored him not to
compel her to sign it; but he sternly insisted.
and she signed it. As soon as she had signed
the paper, he placed before her another
paper, and said: Here sign that one, which
you read this morning referring as this,
defendant supposed, to the one he had shown
her that morning, stating that the complain
ant was the father of her child as herein be-
fore stated; and this defendant, without road
ing the said last mentioned paper signed il,
supposing that il was the same she had read
in the morning, and that nothing had been
added thereto. while the defendant was
signing this last mentioned paper, the COM
plainant opened the door TO her room, and
Mr.. Valentine, (the oomplainant's partner in
business) and the compliments niece, Fanny
Burch, who seemed to have been In waiting,
walked In. The defendant saw them sign
their names to said papers, and the complain
ant turn them down when they signed 90
that they could not read them.sln n no ~
.es-------ial-sl-r 1Sff tif Y