Daily national Democrat., 1860-06-28
The Great Chicago Divorce Case-Burch
VS., Burch.

The answer of the defendant in the case Of
Burch VS.. Burch at Chicago, has been filed
The case is one of rare interest, on account
OF the high social position of the parties. the
defendant niece of Erastus Corning of
York; the husband wealthy banker in Chi
cago, living in magnificent style in that city
and both parties belonging to the upper ten
of the place
lhe defendants answer is very lengthy
and If what she says is true. the comnlainont
ls one OF the vilest wretches that ever escan
ed unhung. She denies the charges of erimi
nal intercourse in gross and detail-savs the
specifications Of times and places bv plaintiff
are vague and indefinite, and proceeds to de,
tall all the most salient points of her history
since her first acquaintance with Mr. Bureh
which commenced in Albany, in 1912. when
he was n clerk in a bank lie came to Chi
cago later, and started banking house him,
selt-took particular pains at that time TO
ascertain his pecuniary circumstances. as she
was then living with Erastus Corning. and
after their marriage Mr.. Corning and friends
assisted Burch with their means. In 1855 n
misunderstanding about money matters oc-
cured between Corning and Burch and about
that time he commenced i'll treating, using
the grossest insulting language in private.
"'NN N"' SNhSS"itu Wy kluuneSS IN puUnc.
Money for ordinary expenses was refused,
though plentifully supplied to a young lady
guest First met David Stuart, with whom
the husband charges the first adultery) at
the fremont House, where she was introduc-
ed to him by her husband, and the warmest
friendship for that individual was alwavs ex.
pressed by her husband, up to the time of
business difhculty At one time went with
stewart and her husband to see Mrs. Senator
douglas, and once Edward Everett dined
Win them, when Stuart was pl esent After
wards Stuart came to her house and she saw
MN IN the parlor alone. While he was there
Mr Farnham called, and Mrs Burch sent
word to the door that she was engaged. NOT
knowing that it was Farnam, who was init
mate with the family. lie appears to have
been mortified by their refusal TO see him
and seeing Stuart's hat and shawl in the en-
! try, suspected something wrong. This affair
Is trumped up by Mr. Burch as the first time
! when Mrs B. and Mr. 5. had criminal inter-
course. The defendant further SAYS. that
having promised to tell Mr.. Stewart some
| thing she was interrupted by some Young
ladies; that when she was about to get up TO
receive them, Stewart caught her bv the
arm as II to prevent it, and this. she saws. is
the only liberty he has ever taken with her
Stuart. for some trivial cause, discontinued
his visits early in 1852 and did not resume
them until the fall of 1859 In July, 1885. a
young lady from Little Falls, N. Y, who
had spent several weeks at their house in
Chicago, much against Mrs Burch's will met
the complainant at Saratoga, where, it is
alleged, Bureh went by appointment, though
to do so he had to leave his wife and sick
child at Sachems Head, Guilfcrd Connecti-
cut. Bureh, while at Saratoga, kissed and
hugged this young lady, and had done the
same in Chicago while she remained under
his roof-kissing her frequently when about
to leave the house, and at the same time
treating his own wife with the greatest cool
ness, and generally showing the young lady
attention.
She confesses to an acquaintance with Car
Isle Boyd, a Sunday School teacher, with
whom she walked home from church, by
plaintiffs request; and, us her husband wished
it, also asked him to their house. During
Boyd's visits Mrs. B. was knitting smoking
cap, without intending it for any body in par
ticular, and when completed she gave it to
Boyd, to please his vanity, and later gave
him ring. Complainant, meanwhile, was
keeping up correspondence with the young
lady ut Little Falls. On the 7th of January,
1860, plaintiff commenced finding fault with
trivial matters, finally accusing her of
improper intimacy with Stuart Boyd. This
she stoutly denied and they went along till
the l4th, when he demanded that she should
sign a confession. She refused to do 1t, and
wanted everything left as it was till Erastus
Corning could arrive. Mr.. Burch agreed to
this, but in violation of his promise, few
days after, compelled her to sign paper
which was a confession of all her msdeeds
but which she says now, is all false
He eXtorted it from her, saying he would
never show it to any body, ard finally forced
her to sign, after he had dictated every word,
she continually protesting that it was IN
true He then made her sign another. which
defendant supposed was what she had writ
ten, denying all the charges he made, which
afterwards proved to be the confession on
which the complaint was based. He com
PEELED her to acknowledge her guilt by
threat of thrusting her out of doors He
tried to make her acknowledge herself guilty
at fifteen different times She would not
He said he had written to Mr.. Corning to
come to Chicago, and sent her to Albany the
next day, not allowing her to see her child
ren. In conclusion, she emphatically denies
all criminal intercourse with any one, and
petitions for change of venue on the ground
th"l MI DulCu oh dccOuhJ OF MS UOoltiOli
exercised undue influence over the people Of
Cook county the minds of the people being
prejudiced.-St. Louis cor. Alta.
KILLED BY INDGANs.-A correspondent of
the Stockton Argus writing from Mariposa,
June 22d, gives the following account of the
killing of two white men named Bean and
Gibbs, by the Indians: