Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1861-09-28
LATE LOCAL NEWS.

THE BARNEY CAsE-Editoy Star: The publi
cation which sppears In your paper this afternoon
and which purPorts 70 be q correct report Of the
lated to mislead the public, that cannot allow IL
10 pass unnoticed.
Mr. Barney Is at common lac the guardian Of
bis children. The controversy 10 not Of his seek
ing. He 10 not asking letters Of guardianship
but defending bis children against the ofncious
Interference OF strangers The common law right
Of every parent TO the and custody Of his OF
spring IL assailed, first, on the ground Of Ia Iowa
decree Of divorce against Mr. Barney, rendered
In default Of his appearance 20 the suit and Sec
ondly, on the ground Of alleged misconduct On
the management Of the children; In the Iowa
SUIT, Mr.. Barney was never served with process,
nor had he any opportunity Of defending himself
or even any knowledge Of its existence; nor 10 II
shewn that any evidence whatever was offered.
Moreover, Mrs. Barney had not resided In Iowa
SUFFICIENT length OF time 70 entitle her 10 sue for
a divorce under the laws Of that State. They re.
quire previous residence Of sir months. Mrs.
Barney len Paris, in France, on the Tth day Of
May, 1s60; her petition was sworn 70 on the a7tk
day Of july $780, and the decree IL dated the I7th
day OF September, 1860.
As to the alleged misconduct ofMr. Barney, th.
only evidence is the testimony Of the French girl
Ale1andrine. The petitioner. Mr. J. w. DE
Kraft, was required 20 specify wherein 70 con-
sisted. Specifications were ordinsly sled: and
with them, as exhibits, twas offered bundle Of
papers, consisting OF letters written by Mira. Bar
ney, sr paTte dispositions taken in the absence Of
Mr.. Barney, &c, &c /, &C. This bundle the Court
refused 10 receive AZ part Of the specifications.
IL was then offered al evidence in support Of the
specifications; but, with the single exception Of
the Iowa record OF the divorce suit, (objec-
tions TO that being waived,) Il was ruled
out az inadmiaible. These rulings Of the
Court, believe, your reporter has not
published; but the public are RECALLED this az
ternoon with the contents Of the bundle styled
vouchers" Nos. 1, and ia heterogeneous
mass, the rejection Of which by the Court no law
yer will hesitate TO approve.
The publication OF these " vouchers" may sd-
minister to a morbid and prurient appetite for
scandal, but can answer no good purpose. The
life, property and reputation Of every man depend
upon a regard for the established rules Of evil
deuce. But especially in case like this, where
the charges brought against the father even IL re-
futed, must darken the lives Of bis innocent chill
dren, IL was to be supposed that you would Al
least confne your report 20 the evidence In the
case, namely: the contents Of the Iowa record and
the testimony Of the witness Alexandrine.
might well complain Of the general tone Of
your report Of this trial ard the spirit OF preju-
dice which pervsdes t. well the blunders into
which your reporter has fallen. But forbear %
say more than that the alleged suppression Of OBJ
scenity has given color 20 charge Of which
have yet to see any iot or uttle OF proof
Yours truly, w.D. DAvIDsI.
Friday, Sept. 81.
NOH.-TLe cs~I's court IcpOrter being absent
from the once in the discharge Of hs duties, has
no opportunity to reply to-day 20 the portion Of
the above note referring TO him; which we take
Il for granted he will take occasion 10 do in the
next issue Of the Star.