Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1861-11-15

The BARNEY CASE BEFORE THE ORPHANS
CoURT, JuDGE PuRcELL-Mr. Daridge's Avgu-
,nsat.-On Tuesday Mr.. Davidge resumed his
argument by q review Of the evidence. He said
the testimony Of all the witnesses for the petit
toner showed no case, az 10 failed TO sustain the
allegations against the respondent. Alexandrine
Parfsit was the only witness who had testified to
improper conduct of Mr. Barney In presence Of
his children, and her antecedents were unknown,
and her testimony not only contradict Itself in
several important particulars, but Is contrsdicted
by her own conduct and the conduct OF Mrs.
Barney. Furthermore she 10 promptly and fatty
cOntradicted by two witnesses MRS. Barney and
Mira Oldfeldl In two points. Those ladies say
she said to them she did not these things Cthe
improper liberties with little Hebe;) her mother
told her, and yet she testifes here she saw them.
Again they testify that she said TO them they must
talk 10 her In French, she could not understand
English and she swears here that she did not tell
Mrs Barney to speak to her In French She
alleges that Mr.. Barney attempted to take I'M
proper liberties with her, and vet she remained In
the house afterwards; stayed there with Mr. Bar
ney while his wife came to this country, and
Barney could reach her room IL he choose to do
so without passing through Mrs Barney's. Even
IL she was to be believed there Is nothing In her
testimony to give the slightest color 60 the in
fernal charge brought against Mr. Barney in re-
latfsn TO his daug hter Hebe. This horrid charge,
from which human nature shrinks back appalled,,
originated in her prurient imag ination. She
fauy, deliberately lied and the other side dared
not put her on the stand to contradict Mrs Barney
and Mrs.. Oldheld
Mr. Barney did not live in a hole on a corner
and why were not bis neighbors and associates
called to sustain the charge Of habitual drunken
ness The evidence on the other slde-now
AleXandrine's was postrated, as Il ough TO be
amounted TO nothing against Mr.. Barney, and he
(Mr. Davidge) would have been willing 10 have
rested bis defence on II alone. He however had
called Mr.. Barney g relatives and neighbors, who
knew his habits as the other side failed 10 do
Mr.. Linton, counsel on the other side, partook
of the elegant hospitality dispensed by the respon
dent; and he was Just the man to bring proper
n Mr. akiD
could be proved. Mr.. Bradley, who dealt largely
in sdjectives, had seen nothing; but, from what
he had heard across the street, painted picture
from his own Imagination.
Mr.. Davidge briefly reviewed the other evil
dence, and e1patiated on the sacredness If the
lation Of parent and child. which the courts Of
chancery would not sever for immortality Of the
parent, IL the chidren's morals were not affected,
even IL the father kept a woman as his wife, and
did not bring her in contact with his children
Nobody would get married or have children, IL
the iron and despotic sway sought to be instituted
here was 10 prevail In the community
Mr. Dividge then spoke Of Mr.. Bsrney's un-
happy domestic relations in Paris, and said that
In such cases both parties were generally in the
wrong. Take MIR. Barney's conduct for the last
two years, as presented in evidence here and
then consider the provocation he had before that
ume-ns cnhoren LETT without protector, and
his own wife putting aside her name and coming
here under fictitious one
Mr. Fendall said that was not In evidence
Mr.. Dayidge said II was in evidence she came
TO America, leaving her children in Paris without
natural protector. To deprive Mr. Barney Of the
custody Of bis children, you must prove improper
conduct now; and for the last two years there is
not single shadow Of Teprosch cast upon him
Mr. Dayidge then spoke Of the spirit of CHARITY
which animated Mr.. Fendall and prompted him
tn ascrfbe Mr.. Barney's reform to " dodge'' to
obtain the custody Of his children, and said such
charitable views would turn the world upside
down.
In view Of Mr.. Rarney's conduct for the last
two years let him have his children; and IL the
old Adam breaks out again, and he (Mr b. does
not perform his duty as a guardian properly the
court has the power 70 take them away again Its
arms are long enough to reach him.
In conclusion, Mr.. Davidge briefly reeapitu.
lated the main points of his defense and said the
case was absolutely so ridiculous, that IL IL were
not for the serious attempt 70 assaI the ht of
parent TO the custody of his children he would be
disposed to laugh the case out Of court, and moi
argue II out.