The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1870-01-07
THE BYRON SCANDAL.
MRS. ST0HE'S DEFENCE OF HER
STORY IND HERSELF.
Her Facts md "Proofs''-yvhy the
Story was not Sooner made Public
Old Scandals, Letters, Reports and
RuHors Revived and Reiterated.

A Fresh Account OF the Interview
Old Scandals, Letters, Reports and
Rumors Revived and Reiterated.
Mrs. Stoves Lady Byron Vindicdted-hel
long-promsed defence of her Byron scandal,
published in the Atlantic Monthly last Septem-
ber,-with all the facts and proofs in her posses
sion, has at last appeared. For some months
now, Mrs. Stowe has been loudly proclaiming
that the volume would be such complete and
triumphant proof of the truth of the charge
she made against Lord Byron and Mrs. Leigh,
that there could be no further dispute on the
subject. Upon the testimony adduced in the
Atlantic, the genreal verdict of the public
was that the charge was not proved; but on
Mrs. Stoves assurance that she had further
and more conclusive evidence in reserve,
there has been general willingness to sus-
pend final judgment until that evidence could
be weighed.
erdeavoring oprove what she has assert
ed,Mrs Stowe makes four points Il. a con-
certed attack upon Lady Byrons reputation,
begun by Lord Byron in self-deience. 2 That
he transmitted his story to friends to be con-
tinued after his death. 3. That they did so
continue it. l. That the accusations reached
their climax over Lady Byron's grave, in
Backwood. of 1869, and the Guiccioll book,
and that this reopening of the controversy was
reason for speaking" Mrs. Stoves book con-
sists of thirteen chapters, besides an appendix.
Ofthe thirteen chapters, five arc devoted to a
statement of the reason which impelled Mrs.
Stowe to originally take up the subject, and
seven more to discussion of the controver-
sizes which have followed. The appendix con-
tains q reprint of the Atlantic-Monthly article,
and other documents of as little value. One
charter alone, of but thirty-fvc pages, is de-
voted to the positive arguments to prove the
commission of the alleged crime, and the
statement of those arguments Is diluted with
an abundance of irrelevant matter. This chap
ter begins as follows:
First There is direct evidence that Lord Byron
was guilty OF some unusual immorality.
The evidence Is not as the BlackWeou says
that Lushington yielded assent to the et pufe
statement OF client; nor as the Quarterly ihll.
mates that he was affected by tile charms Vi an
attractive young woman. ,.,
Tile first evidence OF 1t Is the lact that Lusiils
ton aud ROmy offered to take the case lhio
court, and make there public exhibition Ol thc
proofs on which their convictions were ionhaeu.
Second. 1t is very strong evidence ol tliis laci,
that Lord Byron, while loudly declaring that nc
wished to know with what lie was Charged de-
clined this open investigation, ana, rathcr tlilh
meet il, signed paper Which lie hau before IT,
fused 10 sign.
that although secretly declaring to all lis intl-
mate friends that lie still wished open lnvcSilGa.
tion In q court of justice, and affirming Ills Dcllei
shat his character was being ruined for want ol
t, he never afterward took the means 10 geI u.
Instead OF writing private handhill, ilc might
have come to England anu entered 4 sui; ana he
did not do 1t.
is further made probable by the peculiar malice he
seemed 70 bear TO his wlfc's legal counsel.
If there had been nothing TO fear IN that legal
investigation whercwith they threatened nm, why
did he not only hec from 1t, but regard win
peculiar bitterness those who advised ana pro
posed it, To an innocent man falsely accused, the
certaintcs OF law are blessing ana q refuge
Female charms cannot mlScad In court OF JUS
tice; and the atrocities OF ruor are there sllte,
and derived of power. trial is not q threat TO
an innocent man; II is an invitation, an opportu-
nifty. Why, then, did he hate Sir Samuel Romiily,
so that lie eXuted like nend over his tragical
death? Tie letter In which he pours iorth MS
mallgnity, was so brutal that Moore was Obliged,
by the general outcry OF society, TO suppress IL.
Is this the language OF On innocent man VINO mas
been offered fair trial under his countrys laws,
or OF guilty man, to whom the very luea VI pun
lie trial means public eNposure?
Fourth. 1t is probable thut the crime was the
one now alleged, because that was tle lnOsC I'LL.
portant crime charged against MN by rumor al
the period. This appears by the following en-
tract OF letter from Shelley, furnished by the
Quarterly. dated Bath, September 29, 1916:
"I saw Kinnaird, and had long talk Win llm.
He informed me that Lady Byron was now IN
perfect health; that she was living with your Sis
ter. felt much pleasure from this intelllgence.
consider the latter part of 1t as allurdlng q 0c'
Csivc contradiction 10 the only important calum-
ny that ever was advanced against y0u On TINS
ground. at least, II VIII become the WORTH nercu-
ter to he silent"
IL appears evident here that tho charge Of i'm.
proper intimacy with his sister was, In The mind
Of Shelley, the only Important one that hau ya'
been made against Lord Byron.
Then follow q number of pages OF 4 dlsscr.
talion upon Lorl ByrOn's singular power oi
fascination over both men and women, ana
other matters of that sort, after which MIS-
Stowe resumes her argument, as follows:
The peculiar bitterness OF remorsc eNpresseu
in his works by Lord Byron is a further evidence
that he had committed an unusual crime. we
are aware that evidence cannot be- drawn III THIS
manner from an authors work merely, II unsul,'
ported by any external probability. FOR eNam
ple the subject most frequently and powerfully
treated by Hawthorne Is the influence Ol ;lsecrct,
unconfeSsed crime on the soul; nevertheless, aS
Hawthorne is well known To have always hvcu
pure anu regular uouuhS WI
cd him of any greater SIN than vigorous INA.
Cination. But here Is q man believed guilty 0l
an uncommon immortality by the TWO best law
ycrs in England. AMI threatened with an open en-
posure which he does not dare TO meet. The
crime Is named in society; his own relations TALL
away from him on account oI 1t; II Is only SCI III
rest by the heroic conduct OF his wife.
This point having been duly hammered 0ut,
q fresh one is introduced:
His evident fear and hatred OF his wife were
other symptoms of crime. There was no appa.
rent occasion for him to hate her. He admitted
that she had been bright, aniable, good, agreea-
BILE; that her marriage had been very uncomlor-
table one and he said to Madame dc Stael that ne
did not doubt that she thought him ucranged.
Why, then, did he hate her for wanting 10 i've
peaccahy by hcrselfy Why did lie SO fear her,
that not one year OF his life passed without his
concocIng and circulating some public or private
accusation against hery She, by his own SNOW
inr, published none against him. II is remarka.
BILE that In all his zeal to represent himself inJur.
cd he nowhere quotes q single remark from Lady
Byron, nor q story coming either directly or IN
directly from her or her family. lie Is In lever
in Venice, net from what she has spoken, but DC.
cause she has sealed the lips OF her COUNSEL anu
because she and her family do not speak; 50 That
he processes himself utterly ignorant What form
her allegations against him may take lie had
heard from Shelley that his wife sllcnCed the
most important calumny by going to make Mrs.
Leigh a visit: and yet he Is AFRAID OF her-So
afraid, that he tells Moore lie expects she will at
tack him after death, and charges him 10 defend
his grave.
Now, if Lord Byron knew that his wife had q
H., thotc eli fnIl all this cOnIuct