The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1870-03-17
MISS MOORE'S MISERIES.

From the n. y. World.
The slander suit of Miss Moore against Mr.
Bonnell for saying that she was not Miss
Moore at all but Mrs. Bonnell, or that if she
were Miss Moore 1t was high time that she
were Mrs. Bonnel, came on Tuesday, not to
decision, but to the demonstration of an in
ability on the part of twelve jurors to arrive
at any decision. Mr.. Bonnell and Miss
Moore are left at liberty to promulgate their
several theories of their relations and the
household or the households, as the case may
be, of Bonnell and Moore are plunged into
chaos come again.
1t is singular that case of this kind should
occur. 1t is common enough in novels, and
not very rare in real life, to find one party
insisting upon secret marriage which the
other party denies. But in those cases it is
always the woman who insists that the man
shall do her right, and the man who has con-
spired to cheat her into allowing him marital
rights, without thereby incurring for himself
marital responsibilities. Whereas here the
male contracting party desires to hold the
female to vow which he affirms and she
denies; and it is perfectly plain that his
anxiety to be bound to her and her anxiety
to be rid of him are so intense that they have
| inspired one or other of the parties to the
commission of the most flagrant perjury.
AS nothing is concluded by the verdict of
| the jury, those who have hitherto amused
| bilties of the case are left to resume that re-
taxation. And the majority of them will, we
| apprehend, have much less difficulty than the
| jury in arriving at satisfactory solution of
| the puzzle. The probabilities it must be
| said, are all in favor of the defendant in the
| suit.
1t is not denied and there is indsputable
| evidence to prove, that he was married to
some one on the occasion at which and by
c1o hu vyhn ia tl
have been married to Miss Moore, and it is
also in evidence that the person to whom he
was then married gave Miss Moore's full
name. To overthrow the presumption raised
by this oral and documentary evidence, it is
necessary either to produce some other per-
son of the same names as this Miss Moore to
whom Bonnell was married, or else to estab-
lish conspiracy on the part of Bonnell and
some female person unknown to have the lat
ter personate Miss Moore, or at least to show
plausible motive for such n conspiracy.
Miss Moore, on her part, admits that she had
engaged herself to marry Bonnell, and that
at one time she was ready to marry Bonnell,
and some of her letters are such as could
| hardly have been written unless she had mar
ried Bonnell. After nll these admissions, she
| insists that she did not marry Bonnell, and
| leaves the puzzled public to answer for it
| self the inevitable inquiry, ''Who did marry
| Bonnell?"
Decidedly the most rational answer is that
she did, and that she now seeks to escape
from bad bargain-which she admits she
would have consummated if it had been a
good bargain-by denying that she made it.
BRIBING MEMBERS OF CONGRESS.
From the Baltimore sun.
An anti bribery statute, which was passed
by Congress February 26, 1853, has been
lately uDearthed by some deliver among dead
letter laws. This statute Furnishes by fine
and imprisonment any person giving or offer
ing bribe to a member of Congress or other
officer of the United States, with q view to
influence his performance of an official func-
ton, and forever disqualifes the bribed per-
son from holding places of honor, trust, or
profit under the Federal Government. 1t was
passed at time when there was a good deal
of clamor about ''bribery and corruption" at
Washington. But what the people of a
former era considered something unheard of
in ''bribery and corruption" has been thrown
altogether into the shade by modern pro-
gress. The lobby, which was then merely a
Vicious but weakly infant, has become now
O hundred-handed giant with big finger
in every passage leading to every branch
of the Government. We ought to have