The Portland daily press., 1871-02-11

| aoCs. IL Is not the endless cham by which yO
draw water from yard wells
But then. they say he was induced to til
| lntoxication by the influences of this wife,
was there ever fouler slander attempted t
be charged upon an innocent woman before al
Intelligent jury of the country? They dare t
say tnls mere ana care TO make attacks upol
some OF the best people in this town. in orde
to show that this lady was led down throurl
thelr influence to ruin. Let me saw here ono
ior all, Ihere are no terms of condemnation to-
strong for me to use to express NV own belie
OF the haDlt which obtains in certain circles i,
sannt Every city OF Offering wine as refresh
neni, when guests are present I do not hay,
IL IN my own house, 1 do not believe in il O.
partake 1s OF 1t myself; believe it is perncfou
this matter, w "eo'i'ou II
J., suppose that the circle was all that M,
v"rtn v~,neulor1tner says 1T was; that it was tina
aaescrlDe; suppose that Mr. Carter. Henry Fox
nir: Mllliken, Mr.. Stephenson, Mr.. DYER, Mr.
rutnam, John B. Brown, the best men there
are In this city, any or all of them were dagger
ous ana fascinating lnrers to ruin as he says
wnae would be its effect upon Mr. Miller?
believe sou will agree With me that the grea,
danger that arises from the use of Intoxicating
ilquor as part of refreshments is, when per-
son has not an appetite fixed upon them they
are lured into taking little wine in the first
place, and they go on step by step until the
demon seizes upon them and the appetite be-
comes irresistible, till the man becomes a
drunkard. But when the man once has the
habit fixed upon him, when he is once a
drunken man, when he is habtually intoxi-
Gated, then it does not plunge him any deeper
he has formed the habit before, and it makes
no difference whether he takes the glass OF
Wine in the presenceeof respectable people or
whether he goes to the drinking saloon, except
he is not SO likely to become drunken and vio-
lent IN the presence of respectable people. But
have one word to say in vindication OF these
people who have been so grossly assaulted. l
say TINS Jones Miller long before he knew this
woman whose life he has made wretched
desoiation, before coming here to this city OF
Portland, before moving in this circle that nv
brother speaks of, had the habit of intoxication
upon him-and he admits that it was so-that
neither she nor any one who came from this
society in which he moved can be held up even
by the ingenuity of counsel ia defence of his
most unwarrantable course; of common and
habitual drunkenness. He was accustomed to
1t before coming into this society. But sup
responsible for it? Suppose Gen. Shepley did
take whlskey and wine with him, is she the
one to be held responsible? She did not urge
him to drink; she did not carry him into soc;e-
ty; it was he that took her, a young girl, into
such society as his family and wealth gave him
entrance into. Are you to punish her; are you
to lay it to her door, this charge which is made
against her people?-a charge which wish
you to bear with me in speaking of hereafter
Suppose it is all true that they claim, how in
the name of Heaven is she to blame for it? She
did not go into that society voluntarily; when
she came here che had no society to 90 into
except what Miller chose to have her go into
She came here Without friend, without rela-
tive, without mother or sister, or any one
to counsel with, or to talk with, and he
carried her into this circle of society, which he
claimed to be vortex which, if true, would
add one more instance to the cruelty which she
has always suffered at his hands.
Inc counsel refers 10 the testimony of j.
+. Miller, who says he made rum punch at his
brothers. If so, is he not particeps erinainis9
LII Mrs. Miller participated, as j. L. Miller
says she did, then be committed the very crime
which they undertake to charge upon this COM
pialnant, setting the example before an erring
brother which they undertake to denounce
now before a jury of the country The other
witness, Miller himself, the respC ndent, would
have you believe that she drank intoxicating
liquors from the time of his marriage.
Mr.. MIlleI refers to the wine that was useI
at her marriage. have been accustomed to
believe that on certain solemn occasions it was
proper to use wine. have been accustomed
to be taught even from my early childhood that
the examples given in Holy Writ are fit and
proper to be followed on such occasions I re-
member that wine is used for sacramental pur-
poses because of the Scriptural Injunction ana
the Scrptural precedent for its use I remem-
Der that at the marriage of Cana of Gallilee he
VINO spoke as never man spake, that the Lord
and saviour of us all, for the purpose of add
Ing to the solemuity of that occasion perform.
ed his first miracle, that of turning water into
wine for the marriage guests, ana yet because
one OF the ministers of the Gospel, who per-
iof med that ceremony came forward to pledge
the health of this lady in glass of wine and
she touched it to her lips, Mr.. Miller is faign
to seize upon this trivial Circumstance and
place it in the hands of his ingenious and elo-
quent counsel, who comes before you to make
you believe that even before ber marriage she
was accustomed to use Intoxicating liquors
The singularity of the argument must have
struck you. And the intamy of man that
could make charge like that upon his wife on
such an occasion and in public, no words of
nine are sufficient to utter or express.
The counsel discui sed this topic farther, and
1t IL. so o'clock Court took recess of twenty
AT IL 10 Mr.. Strout resumed his argument
lead the definition of an habitual drnnkard
rom Bouviers Law Dictionary, and said that
after all, l,whatever may be the definitions in the
% be the Judges as common sensed men, from
your knowledge of human affairs in the tram
'action of daily business.
But there is one thing more to which wish
o call your attention here, one of great many
If these ingenious subtletes which my learned
'ice He says that one reason why N. j. Mil
er had become and continued a drunken man,
was because of the influence which Gen. Shep-~
ley had over him. Let me show you how un.
fair that assertion was When Gen. Shepley
was on the stand I proposed to ask him what
he had said; what efforts he had. made to in
duce Mr.. Miller to leave off the use of intoxi-
eating drinks. The question was put by me,
objected to by my brother, and upon his objec-
ton ruled out Now in the name of common
f.tr al a. L.
in question like this before tribunal consti-
tuted as you are. how can he go on, aud in the
discussion of this question make this charge
against Gen. Shepley, that he aided by his ex-
ample in making Mr.. Miller intoxicated, when
upon his objection his lips were sealed, the on
ly man beside N. j. Miller who could testify
anything about it; and yet 1t is by such argu-
ments as this, by counsel who are employed to
use such arguments as this, that they would
make this woman thing towards which the
slow moving finger of scorp should be pointed
from now until death shall merc!fully take her
from this world. Gen. Shepley was the only
man save the RESPONDENT himself, who could
have given you any information upon this
point, and he had his lips closed ba the sudden
and legal objection of my brother, aud then he
charges it hnme upon him by insinuation, aud
this they call fair way Of trying a case before
a jury. contend that that act on the part of
the counsel for the defense forever shuts their
mouth against any argument which shall tend
to inculpate Gen Shepey in the slightest de-
gree in this matter. Ii they had allowed us to
put in testimony upon this point, we could
have shown you that the purest and truest
friend in that respect that ever Jones Miller
had in the city yof Portland, purer and better in
example than bis own brother even, was this
same Gen. Shepley whom the counsel sneers at
and calls one George H. Shepey.
1 now come to another branch of this case
which is to me as sad as the other. 1 refer to
the allegation in the libel, ofcruelty and abuse
on the part of this respondent. Thsre is
charge that this man was cruel to his wife; !;
that he used towards her personal violence.
that led ultimately to this separation; that he
was not only gailtyof personal violence towards
her, but Of abnse to his children and of the use
of profane and obscene language in their pres
ence; which uuder the circumstances of this
case is perhaps more painful to her than blows
and violence itself. 1t is said in one of the
cases cited in the book from which my brother
read to you lin describing what's the servitia of
the Roman law, that to woman delicately
constituted, the use of profane and obscene
language in her presence, the charging her
with groundless accusations against her chasti-
ty, language that outraged that sense of pro-
prety which is in the mind of every true and
delicate woman, are greater cruelties than ac
tual violence. Gentlemen can you have any
doubt in relation to this matter, that SO far as
obscenity is concerned, that it is not proved
beyond the possibility of doubt? Have you
any doubt Of the truth of Miss Phebe Peters
statement, when she tells you that long before
Gen. Shepley became acquainted with Mrs.
Miller and since that time when Mr.. Miller
would come home intoxicated he would use
language SO obscene that the very mention of
it calls the blush to the cheek and the Court
would not ask the witness to repeat it.
You have the testimony of Mrs. Mary G.
Fox and Mrs. Alice G. Stephenson, two of the
most respectable ladies in this city and inti-
mate friends of Mrs. Miller, that they never
heard an improper word from her. Mrs. Miller
bears in her face those indices of gentleness
and goodness which cannot deceive you and