, 1875-07-10
Whereby, Why Sot' lfSo, What Odds 7
Can Any Nan Say Otherwise q?
No! Awast Thcn!"
"The Bearings Of This Observation
Lays in the Application on it,
a Failure Of Justice, for Either
MIR. Beccl,er Is or Is Not
Guilty."
IT Guilty, It Is a Pity.that Re Has
Not Been Convicted"

ar Innocent, II Ia Tenfold Pity TINT
lie Has Not Been Acquitted"
Conaidossble curiosity laa been telt ae 10 what
Mr.. Henry C.. Bowen would aaT relative to the
action Of tho Jury in tho Bcechcr case, as Sir.
Bowen has been l.,eely credited with The pod
aession Of deal Of private knowledge in regard
to bTr. Boechcr, bnt has beduloualy refrailel,
oven through his paper OF whle on the wstnosa-
s!tud, from impasting any Of that knowledge TO
the public. In view, then, Of this popular curl
ouity. wo pve below tho Iondlng editorial article
in tho Independent OF tho sth lust:
NO VERDICT
Agtor long and tedious study Of h1l legal cvi.
dence extending over half year, the Jury have
ensled shelr tHsk Without coming 10 verdict.
For moro llan wco& they have tried 70 agree,
and havo tailed. We might evstl call It n failure
Of justlcc. For either Mr. 1ieccl,cr is IL not
eut'ty- II entity, It ID a nfty that lo has not
been convicted; # innocent, it IL ttnfold d pity
that he has hot beuu acquitted. After very long
aud careful B,uaY Of Tho aviauco, which prs
vailed IN bringing one or two Of tho n'inor't?
over to The majority. the jury 6naly remained
with only three Of thu twclve Tor conviction !;
and in their Disagreement they doubtless repro
ann,od tho larger verdict OF tic people who have
read tin eVdnice.
eya,,sa With hss no raloysncy arre,,. ~ ts u
question Of damages. in tho event that the prin-
c,pal charge IL proved; disnisAIng also sntiraIy
the tleuty Of conspiracy and blacanAil ~ sot up
M a.atnl no f,,tioa Nailsns, ti,sf M ay,d.ns Ia
been uiYored Swhlch con,d s,,ut,ars nuch
clsrpce": md then cofuj,,v 10 tbn testimony
which most directly boasa upon tho main Issue,
an,,stant;sljy IN tha rooviro fnr,G '0eeA''o
f1,' tito ma han'1 ~ have Tia test;monr ~ M.
md Mira. Moulton and NJ. rtlton, xho nwenr ar.
olcitly That Il uilorout times durlnu period, at
soms Tour yosrs tbs ]efeudant confossad % n tSen,
"hat r. ,i,,,,,s. snairst H., H. ~ s,,, " 49,
nec,ca vii 1i5s .ifsred cot,Tos.,on IL Ii. f.ct
san,tcn iy t,tt. nsrt1.s that tbn nefcndsnt .nd
ihasa wtnasscs t.nrs IN f.n;i;sr IN tercomrsa ;th
casi' ot:,n1 urn@ III. xhon t,no sn ts, sonsl ",s
,hi,.o which tsev wern aii ,ahort,, 20 Ia,r s,n,,
,hn Jnbiic know 1cfaa vnn tl,e sus,,cct.nattar ~
numnrnrs cnnyorsnf;nna an1 drars ,,is"s atiIi
further. sorica Of wrlt.oa documentp 10 WHICH
Of tI,oln lu bis ow handwriting with llia e1cec.
lion ri ,hn sa.cal,cd iottsr ~ "nnouv r cp
Triton" arpear iu the oyidepce. TSass doc,.-
iueuts, raEsrtsed ~ q whole, present lie jcfend-
snt iu tns foiiow1nc leit tirat, as atlm,ttlnv
t,at Le had NINA r., nfYcnsc n"a;n.t
Wr' 'r,lton aeenndiv ~ .nIs,,v simi,t;n.s tnst
Mis-, T,json was iu ho,ng gaY iuyoysd in 1b.t nf.
tense. wlntayer II vas F: thirdly. An hslna orcstiv
oYc,tou and d,.,rntncd IN nf,d .nd httaris rcn.
!omuiuc hiu,svlf on ecoount Of th;s nffanxn =.
1vu,thlS. IL aariaatly sse3;no IN n h.a,, !,
f,o,n ,up., .Enn1lodpa tic n,ih,Ic
It 's impossible to mad tho dooarnsuts Without
their fAce. such IL tho pIaintfi's case, "a made
W Of tho puuit.vu Testimony OF t.trao wtuouscs
Awea,ius 10 oral admissions and The t!ocumeuts
pat IL esitehse, which elesly .re admissions Of
OF tile dufeudaut, and wbIcb carry viii them
the ,nlpyuu adn,sstoua cf Aeusrsl Sondnct. ~
say ts,at all tlas amounts 70 totinng; that it ia
nero ahaul. that It ia OF no Consequence and
worthy or no Consideration. ia an insult to CON-
mon sense. That 1t smouuts 10 somstG,nr is
conceded BY tho counsel Of the defendant ii Tho
efT1st tu dis,,osa OF IT aud ayoId The conona,o,,
claimed by tho plaiusin.
ou tho other hand, We have In the outsot the
legal presumption, t0 which tho Jclenlaut IN an
titled uutil It ia rovesaed by oydeucs, sh.s the
wholo charge 10 false, This jaw rive, hin, ,h,s
right and tie public should giyo him ,.s fu,iest
bencl.t. Wa have nIso fho ntoroi rraa, ,n,,,;n
III his 1ayor arising from q public cLa,seIor
hitherto uuquoatlo,ed d. to It's integrity, o1sopt
III tho mattefa growing out Of ana cotnccI ~
with this sc4ndsl, Both Of these nrasnn,n.
tons bs!oug to him, regarded nnteccdnntIv
10 the iosroductiou Of oy,denco' uua",.s ps's ~
Clergyman. not NJ a nnnulnr nas,or ~ -
great opurcb, bit AZ man and a;,1gaa
still further, We have tho unep,,iyocl tcnt,mony
OF tho defendant h,nlself. lcnylnv lin whnia
charge in every form from beeju,,jun In ~, III
explicitly conlradc.nR tho aliepoi coufrssioos
eMorn to by tin turee witnoInns M H. n,oi'-
t.1l's sttlo In Additiou to thje, we haye liza ,ta
iendanls eap!anat,on of tue coutonts Of bia lot.
lots aua Of bis conduct. solatunly Affirming thnt
uoitkes Ills letters nor the contlnrt I,ad a1v a.
ctonce 10 tho ououse charged haajust hin;. luit
wc1e grounded wholly upon fault Of ~ sntraiy
different character. This fauit ~ st.t";s
by L,n1snlf ronsiata ~ tn-aa ,,';.'..s
First. In the INFLUENCE vhinh In '1'axs IN:
posed himself to have exercised n
securing Iii. T,!ton,s flismismnr rom .h" nu,ia
pendent aud Tic b.ooklyn iion sseana3y isso, T.
itl-uIy.sea counHsi in resnso. ~ ,ss o,'a:,an ~
whether Mrs 'litou should sopsrata ffno, fs'uM sr
husbaud thl14ly, in unwi.tingly allowing hin,
object Of uuduo st,sch,nent an ,is nsri - MI @
1iiton, and 80 lar hJinna,uo har d a"ta,,u taas,
heF husaaud-a ,hlue or VIA ho ~ ~ s,'"a
odce or thought until III ,nfoTmsa iv ~ rIar
% eutiro ml4take on bis psst ~ hs d,seovsssa