The New York herald., 1875-12-29
Nature Of the Action and What
Lawyers Think About 1t.
MRS. MOULTON AND PLYMOUTH CHURCH.
The Lady Declines to Meet the In
vestigating Committee.
WILL THE MUTUAL COUNCIL MEET? 5?

WILL f1E MO OAL OOOlNNlI WEE
There is again something new in the legal complica-
tions arising out ofthe Plymouth church difficulties Mr.
Francis D. Mouton has commenced suit for malicious
prosecution against Mr. II. w. Beecher the papers
have already been served the defendant This suit
will operate TO reopen the whole question whose
vestigaton occupied much time last spring and
summer without arriving at any satisfactory concu
sion. This legal episode together with Mrs. Moultons
persistent demand for consideration OF her by
the members OF Plymouth and sister churches is likely
occupy public attention Tor time Both Of
these important movements will necessitate many mi
In the courts motions and counter mo-
tons will no doubt be argued before the main
question is tried, If it ever comes TO trial !;
and consultations numerous will prepare the way
for an examination Of the merits OF Mrs. Mouton's
appeal Below will be found the peadings in the
OF Mouton vs. Beecher which explain at length tn
nature OF the suit Mr. Moulton damages in the
of $4,000 recompense for the injury he
claims TO have been inflicted himself and his busi-
by his Indictment at the instgation of Mr..
Beechcr
THE SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT
here set out full, and in twenty days exclusive
OF the date OF their service the defendant
bis
NEW YORK SUPREME COURT KINGS COUNTY
Francis d. Moulton VS. Henry Ward Beccher. Sum
mons for Rclef-To Henry Ward Beccher, the defend
ant above named-You hereby summoned and
quireo to the complaint in this action OF which
copy is herewith served upon you, and 10 serve
copy Of your answer to the said complaint on the sub
scriber, at his Office, No ~ Pine street in the city Of
New York within twenty days after the service hereof
exclusive OF the day OF such service and II you fail to
answer the said complaint within the time aforesaid
the plaintiff in this action win apply 10 the Court Tor
the relief demanded in the complaint
Dated December ~ 1876.
ROGER 4 PRYOR, Plaintiffs Attorney
NBw YORK SUPREME CouRT. County OF KINGS
Francis ID. Moulton Henry Ward Beecher.
Complaining of defendant, plaintiff alleges
J. That with malicious intent to injure plaintiff in
his good name and credit bring him into public dis.
grace, to him to be imprisoned and to subject
him TO trouble and expense, defendant did before
the 80 day Of October, 1874 voluntarily 60 before
Of Kings in the city OF Brooklyn Tor the purpose Of
procuring an indictment against plainh as hereinafter
stated
2 That at the said Court defendant complained OF
plant1 before the Grand Jury, and falsely and mali
ciousy and without any reasonable or probable
whatever, charged plaintiff TO the Grand Jury with
having uttered and published OF and concerning him.
the defendant certain criminal hbes, which said
charge so made by defendant, was wholly false and
untrue, as he then and ever since well knew
g. That the defendant falsely and mallcously, and
without any reasonable or probable cause, procured
the Grand Jury aforesaid find and present the said
Court Of Sessions an indictment against plaintiff for
said alleged criminal libel
That on the said Sd day of October 1874 the said
indictment transferred 10 the City Court OF Brook
lyn Tor prosecution and trial.
g. That the defendant falsely and malciouslv, and
without any reasonable or probable cause, procured
warrant Tor the arrest Of plaintiff upon the aforesaid
dictment 10 answer the charge therein made against
him. aforesaid and afterward caused plaintiff to be
custody and carried before judge Of said City
Court and TO be then and there compelled to give bond
I appear for trial therein.
g. That defendant falsely and maiicously, and with
any reasonable or probable cause procured PLAIN
Ln to be arraigncd before said City Court and
PEELED him TO plead 10 said Indictment
T. That plaintiff pleaded not guilty and then and
has been ready and anxious to stand trial
said Indictment but the District Attorney and for
the county OF Kings, alter consulting with defendant
and in compliance with his wish, but against the will
and protest OF the plaintiff, did about the 22d
day OF October 1875 the said City Court OF Brook
yn that nole prosequi be entered TO said indict-
ment and the prosecution thereof against the plaintiff;
and the said City Court did then and there grant said
motion, and IL thereupon adjudged and ordered
by the said Court that nole prosequl should be al
lowed and entered to said indictment against PLAN
IN, and the allowed and entered in
said Court
That the said indictment, complaint and prosecu-
on and each of them, wholly ended and determined
favor of plaintiff.
That by of the premises plaintiff has been
injured in his good name and wounded IN his feelings
and involved in expense and subjected insult o
preston to his damage $50 900
Wherefore plaintiff demands judgment for $50 900
and costs. ROGER A. PRYOR,
Plaintiffs attorney
City and County Of Neso Fork s&-Francis D. Nou-
ton being duly sworn, says he is plaintiff in this
is true OF his knowledge, except matters
therein stated on Information and belief, and TO
them he believes 1t to be true
FRANCIS D. MoULToN
Sworn before me this 27th day OF December lS75-
WILLIAM 7. PARKER, Notary Public city and county of
New York.
Alter receiving the papers Mr. Beccher handed them
over to Mr. T. G, Shearman. his attorney who will not
say present what his line Of defence will be Neither
is Il definitely known who will be counsel for the OPP
posing parties 10 the suit