Public ledger. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1865-1893, 1878-05-02
BISHOP MeCOSKRpS INNOCENCE.
A General belief that the Charger
are False. and the Latfara ver,

A General Belief that the Charges
are False. ana the Letters were
Forged.
Detroit Special to the Philadelphia Times
AS might have been expected, a
very strong reaction has followed
the awful dose Of filth which a
Chicago newspaper has been fling
ing into this city over what has
came to be termed the McCoskry
scandal. The originators of the
scandalous reports which have been
published threw their mud so thick
that little Of it has stuck, and now
that Bishop 'McCoskry has given
the stories specific and emphatic
denial, public opinion has under
gone a complete change. His sud-
den resignation and departure, with
the intention of going to Europe
so shortly preceding the outbreak
of the storm which has arisen, made
very many people think that there
was some truth in the stories; his
denial of them, and the expression
of his determination to return,
have removed doubts and satisfied
the public generally that the bishop
can readily dispose Of the charges
against him.
1t has become known that the
person who claims to have discov-
cred the correspondence is one Geo.
Mcconnell, printer, once a beau
of the Fanny Richards with whom,
it is alleged, the bishop was impro-
perly connected. Mcconnell SAYS
that be stole the letters from Miss
Richards while he was courting her,
and only produced them as meas
ure Of safety to himself. Some of
the letters deposited in the safe of
the First National Bank are signed
by the bishop, These are letters
such as any Christian gentleman,
especially a clergyman, might write
to young female ward-letters of
advice, counsel and instruction. A
father writing to a daughter would
adopt such a tone. The indecent
letters are not signed, save by a
hieroglyphio cypher, and they are
plainly the work of another hand.
The obscene drawings, to which
reference has been made in the
Chicago Times report, could hardly
have emanated from the aged
hands of the bishop. He cannot
draw, while Mcconnell can. The
language of the signed letters is re-
fined and beautifully expressed in
the unsigned it is coarse, and there
are frequent misspellings and era
sures.
Mrs. Banister claimed that she
never received any letters from the
bishop that were not signed, either
as Fannie Richards, his ward. or
sirce her marriage. She did not
know of the abstraction Of the let
ters until she heard of them in the
charges promulgated ia a local
sheet and the Chicago Times. She
charges that all the unsigned letters
are forgeries, aud declares that Nc
Connell has a peculiar faculty for
initiating handwriting. That this
is true / have learned from other
sources. Mrs. Banister further
states that after she was married
Mcconnell swore he would have
revenge upon her and the bishop
for the interference of the latter
and the part he had taken in induc-
ing Fannie 10 refuso MCDANIEL on
account Of the Indifferent moral
character Of the young man. Not
till nearly year after her marriage
did these letters come to light, some
of them apparently newly written,
This same person, it ought to be
borne in mind, served six months
ip the Wayne county jail, on a
charge Of bastardy, His moral
character is of the very lowest.
There is no other accuser of the
bishop,