AN EXTRAORDINARY LIBEL SUIT.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 1156, 27 April 1894, Page 30

AN EXTRAORDINARY LIBEL SUIT.

From Our Oum Correspondent London, March 9. Twenty years ago Victoria Woodhull was a name familiar to tho ors of Americans as a household word. Sho was the leader of tho woman's rights movement, a popular lecturer and tho promulgator of strong views anent sexual matters. Her courageous voice first gavo publicity to tho scandal at that time whispered everywhere concerning Henry Ward Beecher and Mrs Til ton. It cost her dear. Beecher's supporters fell upon Mrs Woodhull's reputation and tried to tear it to shreds. She was accused of living with Theodore Tilton in concubinage, of promulga'ing tho most infamous views on sexual questions, of being "the queen of immoral women." In° 1883, Mr Biddulph Martin, a wealthy English banker who had long followed Mrs Woodhull's unselfish and cruelly misunderstood career with admiration, offered her marriage and the sanctuary of peace and privacy in England. She gratefully accepted him, and for eleven years has disappeared from tho p'aiform and from public lifo. For her husband's sake, Mrs Biddulph Martin has long been anxious that the libeli circulated concerning herself (but more especially concerning her alleged views) in America during the heat of the Beecher-Tilton esclandre should be effectively and finally publicly disposed of. Tho difficulty was to find a mode. Eventually a lawyor shrewder than tho rest suggested Ithat the British Museum in issuing to its readers a work called " The Beecher-Tilton Scandal," in which Mrs Woodhull was fictitiously represented as admitting she had lived for three months with Mr Tilton, had slandered and was • slandering her. Accordingly an ac-ion for / libel was brought, Sir Richard Webster leading leading for the plaintiff ar.d Sir Charlesßussellfor the Museum authorities. The defence was that tho books wero placed in the Museum Library under statutory powers, and that the authorities were not aware they contained scandalous matter. Mrs Martin is a woman of some 50 years with a kindly maternal countenance, and hair slightly tinged with groy. She was wearing a CLOAK OF DULL CLAIIET TINT and a low bonnet made of the tame material, each being trimmed with squirrel fur. Naturally, the court was crowded. The lady quietly entered the witness box to ho further cross-examined by tho Attorney-General, who had been briefed by the British Museum. "Were not you," asked Sir Charles Russell, with a preliminary tap at his golden snuffbox, 4t tho first person who g>we public voice in the columns of tho Press to tho charge against Henry Waid Beecher V "I don't think that is bo," answered the lady. She desired to make an explanation, bub waß requested to confine herself to answering questions. "Didn't you publish a letter ill the New York World on May 22, 1871, that you knew of one public man, a teacher of "eminence, who lived in concubinnge with tho wife of another teacher of almost equal eminence, and that all time concurred in it?"—"Yes, something to that effect."

"In a book of your life you say the knowledge about the Beecher-Tilton scandal was known in every newspaper office, but not a hint was given of the allegations against Mr Beecher, but from the day it was known you were in pouession of the facts you became the target of vituperative abure?"—" That is quite true."

" May I say, then," continued Sir Charles, " that you gave tho first substantial indictment in an article on September 2, 1872 ?" " Oh," said Mrs Martin, " it was public talk in all tho circles throughout the newspaper world. I did not publish the article in piquo, but there wrro VERY SERIOUS CONDITIONS which led up to the publication." "Now didn't you," said the AttorneyGeneral, fixing his <ryes firmly on the lady, "ask Mr Beecher to give you an Interview and to preside at ono of your meetings at Steinway Hall ?" " I did not," came clearly and firmly. "Now tho published interview purports that you said you had a talk with Henry Ward Beecher about his relations with Mrs Tilton, and Mr Beecher said, 4 1 am a moral coward on this subject. If I appeared on your platform 1 would be a living lie.' Then you are credited with spying ho got. on tho sofa, and, with (oars in his eyos, placed his lnnds on your face and begged you to let him off Now is that statement untrue 1" Mrs Martin hesitated. "There \% a great doal which led up to it," she tried to ram bio away. " But is it true?" persisted Baron PolJock, gazing at tho witness through a round pair of spectacles rimmed with black horn. " Oh," said Mrs Martin with porno impatience, "all this is not only unjust to history, but it is unjust to me." Sir Charles Russell smred ; tho lady's observations wero irrelevant. "I think what you aro asking mo is irrelevant," said Mrs Martin. "But you complain that tho British Museum " Sir Richard Webster, charged with tho case of Mrs Martin, HOTLY INTEIIRUrTED. "We complain of the allegation that this lady was guilty of the grossest immorality, and that sho was tho queen of immoral women." Tho little fhre up then subsided. Then camo a littlo re examination by Sir Richard Webster. When she was away on a lecturing tour in America opinions wero put in tho Woodhull and Gktflin Weeldtj Journal with which she entirely disagreed. Sho found it was used by sex mani cs, and she stopped tho paper. Sho had novor approved of the filthy paragraphs alleged to represent her opinions. "Something was said yesterday," remarked Sir Richard, " about your once going on the stage. Tell the court about it."

Mrs Martin's eyes filled with tears, and her lips quivered. She glanced at her husband, Mr Martin, who also was affected.

"Just tell us," insinuated the learned Queen's counsel. Mrs Martin plucked up cournge. "My first husband, Mr Woodhull, took me and my imbecilo child out to California, and was unablo to buy our tickets back. 1 went to a theatrical manager, and asked if ho would allow mo to eain enough money to bring us homo. He did, and that was the only time I was on the stage." " Something has been said that the birth of your first child led you adopt your present vicars?" "Yes," said Mrs Martin emphatically, " my first desire on entering public lifo was to search out tho cause of so much misery on the earth. I was married when

ONLY FOURTEEN YKARS OF AGE. My husband was a physician, a very man, but addic : ed to drink. Fifteen months after my marriage 1 g::vc birth to an imbecilo child. My haarfc was broken. 1 sought out an explanation and my husband helped mo." "You came to tho conclusion it was due to your husband's habits V questioned counsel.

"Ho positively aided mo to it It was that which led me to undertake to plod on every platform on tho face of the earth that women should awaken to their responsibility in becoming mothers, and never boar any child that could bo an imbecile or a criminal."

Mr Biddulph Martin—tall, courteous, and iron-grey-haired—banker, of Lom-bard-street, said he married Mrs Wood hull in October, 1883. He had followed her career for some years before she came to England. The views alleged in the pamphlets to bo those of his wife were directly contrary to those she held. Then tho Attorney-General, in a facetious and light-heai ted manner, addressed the jury. He lidiculed the post tion into which tho plaintiffs endeavoured to placo the British Museum. Instead of the objectionable pamphlets having been 41 widely circulated " during the 15 years they had been in tho libra y, they were only SEEN BY THREE PERSONS Every publisher was obliged to send evory paper and book to the Museum, and the Museum was obliged to accept them, and ho argued that any book which had historical, physiological, social and scientific • interest ought to bo acccssiblo at tho i Museum, oven if they did contain state* | ments which might be deemed to b« | libellous. This action wag not brought to obtain damages, but rather to allow Mrs MaVtin to go into the box, and, unchallenged, fcivo a denial to views said to bs entertainoi by her. How wis it possible for tho British Museum authorities to know what w s in every book which came their nay? Why last year the aggregation was 315,006 publications. For these to le critically examined would

occupy 173,350 hours, cr 110 reader* engaged each day scrutinising the volumes. But they wculd have to bo legal experts, and tho Attorney-General held up his hands in horror at tho prospect of 110 legal experts turned loose in the British Museum trying to find the libellous needle in tho literary bundle of hay. At tho conclusion of the caso a verdict for 20s damages was given.