The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1857-05-23
BUPnlO1 O0URT-YIRsT PAKr.
Before Hon. Judge Woodruff


BUPnL0R O0URT-HIRsT PAKr.
Before Hon. Judge Woodruff.
THIRD DAY.
NAY 2-&scAaSd 9. losCla n. Hem1y @ B0oeA-Ol
the Bench beside the Judge noticed at The opening
the Court the Venerable Doctor Lyman Beecher father
the Rev Henry Ward Beecher and Mrs. Harriet Beeche
Stowe. ne court room was, has been since the com
nencement Of this trial, crowded to excess
Mr. Cutting, In opening the for the defendant sale
having had opportunity Of making himself heard for tn
first time before the present jury, he would now ask then
TO discard from their minds all prejudice against tn,
defendant sympathy with the plaintiff He commenced
by abiding to and reprobatng the manifestations of sp
plause on the previous evening, ana to the extraor
binary coincidence Of three editorial articles which an
peared simultaneously yesterday three different papers
which on no other subject have any affinity or sympathy
After some remarks upon the opening statement Of Mr.
Perrepont for the planuf Mr.. Cutting called the attention
Of the Jury to the complaint and what the damage cone
TO the plaintiff Isl he would then go through the evidence
and from the inmaton thrown ont by the Judge yeser
day he would then submit the case TO them.
The Judge-Do understand GU that you do not mean
70 call any Witnesses
Mr.. cuipg-we do not, sir We are satisfied with the
Mr. OConor said there was one piece CT evidence which
he expected 70 have got from one Of the for the
defence. was an unusual proceeding 10 com noepce
opening the for the defence without first ntimatng
that they would not call Witnesses. He (hir OCpror)
therefore begged to be permitted to give that evidence
-
TO the Court that RS purport might be manifest TO the
Judge.
wards TO thecounsel for defendant who perused il pr
vaely Mr. Evars thep without SAITH It's contents said
,h.t was new matter and form proof that could
not De ooaned by any OF the witnesses for defence
Mr. OConor admitted that he had legal right No to
insist on its tucon in evidence at this stge OF the pro
ceedngs. His reason for asking Its admission is his sur
prise the adopted by the defence: Il admits of
grave question OF sbiity but if the Judge would
look to the records Of the court in this he would see
htc of
occasion the cause was postponed the ground that the
plaintiff could not go 70 trial without it, There was no
bsSe Inc his
that the defer dant would 60 In O evidence
The Judge saw no reason why in this case, he should
not allow counsel the opportunity which would be granted
IN other when defendant declines TO 20 into es
ony He confessed that though the counsel for defence
did not intimate that they intended 10 into evidence he
presumed that they would do and be fell II was ap
parent that the plaintiffs counsel taken by surprise
The Court thought that under the Giro isances would
best subserve the ends OF justice by admitting letter.
Mr. Cutting thought that if the Court granted the favor
Of its admission, he should also impose upon the plaintiff
to prove the handwriting Of the letter Of Bowen McN
mee already in evidence, and that the paniG should ad
init that this letter was written by the person.
The Court admits the letter upon what he beev g 10 be
the established practice of the Court and copceiypr that
cannot prejudice the defendant but he reason to
annex any condition, but that the defendant should be left
70 offer evidence on it,
attorneys that an annexed letter written by HeI ry L.
Stone ono CT the partners Of Bowen MoNamee to Mr.
John shilet'o of Cincinnati but adding that they would
object to production in evidence, the ground of its
irTelevancy.
Mr. Cutting then raised an objection to the production Of
the letter. il written by Mr. Stone a pr yate indi.
vidual and not as a partner.
Mr. OConor contended that the letter was written in the
plural, and was evidently written on behalf of the firm
The Court asked he understood the counsel for defence
object on the ground that the letter Of Mr. Cole could not
affect Mr.. Bowen?
Mr.. Evarts replied in the affirmative.
NJ: OcSnor, IN answer to question from the Court,
said that the first few lines Of the letter directly fses
some expressions in the SANDER.
r,srk again contended against the admiesbihy Of
be letter.
The Court would be mapprebended II IL understood
hold that letter written by party without the know
edge OF the other could affect that other. xr. Bowen
lated that We" have written Mr.. John shietto &C.
which admisso OF a letter having been written
ut the Court u not prepared 70 say that this letter the
AIRED 10 say that the jury might bear the letter and
ecide for themselves whether was not the one
lluded TO by Mr.. Bowen IN his conversation with Mr.
ole, Of the firm Of Geo Wood 4 Co, of Cincinnati
Mr. oConor then proceeded to read the following letter.
nder the exception Of Defendants COUNSEL
lPrvae.l Nrw YoRK, Dec. 20, 1851.
NJ ], sHs.fnrro-Dear sr: You win doubtless remem
yer Mr.. Fowes who bad charge OF glove department
Or some time and who lef here few days since fer on
Since he Jeff have heard Of his carrying very large
amount Of baSsase mvch larger than he would naturally
have for his clothing, and although have 10
suspect his honesty think suspicious circumstance
and would like TO have little watch taken OF his pro-
,eedings IF he has taken goods he would probably try
hould call ou you could very easily ascertain where no
topped, and should like to have you employ some
hrewd officer TO visit his lodgings and ascertain wbe
her be appeared to be IN possession OF property
hat clerk on small salary ought not 10
ave. By taking little pains he could ascertain !
true state of the case and If on knowing the facts you
ud think II advisable TO have his things detained you
ill please do 90 ana ADVISE ne py telegraph Perhaps
ughi 70 say that the only thing he would BIO Likely 10
ave of ours would be gloves, and suppose woud
ot be justified in interfering with anything else Yo1
viii q ooure perceive this matter requires very delicate
Management, know nothing against the young
nan and would very much regret to say do anything
iniure him We know Of no better way than 10 employ
N experienced police officer AID charge the expense to
s. lie will of course say nothing to any but your
~ II. 7. STONE.
Mr. Cutting then continued to address the Jury:-Ths
OF Mr. Stone and the testimony formed, bag and bag
gage the oariial OF the plant in this case and upon
shch he built his hopes OF the Jury taking large amount
money Of tho pocket of Mr.. 30 and puturg ID
his to enable him to start In tho glove trade. He,
Mr.. Cutting need not send TO Chatham street and buy
abel aud stamp and produce them 10 the Jury for eject
whore Is thai label that had been alluded 10 by the
council In bis openingf What evidence has been pro-
iuced about hemY Whore did rogles get them7 Ifthey
belonged 10 Mr. Bowen his Counsel would be 10 posseso
Of ihom. Mr. Cutting proceeded 10 read and comment
upon the testimony.
The Court took brief recess and re Assembling tho
Judge minated 10 the counsel that not likely
The summing up could be concluded day hour
sonabe for the convenience OF the jury he would ourn
NJ the usual tme, resume the In the ming,
contrary TO the custom. lie would however, in view OF
importance OF this suit absent himself from the
raj Term 10 morrow, IN order that might be finished
Mr. Cutting then resumed bis summing up arguing that
the conversation Of Mr.. Bow en- with Mr. Cole, and the
letter Of mr.. Cole 10 Mr Sclio, OF Cincinnati, did not
charge Mr. Fowes ofdisboncsty but repudatci tho idea,
although they admitted that their suspicious arous
Cd The conversation In fact amounted 10 tbilwe have
no knowledge OF Mr.. Fowcs' dishonesty, but from wha,
we have snce ascertaned learn thai he left the city
IN six trunks unusual amount for in his POSI-
ton, and which exces our suspicion. NJ. Coles says
that Mr.. Bowen said that he did 10, know OF
any dishonest act Of Mr.. Fowlcs, but they had
their suspicious raised In consequence OF bis leaving the
city with many trunks. He, Mr. Cli,ing, therefore
conlcnded that under the circumstances the suspicious
reasonable " he, counsel, going West him
SELF he could not FOR the hfo OF him. an sx or eight
trunk unless he put his carpets into them. aughter)
when he did out OF town he found carpet bag quite
enough for his purposes But hey say that these trunks
contained books the counsel in bis opening said and
that these books for Fowcs' recreation in the even
ings Why did they not put Mr.. fowes on the stand 10
prove the contents OF those trunks then should have
learned what his salary was and why he left tho house Of
Wood IN Cincinnati Mr.. Cutting then commended that
yvima facd this alleged SANDER privileged commu
nicaon, and that Bowen believed the words be true