The New York herald., 1864-02-19

rhe Evidence on Botn sides Closed and
the Case Given 10 the Jury.
eUrREME CoURr-ClRCUIr.


rhe Evidence on Both sides Closed and
the Case Given 20 the Jury.
rUpsEnE couRr-ciRcUIr.
Before judge Smith.
ys N.-At the cpeniog Of the Court this morning the
Ss~e Cor the defendant resumed his argument on the
saa.-iency Of ine defendant appear a witness and
aoed Of Marsh and Potter IN support OF bis mo
scA.
ar Fullerton replied very briefly, taking the ground
hst the the evidence Of Mr. Melville was 10
sdnissb,e
Jsase smith, have thought over the matter since
evening the conclusion that under
sse code evidence OF the defendant would be 'n
ps ,er The Of The counsel rs therefore denied
Counsel Tor TIE defepoe-Wil your Honor give Us tbe
eHDeht oi exception.
tSdAe Smitb-Ierianly
JANE s',okDs STATEMENT -.
sse NcCord OF No e3l Houston street, was then called
q stand
o ln Isss did you keep the premises No II Mercer
q Ind Won 9, or sec Mr. Melville tnereP A. did not
q You have kept the promises NO. o3I Houston street
o ,ud Won ever see Mr.. Melville tbere9 A. did not;
sopr kucw gentleman; never saw him before TO
8 You generally know all those who frequent your
o 10 you know Rose Maddep9 A. lido
q whst MAS she doing IN your housef A. She lived
~sa a,e "s a eoivan, ana aso as ooaIder.
years
trcssexanined-Doy You mean to say that you know
Al who visit your houseG A. Yes. nearly every one.
q there those who into your house
whom you do bot see A. No.
4. Are ycu always ut home? A. Pretty much all the
Mrre very seId IN 20 out
T. DO you reco.ect every one who enters your house3
Oh, no. hundreds come and 60 without my being able
Re- omec,-suppcse person the habit Of visit
ns your house for period Of hve SIX years, would
yoa Dot bc allie 10 Iecoect his facer A. Yes.
Counsel fer the dcenceIhat rs our case, your Honor
Counsel or the plaintiff now propose to read the
wrtten testimony OF tbe Witnesses we examined yesier
day taken before audl Stuart some Two years ago
Counsel for The deence-l object 10 The reading Of Inc
eoCuUeus
Judge snith-W hat is the object OF this testimony
Cuunse for The piaintiaFor the purpose OF corrobo-
rssing hat they testified 10 yesterday.
Counsel or The deendant-lhe first thing you ought
do produce the person who drew up these state
na1is. / would like To see him cn the siaud.
Louusei Tor the plantIn-He Is eick and cannot at
i<ad
Counsel for the defendant-ls hep 1 shall argue 10
abe jury lba we have done all we could to get him here
The Court held that such testimony that offered by
Abe counsel Tor The plaintiff would only be admissible
from the other side for the purpose or mpe ichment
Mr.. Fuiier.on-four II, nor VIII please note our ex-
The SUMMING rP FOR DEFENCE.
10 Summing up for the defendant the counsel
k the ground that the evidence OF the witnesses for
Abe plsintin unworthy OF belief and was directed
DsGiy against Madam Bell, with whom they were on
bad terms. he also held that Mr.. hevile's mouth
not sealed by the decision Of the Court he could
d did DOT follow that because a married man
entered house Of prostitution he guilty Of adultery
iaseutious may have been rs pure as the angels Mr..
Neive may have entered such house for the purpose
u seng some Of his ewery Just the sametas physician
would enor IN ,he pursuit Of his calling. II
matter OF trade aud many merchants who stand much
higher in The community than the defendant were IN
the habit OF doing daily II did not follow that be
cause a went TO . bar to take a drink. and while
tnore threw bis around pretty girl and kissed her.
wroOg hat N tue abstract there was nothing bad or
voic.e about IT, and tho jury should not attach any i'm
rortsboe TO Il in conclusion the counsel stated he
ms To M una and
responded 70 their oaths they would not upon light
sroaods sever those whom God had joined together.
HR- yJIiERroSs ADDRESS s.
Mr. Fullerton followed behalf OF the plaintiff The
caee. be claimed, involved nutshell, the
~ on te other side mad alluded things which
fregn " the issues In this and this foreign matter
ne Tor the detepdsu, had also akrn occasion 10
sharge the witnesses for the plaintiff with perjury, SIM
Ry because they were poor allen prostitutes Was Mrs
Melville follow her husband these houses Of i'll
pute and mngIe with his loose companions procure
evidence Of hrs guilt or WAS she 10 take the witnesses ne
sse found them She could not take other step than
Abe she taken and The counsel the defendant
sAcud not rsil against those poor creatures for Nell
vile himself. BY hts acts responsible for
uheir appearance as witnesses On the trial
he speaker then proceeded TO refue the idea
witnesses the plaintiff anxious to rum Madam
1e that Mr.. Melville guilt innocenee was only
seoondary consideration. He could not believe for
tves tbe counsel for the defence attributed TO sncm they
would stop short " running her the most complete
nAaneT Instead OF doing Ter al injury they doirg
business and peculiar calling And, no IN 'ter what way
ste case went, Madam hell would co out OF the court
better on than when she entered IT, Sacred the bond
mairimouy may be- II the duty ~ the jury this
case 10 dissolve The CONTRACT II the plaintiff had estab
Tbe counsel then called ,he attention Of lie
Ooort and jury 10 The eadngs where the defendant upon
bis own admission, dd not deny The chge that he was
n tie habit OF visiting houses OF prostitution.
The counsel Tor the defence here objected to the read
ns Of the pcsdnRs al this stage OF the The Court
overroed the objection, and noted the couuses exeep
tUp
Mr. Fullerton then proceeded OF the
seendapt reference his visiting house OF pros,tu
t0n IN Mercer street, kept by Mary Fell ia VII ch he did
pot seek b. deny the allegation. The defendant denied
that ever VISITED ord's he was silent as
his visiting Mary Pe's He could deny IL for he
ev,deDce OF his visits belming. IL ad-
mission 10 the oioades possible iems and that alone
snould convince the Jury Of his guilt. When a man
vent INTO house of prostitution the inference
w@s ih, lie went thee 70 cousumnaie his guilt and
bis prayers. II lie had any legitimate business
there be could easily prove 70 the satisfaction OF the
jury II assumed the part OF the that
seiendant was employed 10 selling ewcry when making
these Mercer street but there proc. Of
the fact His visits 10 Madam bell frequent
~ be ever sold during that period we're watch and pair
oi The counsel shen proceeded TO review the
evidence of the witness for the antr and said that as
loet they 10 all shame, they had not their
uthflness 1he very TACT that the witnesses cu.essed
sher own shame without Withholding anything
elusive as 10 their truihness, they did not
rse0rt to fasebood up their degradation,
no reason why be jury sbouid discard their testimony
unworin by o belief He then .ompared their manner
Co the stand with that Of Madam Bel ana said that
while they were wiling e. tell the whole truth,
Madam Bel, ~ trying 10 shield the defendant. had per
jured herself beyond redemption. Mr. fulertons closing
remarks orcibe aud eloquent, and made marked
Suppression all his bearers
TIE JtiGEs CHARGE
Jsdge Smith tbeu proceeded to charge the jury uron
the a~ governing the case The plaintiff sought 70
divorce the ground adultery The counsel
both sdes have faithfully erformed their duty. AID
vss pow the duly OF the Jury upon the iooun
keUcs-
FsS-wss tie plaintiff married 10 the defendant
s>cond-iias The dciendsnt, between the month of
AIr 1861 aud the 9Th March 1861 house known
- 10 l-e Mercer street. 10 the city of New York
nstted adultery with any person 70 the plain
am
Thrd-Hss the defendant, within time aud al said
place, committed adultery with ptrson as Mary
neiR
Foarta-Bas the deendant in or during the year 1858
r 1869 s the bouse OF Jane McCofd No II Me Ger
street, 10 the city o. New York, adultery With
any person unknown TO The plaintiff
F3A-Ess The deieDeant, during or since the year
1teU or 1861 a. :bc house oi Sic ord, al No
si Houston street the city Of New York. committed
adultery wIth any pertUn unknown 20 the plsintiHy