New-York tribune., 1874-11-20
VIEWS OF COUNSEL ON EACH SIDE.

PROTRACTED DELAY OUT 0P THE QUESTION.
The failure of the General Term Of tho
Brooklyn City Court to reverse the order OF Judge
Nelson denying the motion Of Mr. Beechers counsel for
q bill OF particulars, on account OF the division
OF opiuion between Judge Reynolds and Judge McCue,
will probably be followed by an appeal TO the
Court of Appeals the part of Mr. BeecLers counsel
Que of Mr.. Beecher's lawyers told TRIBUNE reporter
last evening that Mr. Beecher's attorneys Will hold
consultation to-day with regard to making an appeal
and it probable that they will decide TO appeal He
asserted that there could be question that an appeal
was legally In order As the Defense he said, de-
sirous proceed with the with as little delay as
possible decision the appeal. IL 10 were made, would
be sought as soon as practicable II the were ad-
vanced on calendar OF the Court OF Appeals aud he
thought that the Judges would be willing to do that
decision might be had speedily and the suit In the CITY
Court could 90 at early day. II it were not ad-
yanced, decision might not be reached until the
next calendar year, but there was no prob
ability that the suit would be delayed for
a twelyemonth as had been suggested. The Court OF
Appeals would undoubtedly render decision at tho
February term at the latest Wnen asked II MI.
brought against Mr. Mouton IN the United States Sours
bopd no concluded before the suit ganst Mt Beecher
was begun, in order that Mr.. Mouliops VaIus
as witness might be Illustrated. the h"-
yer replied that people already knew what
To think Of Mr. Mouton's worth as witness since no
had himself admitted that he had net told the TRUTH
but he added that might be desirable to get the yer
Dict Of q Jury to confirm Mr. Mouitons own admission
of falsehood But the MOuton case was an entirely
senarate matter which Miss Proctor was pushing nde-
pendenty He thought IL would be tried al the Deceu
Der term OF the United States Court
Gem Roger A. Pryor Of counsel for Mr. Tilton said
that he had never examined the order o. JUICE Nell
son. which had now become the order OF the G"nerh
Term because it had been reversed by the General
thaf der
particulars as q discretionary matter. apprehend,'
said Gen. Pryor, "that it is not reyewaDie ny the
Court Of Appeals. II 1t denied the motion on ac'
count of want Of Jurisdiction, 1 apprehend
that it is renewable by the Court OF Appeals;
but an appeal to the Of Appeals need delay the
trial of the case only very short time. II Mr. Beechers
lawyers are in in their professions OF desire
for an early tria-and do suggest tdat they are
not This appeal, by Subdivision Of sectgn XI OF the
Code can be heard as motion. and by rule OF the
Court Of Appeals motions can be heard every tuesday
The order OF the General Term has either been already
entered or will be to-day Mr. Beechers lawyers can give
notice OF an appeal without delay. Mr Tltoa's counsel
will accept short notice. the papers can be priuted In
hours and the decision on the appeal ghi
be rendered. by the day set down for the trial to
begin Tuesday Dec. for tho argument on tie appeal
might be made either next Tuesday or the
Tuesday after. and the decision rendered in
week. On the other band Mr.
Beecher's lawyers should desire 10 neiay
the suit as much possible they cannot put 1t Of very
long. When Tuesday, Dec g. comes and the case 10
called, Mr.. Tlton's lawyers will answer. Ready"
Then tho case cannot postponed unless Mr. Beeches
counsel have a good for delay They must give
notice of an appeal from the order of the General Term
before that day. because statement Of intention
10 appeal at q future day would hardly be accepted
as a valid reason for delaying the suit. IL tho
anpea is made the decision has not been rendered
when the day set for the trial the may bs
delayed for short time but not for long, because the
papers statement that the might be delayed u
long time by the granting CT stay OF proceedings but
stay OF proceedings for more than twcny days. Ia
such a case, pdrte application e ls;t think
that will be brought TO trial before
the 1st OF January Even TIC appeal were not TO
be treated as u, otiop-aud think that eau prove 10
any lawyer M lye minutes that II can bc treated as
otiou-therc could not be years delay. as has been
cisops on ali appeals must be rendere within SIX
months after the appeals are made"