The New York herald., 1874-12-24
BROOKLYN CITY COURT.

THE TILToN-BEECHER sUT-THE PLAINTIFF
REQUIRED TO SHOW CAUSE WHY HE SHOULD
NOT FURNISH THE PARTICULARS.
Before Judge McCue.
Yesterday afternoon the counsel for the Rev.
Henry w. Beecher. Messrs. Thomas G. Shearman
and b. r. Tracy, appeared before Judge McCue
and moved that the Court grant an order to COM
pei the counsel for Theodore Tilton to show cause
why the order granting bill or particulars should
not be enforced. Counsellor Shearman said that
all their efforts induce the counsel for the plain
tin to 1x a day for the argument OF the appeal
taken from the order granting the bill OF
particulars had failed. The plaintiff had not fur.
nished the bill neither had his counsel agreed
to stipulare as to Q day for the argument. The
defence was most anxious to proceed with the
trial, which was now near at hand being Sc. down
for the first Monday in January. At one time Mr..
Evarts and Mr.. Beach had almost agreed upon q
modification, when the latter abruptly asserted
that no modification would prevent the argument
OF the appeal: The defence will not now take o
dismissal OF the complaint.
Judge McCue granted the following order:-
CRY c9unr on m SsoSktrx1ahSee :, g Ien Terry
ned on the I'D DAY December s74 and The atdavt
rs dlsayey verified On The 2sa a,y Of December
ali the pesdinss and Proceedings u ths tho
s0 &c nsa % e houss q hs
I srSSkyn ss on wy The ,Ss as,h n., sy
lie precuded from giving any evidence az Ia acts OF
criminal nie between the defendant and the wife
I'd as Hs 4 ns
tns motion hefetoiore made for particears 70 wit the
the plann and defendant respectively in the city OF
Brooklyn, al those tines or why the defendant should
not have sucn other or urtaer rele as may be JUST
A. acCCE, Judge.
The following AFFIDAVIT, setting forth the latest
movements OF counsel in TINS remarkable Itiga-
tion was read before the COURT
CRY CogRr or BRooRLYs.-T Theociore 7g,oa ps Henry
Wlrd Eeecicr CITY ant county of Ncn FORK s-rhomas
q. shearman, being duly sworn, says
IdS-I am one OF the attorneys ana sci for the
defendant in this case.
Second-An order was made herein at Special Term
the 10th inst, requiring the plaintiff 10 upon
the defendants attorney within three days alter service
bill Of particular In this action
Hild-A certified COPY Of said order was served as
am informed and believe by scerk OF the DEFENDANTS
counsel upon samuel ID. Morris, Es plaintiffs
attorneys n this cause, on December " 1874
Psiam-Ten days have expired since such service of
The SAID order, aud bill Of particulars 81 ANY kind
whatever has been served by the plaintiff upon lie dc
ii 1.-The pianIT has appealed TO the General Term
lar but has obtained no stay OF proceedings upon such
appeal and has Noticed the cause Tor trial at en-
been previously noticed for trial BY the defendant and
szm-I have had several interviews with william A
cause, and al my request VIII tn fvarts Isq senior
qteryiew,s with ur, Mr nsasn ior the ggrpese
appeal Aforesaid so 70 M Evl ns
the orjer related only portions o H. and might
probably be cured by stipulation amend the order
Several efforts were made e. 70 meet tho views Of Mr.
LleaQ Ne Evarts and Mr. Beach was found 10 be very