The New York herald., 1874-12-29
TILTON vs.. BEECHER,
Another Argument on the Bill OF
Particulars.
PREPARATIONS FOR AN EARLY TRIAL.
Argument Of Counsel Before Judges Nelson
and Reynolds.
A Jury To Be Drawn for JAM
uary 4.

Yesterday the argument was heard OF counse
in the Beecher and nlton case, on the application
OF Theodore Tnton's counsel from the decision OF
Judge McCue, granting bill OF particulars in the
suit. The argument was heard before Judges
Nelson and Reynolds, and whatever may De the
decision OF these judges-which VIII be given TINS
morning, and, IL Is understood win be modin-
cation OF the recent order-the public VIII be giao
to know that practical result was optalneo oy
the decision OF Mr.. Beecner's counsel to acquicsce
III going to trial on Monday next, even shouid Tue
decision OF the Judges be adverse 10 them. rhere
will therefore, 1t Is presumed oe no longer any
delays on either side on mere technlcal grounds
and the merits OF this case, that has so long agi-
tated the public mind, may be conAdently ex-
pected TO be reached through the courts in about
a fortnight from the present date.
fHE AUDIENCE.
The court room was very crowded during the
argument, but the audience was mainly CON-
posed OF lawyers and prominent friends OF the
plaintiff ana defendant Nearly every distin-
guished lawyer OF Kings county was present, in
Guiding ex-judges, ex-distrct attorneys and
court officers OF every grade. There were also .
few ministers present, notable among whom was
Mr.. Buckley, of the Washington avenue Methodist
Episcopal church. Conspicuous by his absence
was Mr.. Theodore Iilton. This gentleman has at
tended with an unerrlng reg ularity all the pro-
ceedings in the case in which he bears so con-
splcuous a part until the last two arguments
On these last occasions Mr.. Tilton has not been
present, much to The wonderment Of the specta-
tors some or whom seem TO think that they have
been thus defrauded by his absence of part OF the
SHOW OF the court room. To atone somewhat for
this disappointment MIR. Frank Moulton put IN an
appearance yesterday when the argument was
craving to its conclusion. This was his first ap-
pearance IN public since the earlier stages OF the
Proctor trial, and he became object OF interest
to those whose curiosity Is ever on the wing for
new sensation Mr.. MoulGons appearance con-
1rmed the recent reports OF his sickness. He
looked pale, care worn, anxious and nervous. He
listened with intense interest to the argument Of
Mr.. Beach in favor OF modification OF the order.
1t was, however, manifest TO the most casual OBJ
server that the old. defiant, jaunty and seli-con-
dent air that he manifested In the earlier days OF
this great controversy had been put away with
the fall of the leaf ana the decision OF the Proctor.
Moulton suit
THE PROCEEDINGS
were opened by General Roger A. Pryor, who said
this action was brought for criminal conversation.
After issue joired and after the cause was noticed
for trial motion was made at the Special Term
requiring the plaintiff TO furnish the defendant
with bin Of particulars. The order was granted
and is was from that order that the present ap-
peal was taken This caused the question involved,
and this appeal having been argued by the counsel
for the respective parties, and having been con-
sidered by the General Term, ne deemed it un-
necessary TO do more than submit one or two
general observations. They did not object to the
terms or the phraseology OF this order Their OBJ
lection is not leveled against the construction Of
the so called restrictive clause put upon the order
but there are objections against the oruer Itself,
and they contended that no order requiring
bin Of particulars should have been n,i granted @
parts q restriction upon the parties, proof
by It's own inherent energy and By its proper once
and effects and 1t restricts the party to the proof
of the SPECIFICATIONS alleged, and precludes him
nom giving evidence OF other acts at other times
utility could the order be TO this defendants When
the bill Of particulars specifying the times and
places Is propounded TO the defendant, 1t Is pro
ADnoNrsHED OF THE POINTS OF ATTACK.
IN order to provide himself with the means OF re-
pelhnR those attacks H. on the contrary, after
having admonished MIN that the plaintiff designed
and to prove she acts OF az par
montion and may give proof OF acts OF adultery
at other times and places, what Is the resutf
Just IN the same proportion ana just In the same
manner win bin Of particulars on the construc-
lars at all whereas II there be no Dill oil partIcu-
lars The defendant win come with
PROOF GENERAL INNOCENCE
and win come armed and equipped to repel the
allegation OF adultery at any time or place IN his
whole career. The learned gentlemen on the other
side were men OF TOO mucn earnestness and abil-
fty and practical to expend their energies IN
beating the air. They have not put forth the exer-
zion which they have displayed in this merely
70 grasp an air drawn dagger. They have con-
tended for definite purpose, substantial advan-
tage. Tney dld not invite the struggle here at the
Special Term to renew 1t at the General Term and
continue 1t at the Court Of Appeals and now again
revive It, merely to realize an apparent victory.
csiye advantage. 1t is set Iorth in the order rom
which the appeal Is taken with suficient explicit
ness and is TO the effect that the plaintiff cannot
receive a verdict or be entitled TO verdict
unless he proved the act OF adultery at
some particular time and place. The defendant
desired to restrict paintin as to proof Tne order
robs the plainti OF his legal rights and virtually
denies him any and all redress Tor the wrong OF
1s not that the adultery was committed on this day
or at that place; but MS wrong u, If wrong Is sus-
taine d. in the general lact that his wife has been
debauched and that nls life has been blasted.
Il did not signify, II the wrong has been done,
whether 1t was done at this place at that place,
81 this time or at that time. 1t would not mitt
gate the guilt OF the defendant II IL was com.
mitted on the 10Th OF October or on the 2Oth Of
October; whether it was committed on Colum Dta
Heights or on Livingston street, or whether the
act was committed at any other time or place.
If the plaintiff has sustained tins wrong what
does 1t ayail TO mitigate
THE SORROW, SUFFERING AND INJURY
70 the plaintiff II he should be toio, "frue, your
conversation with her. but 1t was not at this time
or at that placer Inc grievance for which the
plaintiff seeks redress is the substantial fact that
adultery has been committed by the defendan {,
without being qualified by the time or the circu m
stance. This issue the defendant with alacrity
and courage had accepted wnen he prepared and
promulga ted his answer TO the pubic. Now, If
the DEFENDANT had said IN his answer, 81 did not
commit adultery on the 10th OF October or the 18th
OF October; l deny that committed this crime on
the day or at the place alleged. his answer would
not have been received with the applause and en-
cOuragement which IL received all over the coun-
try. In that answer he used these direct ana
manly words. THAT the defendant never
did at any time or at any place nave
ANY unchaste or improper relations with
the wife OF the plaintiff, and never ATTEMPTED nor
sought 70 have any such relations" Why should
defendants attorneys not proceed on this ground,
and thus allow the plaintiff to introduce evidence
In proof OF this cnargef The painun, as well az
MT. Beecher, needed vindication. thief might
escape punishment by naw In the Indictment or
Dy variance In point OF law, but the trends or
tne exalted defendant would not rest satisfied II
Ms was 70 be such vtndicati0n. Let the platntin
prove, ne could, the CRIME upon tue defendant,