Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1875-06-30
Judge Nelson's Charge.

of III witnesses examined, the conSid-
GRAFTON Of which he would spare the jury.
The charge Of adultery was the foundation
of the case. He explained the di,tin ction
bet ween direct, circumstantial or presump-
tive evidence. The differences which the
Jury might draw must spring from the
facts as fruit from the vine Four classes
of evidence We're given in support Of the
charge: Written papers. oral admis-
sionS. tacit or implied, admissions and the
general conduct of the defendant; and the
Conclusions of the jury must be drawn not
from one of these but from all
TIE EVIDENCE REVIEWED.
Taking up the testimony in this order
the Judge briefly described the nature of
the testimony as to the letter of accusation
and the letter Of apology. He reminded
the jury of Beccher's disclaimer of the
authorship Of the letter, and remarked
that sometimes under excitement men
speak in a way that would surprise those
who know them. Beccher's letters of
remorse were to be considered in connec-
ton with all the circumstances. The evi
dcsce rs to oral admissions was contra
dioted by the defendant. AS to implied
the presumption is that if q man is I'M
Justly accused he will deny the charge.
The jury would have to exercise great
caution if they had any doubt as to the
accuracy of witnesses remembrance of
words attributed to the defendant, for in
such cases Il single word might be essen
tia. 1t was for the jury to say whether
when the defendant received plaintiff 5
letter demanding his resignation and the
defendant said, The man is crazy he
was acting in a manner that showed con-
sciousness of guilt. They would have to
scrutinize Beecher's conduct throughout,
the policy of the silence period, and the
ti,nidity and vacillation displayed through
ont, and to inquire whether he took any
part in sending Bessie Turner away and if
SO, for what reason; and whether it was
from a sense Of guilt he refused to answer
TIE question of Mrs. Bradshaw, or in ac-
cordance with an agreed upon policy OF
silence. which policy appears to have been
also that of the defendant church.
In connection with Bcechcrs conduct
thy We're to consider that man may be
accused of ten crimes and fly because he
is guilty of one, and his flight would be nc
proof of the guilt of the rest \ merctri-
ci,us lover found concealed under a bed
cannot be convicted of burglary with in
tint to steal. The jury We're to consider
Mlether the defendant 5 remOr>e could be
Il counted for by ml>apprchenslon its t.
advice to Bowen having caused injury
t. Hilton. AS to the crcuibilitv of wit
E'sseS, that WAS L matter wholly with tho
| i ", but they We're to remember the dis
| tnctlon between 4 falsehOOd uttered with
OFT guilt and Il lie with the knowledge OF
! is filsehood and too much importanc,
should not be given to discrepancies, fol
tlcse occur even when witnesses are dom.
TIER best TO state facts accurately. They
,cre to reconcile, if they could, Moulton
declarations here and his statements mad,
outside that Beecher was not guilty, an,
'iton's evidence with his declaration
hat his wife was pure. and whether Mrs
Iputun testified honestly believing tina
hi.echcr's offence was adultery. and sup
losing that this was the subject in his MIN,
/ hen he cOnvcrsed with her.
As to Tracy acting * counsel againS
Elton and also te>tifving. he had consult
y i his distin rui>hed associates before d.
Ing So. and thus his course WAS strunrl
c,ntrastcd with those of The attorney
r,f,rred to by counsel for the plrintit
Besides no profc>>ionalrclationh had eN>tc
b tween Tracy and Tilton, they were n
{ uncil and client
THE QUESTION OF DAMAGES
On the question of damages the Judg
sid he would call attention to it mcrcl
tIat they might recognize in thc prupc
ACE where the mass OF testimony come
Il rs t. tn, plaintiffs loss of his wifi.
Elections, and on the other hand tc>tim.
" is To plaintiff being unllithill rs
husband. The defendant was entitled t
die benefit Of the consideration that III
t Intimacy between pastor and pari>hionc
|, is of greater latitude than the intimac
with an ordinary acquaintance Th
question OF cons piracy AMI blachmail Wa
dismissed, with the remark that there wa
NJ proof whatever 10 sustain allegation
o that character. In reference 10 Mrs
WoolhUll, and T!ltou'> Intimacy Wi
her. the judge said she might be. 70
al.ht We know the subject Of criticism
and she might be merely an intcilcc;u;
women, carried away hr some cXtrav:
ymcc. The jury were not 10 attach an
Weigh, to bcechrr'S acluittal by his com
nittee, and on the other hand they wrr
MT to consider the advisory counsel @
{ churches. held here, WAS in any sense
prosecution of Bccchcr by two charcht
which were dissatisfied with the prucrcu
ilg- of Plymouth Church.
The Judge then took up the requests t
ella &c and instruct TIE jury thti the dt
itnoant was not bound to prove his inn,
a cencc. He declined to charge that the
mus. he satisfied beyond ALI reaSonabI
I,ln nt h.,l
coult find against INN, for this WAS
popularity of criminal suits. He in~tlu,
; ;cd hem that the higher the crime tn
NOR. stringent should bc their scrutiny ,
: ,hc evidence. In another proposition h
>lru:k out the word actual before guilt O
the ground that guilt is actual. and he iii
not care to load it with aliectvcs. III
f also charged that the destruction of tn
t papT which would be important n cv
dcnc. raised the presumption that it woul
be uflv"rable to the party who dcstruvt'
it. lie declined to charge that NOR;
4 evidence is not sufficient to support a lee
certainty. He charged that the d,fcn,
ant Surveillance of publicity to the charn
ral>el was no presumption OF guilt IN
that he letter of contrition did not impaI
% adultery on its face or prove it, for it iii
: not specify an act real or supposed tn;
, the arty had it in his mind ana that ii
SAINT remark applies to other letters Of tt
defendant. The fact of the plaintiff
e silelce for six months after the allcg,
c confession was to be considered. but
o connection with the question whether h
silence was due to his wife's reque>
> Having disposed of the requests, the judi
inquired, gentlemen, are YOU content ?
and Mr. Beach answered. = We are SIT.
HANGED.-Friday. was quite Il day f
hanging in New Englanl. Costley tn
murderer OF Mrs. Hawkes., WAS hung
Dedham. Mass. John +. Gordon ar
Louis H. +. Wagner We're hung at Thon
aston, Maine. on the same day. Gordo
is the man who killed his brother, bro;I
er's wife and their child. there being
feud between them on account of the pro
crty of the father. Wagner is the Isle
Shoals murderer, the one who killed Il
two women on the winter night two Yea
ago.
Gordon made no confession but cut /
throat Friday and made what would ha'