New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-06-25
THE WRITINGS OF THE CASE.

Within the spirit and terms of the lllustra-
tons stated you will have occasion to consider the exist
ing facts and the differences that may justly be drawn
from them The differences must have healthy growth,
spring from the facts naturally as fruit from the vine
and although you cannot trace the connection as you
could feel the links of the chain which binds material OBJ
iects together yet satisfy the rule you should perceive
and be fully convinced that the connection does exist
The evidence bearing the principal question-that OF
aduterymay be taken in its order thus: First as 10
the writings referred to- secondly as TO the oral adns
sons thirdly, the tact implied admissions; and
sourtbly an to the general conduct of the defendant
purpose briefly TO call your attention TO some OF the more
important matters falling under each OF those heads
Your conclusions however must not be drawn from one
of these classes Of evidence but from all the testimony
on this branch of the combined.
In taking up the writings referred to- You Will observe
that the plaintiffs letter of the Goth Of December 1870
demanding that the defendant should leave his pulpit
and the city, the first open act OF hostility That
demand was withdrawn at the interview had by the
parties at Mr.. Moutons house on the evening Oh Deem
Der 80 1870 The plaintiff claims that that was In defer
ence to the wishes of his wife. At that time paper
written by Mrs Tton in respect TO her relations the
defendant was held by Mr.. Mouton. The copy Of it
which the plaintiff had torn up after having been
no or stated defendant and the original was also
torn up afterward by Mrs. Tlton, with her husbands
assent Proof Of the contents Of that paper was ruled
out because the writing confidential communica-
party to its destruction But that ruling was no depva-
ton IA no charge written by Mrs. Tton could have been
evidence against defendant. That same evening,
Mr. Beecher with the assent OF the husband, called on
Mrs Titon He then obtained the paper. commonly
called The Retraction," afterward surrendered 10 Mr.
Moulton.
The next paper In order is that OF January L. 1871 III
ia in Mr. Moutons writing except the line ut the bottom
and the signature written by Mr. Beecher. question
OF fact in dispute this paper deserves your aten-
ton Mr. Moulton says that II dictated to him. sen
tepce by sentence, and that IL read over Mr.
Beecher denies d4ctaton and that reading As TO
the degree OF credit which these Witnesses thus in
conflict may relatively entitled to remember
that they speak of occurred at time Of great ex
element They may not have besn equally affected but
while the pouring out his thoughts In the agony
OF INTERPRETATION the other may well have been moved
ia sympathy The law has tender consideration for
inrnity Of memory thus inherited the witness Is not
expected 10 speak with the cearness and
taity that he might under other circumstances. A to
the subject thus spoken by those Witnesses you should
be prudent in reference probabilities You are
not 10 indulge In specuatons lightly consider mat
ter which has affirmed because 1t may not seem rea
aopable II you asked 10 determine aquestion from
the character thought style OF well known, You
voud hesitate because one Ia always temperate or
master of himself Our moods aud freaks OF temper
the harmony Of thought and utterance. Your
neighbor may usually have a sfaid qdahv ef
speech. which so well COMFORTS with his char
scter that you recognize him by IT, But the same man.
when unduiy moved, may have quite another method.