The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1875-06-29
The Bcecher Jury-Let This he the
End.

End.
The time has gone by when verdict in the
Beecher case can have any significance. Had
the jury come into court on Friday morning
with judgment either for the plaintiff or de-
PENDANT it would have carried with it GER
tain weight Of authority with the friends Of
both parties, as well az have been conclusive
Of the legal aspect Of the case. Now o YER
dict is no more than disagreement, and O
disagreement has been the result which was
generally anticipated during the six months
Of the trial The moral interests involved
are SO great that no jury con be expected to
give the proofs On unbiased consideration;
and even IL the case had not been one where
the jurors are almost certain to be controlled
by their sympathies, the testimony was 50
voluminous that no average jury could grasp il
sufficiently to reach en- intelligent conclusion
The only use Of the trial was to settle the case
with something of judicial fairness and
authority, but the hope Of such determine
ton was disspated as soon as it became ap-
parent that counsel had resolved upon a
policy Of elaboration One side was not more
at fault than the other for prolonging the
cause The Court allowed tie utmost lati-
tude in the admission Of evidence, and both
plaintiff and defendant on all occasions
ayailed themselves Of the utmost limits OF
proof. This policy was justifable, perhaps,
in the legal aspects Of the case, but it defeated
the one great object Of the trial--the deter
mination by a judicial investigation whether
Henry Ward Beecher had been guilty Of
adultery That is q question which no YER
dict and no court can settle now; and so all
these weary months Of inquiry and invective
have been wasted upon issues which must
await the solemn judgment Of posterity.
The jury is, perhaps, not much to blame
for the course it has pursued since the case
was submitted for Judgment II is true the
mystery which hangs about the jury room
and the long-continued delay, without any
sign OF impatieuce from either side, are some
thing remarkable in themselves; but 4he par
ties and the counsel and the Court have oil
set an example to tie jury Of making the most
Of this case, and 50 We need not be surprised
when the twelve honest gentlemen who are
to pass upon the facts take their own time in
finding the truth in this matter OF falling to
find It. There may be another aspect 70 this
delay, however, upon which we can look with
less satisfaction. No reasoning can justify
majority Of the jury in an endeavor to coerce
the minority into agreeing upon q YER
diet Such verdict would be even
more useless 20 the defendant than 70
the plaintiff Indeed, it would open up new
grounds 81 pickering and dissatisfaction and
still more completely unsettle case which it
now seems 10 human judgment can settle. II
this i what the delay means-and II seems
highly probable IN view Of al the clrcum-
stances-it 10 as unfortunate u itself and
must prove as serious blow to the jury sys-
TEN as have been the scandal and the whole
course Of the trial to the public morals and the
administration Of justice.
Whatever may be the verdict now, the case
il at an end A disagreement is only the
logical consequence Of the trial as Il was, and
of necessity had to be, conducted. There must
not be another trial IN any event, and wo are
free to confess there would be as much neces-
sity for new trial with verdict for the de-
4 fandsnt % without verdict Of al, Both