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


and spirit That observation was made BY one
of tho learned counsel at the tme Of Mrs Morses
letters was received In evidence. think Mr.. Evarts
assented to that, or stated that proposition.
XXXv The letters and oral statements that have been
sidersd in their entirety, and as together covering
long period years. tho jury are 70 consider whether
oral statements of guilt as are attributed to and de-
MED by him. and whether is credible that such letters
could have been written by him with reference 10 gd vi
adultery.
That quite corresponds think. with the instructions
have given you; 1t is covered by the charge.
XXXyI The expressions OF conjunction and remorse
In the defendants writings and alleged conversations be-
long TO the OF merely moral evidence and neither
tend TO support capable OF supporting any
certainty as TO the fact nature degree Of imputed
culpabiLty.
have had occasion to speak on this subject Moral
evidence of great value especially when you have 70
deal with intellectual questions, with emotions Win
mans consciousness of guilt man suddenly charged
accused confronted with something that brings up De-
fore him any ofense that he has been guilty Of has MS
moral emotions and sensibes excited and thus makes
revelations and thus you get at sometimes real evidence
OF what otherwise you could not have discovered But
they belong undoubtedly to class OF moral evidence
and the question whether they tend to support or arc
capable of supporting any legal certainty to the fact
nature or degree of cupaby subject discussed IN
tho charge, and is there stated, think, correctly.
xxxv Testimony Of witnesses that Party oaarg geo
weakest and evidence that is received by
the law
stated to you proposition to the degree OF care
and scrutiny with which that kind Of evidence Is re
ceiyed and think have said sufficient on the subject
xXXVIII. The testimony of witnesses (even If fully
credited that the defendant In conversation admitted
fet he naa Se a Is not snt proof Of his guilt
unless the alleged confessions corrObOraed by other
satisfactory and consistent testimony.
On the character of the CHARGE that is question OF
fact for you to decide respect it, do not consider
it material 1t is proposition of law and not OF fact
xxx. When a person is charged with immoral
conduct under such circumstances that he has no legal
direct evidence of his innocence other than his own Oat
the fact he endeavOred to prevent publicity or 10
avoid public controversy is no evidence OF guilt.
think have explained that quite fully. have ad-
monished you consider the motive which lod to sup
pression and indicated the party apprehendng an
noyance and distress from publicity, and whether nno
cent or not he might well wish to avoid that publicity
XII In considering whether the testimony of the al
LOOK at the whole course of conduct OF the plaintiff and
his witnesses III their intercourse Win inc uelehd
since the charge first made and consider whether II
possible probable that this conduct and social inter
could have taken place, If the DEFENDANT was
charged OF believed by them to be an adulterer.
That question OF fact for you 10 take into consider
alton.
Kill The plaintiffs written statement. that the i'm
pued ofense of the defendant was the making OF i'm
proper proposals. and that defendant denied the charge
mi gt be overthrown by direct proof OF the act OF adu
terry but il cannot be Oyerthrown by oral testimony Vi
different oral charge and admission
think have said enough to you about the question OF
improper proposals advances in connection with the
question whether the defendant was conscious OF having
been thus charged and whether that led to his emotion
and sorrow and trouble tended to lead him to the
expression verbal or written which he finally made.
XIII. AS matter of law, the paper of Jan l, 1871,
called the Apology Letter of ConritOn exhibit No ~
does its face import act OF adultery or OF sex
nal indelieacy, and is no proof OF either
That So 1t Is for you to determin" as said before,
what it does refer to in competition with other crcum
stances
KILL None OF the defendants letters and writings
put in evidence, upon their face matter OF law import
either BY themselves. The fact OF either must be
piled by other legitimate proof before the law allows the
Inference that such fact prompted the expressions OF the
letters and writings.
Ihave put that to you, gentlemen, in the charge
question Of fact This letter. like the other paper called
the Letter of Contron," does not specify the act or
wrong, real or supposed, which was had In view. 1t
makes 1t matter of fact for you to determine.
Xiv. None OF the defendants letters or writings
put in evidence ascertain declare the fact OF adultery
Certainly not.
They only declare express the emotions Of the de-
PENDANT, of commseration aud self-reproaoh at the
broken fortunes of the plaintiff and domestic unhapp
probation and detailed by himself
Well, say to you they only declare and express the
of the defendant and have submitted to you
the question what those emotions were, and by what
they were excited colored or distorted.
XIV II the jury find that the plaintiffs wife left him
in December 1870 account Of his treatment and oon
duct and with view of separating from him. and that
the facts TO wife and to officer Of his church, and
to the plaintiffs and ADVISED sts S c%S. o.
cred by the jury as corro0orang the DEFENDANTS es
mony and discreditng that of the plaintiff on the main
issue.
Ihavc said to you, in effect those facts must be con
sdered by you Interpreting and you may interpret
In corroboratng dsprovng the defendants DECLARE
tons illustrating what he may have said That Is all
think ought to say on the subject 1t is matter Tor
you
xLvI The fact that the plaintiff continued to cohabit
with his wife, her alleged communication to HIM OF
against es the truth d Of Of the present charge
Several cited in support Of that proposition
and in actions for divorce the ground OF adultery
whore the wife is plaintiff defendant, being ques-
ton between the husband and wife, that proposition Is
correct it is sound rule The fact that plaintiff in
an action seeking divorce continued to cohabt with
his wife AFTER long after her guilt had been commu
Gated to him. is O proper matter peculiar to such an
action because 1t is that action that the husband may
be charged with having condoned his wifes ofense Pc
cause also, the who finally comes into court and
seeks divorce s the whose conduct In living
with his wife after the knowledge of her guilt involves
an ncongruty The same spirit that leads him to bring
his action for divorce would lead him to separation
from his wife he learned she was guilty But
in this action that principle does not apply do not
think it is Of any moment whatever.
XLvII The silence of the plaintiff toward the defend
months aftcr ne says was posses
sion of the fact that adultery had been committed Is
cOgen evidence against the truth OF the present charge
Upon the mere face of the proposition that would be
and 1t is 30 unless you take into consideration as
you should the question whether upon the confession OF
that by the wife If she did confess or taking into view
the conduct of the plaintiff the assumption OF con-
fesson did the wife influence him to sence-peace and
did he yield that influenced Does that account for the
that not until so long after the supposed or
alleged confessions did he make any distinct avowa OF his
greyancei That for you consider gentlemen and
think you ought to look at it in that light either to ac
cept or reject the suggestion