The Rutland daily globe. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1873-1877, 1875-06-25
BY TELEGRAPH.
THE REFRIGERATION TRIAL,
THE CASE NOT TO BE RE-opENED.
Judge Nelson's Charge.

city court room. Beecher and his wife sat
among the Plymouth throng, and Tilton
was early in his seat. Judge Nelson said
that under the circumstances he was CON-
PEELED, on an examination of the alildavits,
to deny the application for a re. opening of
the case and in accordance with Mr.,
Beach's request, the papers were filed with
the clerk of the court. Judge Nelson then
stated that the jury might retain their seats
If they SO desired while he delivered to
them the charge. After a few preliminary
remarks of compliment and congratulation
to the jury, Judge Nelson began his
charge by quoting from former charge
OF his in the same court, as follows: 1t is
your duty to accept fully, and without
shade of mental reservation, the rules of
law stated. But, on the other hi nd, |
wish you to pay like degree of respect to
your great office. You are the sole judges
of the weight of testimony and of the cred
bility of witnesses. A sense of this re-
strains me from commenting on the proofs
at large, and from indicating to you what
my own opinions may be on questions of fact
involved. Your recognition of that as
your relation to the court and to the cause is
due to the oath you have taken to render a
true verdict according to evidence. My re.
cogntion of 1t is due not only to you, but
to these parties, as the moral force of a
verdict depends largely on the fact
that it is the unbiased judy
ment of twelve men selected from
the body of our citizens, and in the most
solemn form known 10 our laws consecra-
ted to service. But without intruding upon
your province, shall be able to assist you
materially and as the exigences of the case
require. The learned counsel have re-
peated and dwet upon the evidence in
your hearing so fully that | need not de-
tain you by going over these volumes of
testimony. A repetition now in any form
of what you haye heard from one hundred
and eleven witnesses would send you to
your deliberations days hence, weary aud
perplexed. Then may not be performing
a fruitless service | must assist you to so
arrange and classify evidence that you can
grasp and apply it that | may not leave
your minds troubled by conflicting author
tiles you have heard cited, the pleadings
have been stated in your hearing, and you
perceive that the charge of adultery, denied
by the answer, lies at the foundation of the
case. Upon the issue thus joined the bur
den rests of the proofs of plaintiff. You
are also to understand the evidence should
be such as to carry conviction to the minds
of just and prudent men should point to
the actual guilt more directly than to any
other reasonable hypothesis, The wrong
charged in'this complaint might be proved
by direct or by circumstantial evidence,
but such charge is not usually proved, or
indeed provable, by direct and positive evi.
dence. The reason is obvious. In most
instances where, under social restraints, an
apparently proper intimacy degenerates in
to licertious acts, evil intent and life put
| on the garb of innocence. To such cases,
| to all such cases of doubt and difficulty, the
| law Of evidence, searching and flexible, ap-
| plies peculiar tests, prescriptions and in
| ferences drawn from facts and from con.
| duct, according to the dictates of expert
| ence, so that finally the question Of guilt
| or innocence may be determined by the
| jury in the light reflected by the surround
| ing circumstances. The court then direct
oil tbo % Df ba i,rx N v,l,a
stituted the direct, circumstantial and to
presumptive evidence, the former OF which
was when a person testified to seeing the
| act of adultery, circumstantial when par
bedroom. The first act of open hostility in
this case was the letter of December Goth,
| 1870, demanding Beechers withdrawal
from the pulpit. If to the letter received
by defendant, explicitly charging him with
adultery, he answered simply saying, | am
sorry and hope to be forgiven, or if on
being thus charged in conversation by one
having an interest in the matter, he had
process of reasoning would be presumptivc
evidence. In acting on circumstantial OF
on presumptive evidence. the jury should
exercise great care, proceed cautiously rs
men are wont to do when travelling in din
twilight ON unfamiliar roads, and must dis
tinguish motives arising or suspicion from
a relation latent, and apparent quality may
tend TO support it. The next letter wa'
ts.at of January list, in the handwriting o.
Mealton. With regard to the evidence Of
these witnesses the jury were not to in
dulge in any speculation about it. Secondly
statements, explanations and dcnials, ant
the fact that the paper was to be used il
correcting plaintiffs impressions. Will
Beecher was speaking, Mouton writing
and with his assent, it may well be that il
the absence of deliberate course of dicta
ton he could only note in hurried AM
imperfect manner. detached and strikin
expressions You will consider whethe
he did so in good faith, and with what de
gree of success. But if circumstances wer
not favorable to the making OF correct re
ports had the writer wished TO make II
neither were they favorable to invention O
what was written, you are to consider hoy
this paper, read often and criticised full
here, is to be regarded with especial refer
ence to controverted question OF fact
which have called your attention. Othe
papers belonging to this class of evidenc
in which defendant takes blame to himse
has been read several times and needs /
this connection no special treatment
AS general rule II is the province
the court to instruct the jur
as to import of writing in evidence
that is more especially so as to contracts
L In .niA nlrnllu