New-York tribune., 1875-05-15
THE TILTON-BEECHER TRIAL.
TuF CLNsINH SCRNFA

ou.TN Nay HE txrr,,TFp " TTlP SUMMING UT--Mr. |
~ cH rIiTsD AG,IHsr MR. TvArTs AND hN- |
JvrA,y roKtxS-gEoGAnLE nCRA1Ios or THK
AEOt ,,Rxrs-s sATfNENIs PROM COUNSEL
CnSt ,A..c inisr,s. = manifested IN Tie approach
inc Sn c,ninc UP ia tle T.ltoa-B,echer case 1t Is
cxpestcj tlat tie aut.cT'es in The Brooklyn Ciiy
(,nr,i r,r, while tie 49, dtents arc going on. MI
h. ., i.i.- as the nom can possibly contain. and
TIM; .h, ice,anG ior seat,, or ever standing r'm.
wt}fieA,.Nl " asi hsS ncrctoforS been cXpcTeu, ell
The fr that three lawyer vi the fo,rnsio sbiii.s
ant -rpfst, n o. Mcs,rs Eyarts PnG.cr and iirseh
ar - make she sTsu0cl.s would alr5ie attract
m&ny e?,ctstors bnt tae Tsgnitgie of thls famous
cans ard the w,r- Nidc interest ( 4. ~ i.s rrsll1
iaiensi II - tao utmos; the dcsi7 - IL ci-inS
sren,S- Judge lcrieI. 10 oyenDs iol the defendant
will review the testimony on bo,n cs ana sui9o<'
il & s.arrLiac a4 .,- lie ". contrast iAe CON
fictag neat> a the d,acrcnt witnesses AZ c"-
s. lersble length. snd T0int ont ~hc.e, ~ TIE
defendants view cf the case, he ~'air Of rr'ury
rcs.s Judge Pcrt>r : aS~,rfoA - ee ve;y '"-
pres,iyc sp,0ker. and munh - o'Ioc'ed mon IL
sAaic>s.
Nj. r>ar.,. who viii follow Iudc, Porter viii 50
les ..to lie de.a.l> o. re eylte,ce. lie w..i OF
the eths hand prcS,ui ;Ae c-e iN = =. bearin -
an w Il dwell on lie cc0,rs frst0rc,. On a'coaat
OF u C,s-ts's extensive Legal know w..'cc. a'e hrs
ou;iu., aai refined tasrc-, II l. g'ae-s'N e-l-;ea
tAat lis Argument vii b. remarkable -. - ll,--
ING sna polish
u. Te.oh. having % assistant, NJ dea' v''h ''-
oa.- ia a lis bearings aoLc. Il j, s4se-i tl-i aT
I-a p possess remarkable power @: -yosiN, .na
fnrcc = arsainei sEl Iauol ooui,deoe = expressed
by Lis .,,is il his ahty ils lricc tho lur i.ci
Mr Bach N conversation W. lEHCNS ~
rort-r y.vst.risy ssil ia; she gcarrsi ar7ilen''S
for the summing Up had b-eu completed - both
sGos- lie understood fIom the o'h"F So fhi'
Jads. P,rteT's sr-um-lt would pgofabs 'c COM
plctc>. on FTiily ne, and ,ha' ". - aaT-s. WHO
~ouid immediately follow Jude !or.cF Noc.d =
throa.h on Tue>ley + tho follow wt-N 1A.'
would Low 1--WE Ga ior tie >uirnjlS ~ f., 3d.
defendant. which the loHsr,f tine iila Nj.
Tvar.> a-Ls~l fcr. II. Zach siat~d ia. L. v"-ti
prcsa,y b,-in his areuma o. v r,inesday. Nay %
lie coa Lot tell how long it would iak--he afvoT
could tel Low loug b. soias % :. an u7.i e.
ro,afit. Hothcr.St however. tAlt Ae cou.G ~
ali he Rad 10 say in less taAn tNo
DAYS. lis h1ving to slm up alone
fCr the plaintiff NJ. beach co,Sd-
e.~l s.newhsi un.a;r, and he ssd ths' lie ~"
tolG IL, Nelson =. = c.- nci tlaA Il eA~c.-y
r'slt - "a, rittcl against judge Porter Gao w.
E,ae5> At the beginning 4 the tr.ai the c"n4>.i
fcl the ,la;ntif had understood thai ..y oac ,"3cf
~og'l N up for tie iefeudau. N:'h that u .or-
STANDING Sir. Mc--i> h.i been appointed . r.alr
Tho opening .,.drcSs fT ihs ?'-ir..1 Hal Z been
theu k.,,va thai thcyc sao.d hc two - -,e,i'S -'r
IT, i ? tari - IN. close, Ar. "a 'r-ls wvu.l l.F~
ra.ic str.4-esnc-;s - ass: -. blon Ia s;saia-
u ia-iy IL thc ;-ia fAc ccU.l~, - t..c tctr-i.i
hsA 4.Y ,ci 20 J,l-c Nc,>ou ~ leave tc have fNo
eOu.i>,. SUN up oa their siio, .ad TO P-rais-
sion lad been granted. ~ eoUr tie SAN pfl'-e-'
hai t-,n ext=r44i tu .. plaintiff nn, b'. ais..
tAelr o,,~ni-c they coc,d not oaavcri-.t'y a-,c.
t.,eir 4-l.i- C-u,eu,s-
NJ B,sca furtler stated. in rri .rc~,r - Gee .--
dence ih1i haA ls,u ,rtlL,>d IL tAe l.l. t--t i.,
c>,u,,.l .or ne plain; Z hal succ~ei.-l T. tr--a-
fog,sa-i uoa,iy al q: tie testimony which shrt H-d
Intend u TO in,ro.ucc. Tloy 1c'l We sti>'.l vi-2
thar evidence. wh.,h they coa-la,-rc :" He Nc.F
complete. They lad been disappointed in
not .eIns abe to pnN-Uoe Nv 0,t-'.>>S
whom hey hal srb7rua-d hut ue,,,y a..
lad been promptly on hand vixen oal,r''
for 6cn Butler cne 4 ts~e wh" Aso
h-en s~bp>nasi bat ha1 nc; beoa ili tAe s'suO.
lie had been kept away uuSNo.ably los u engage
ineit ~ N important >u;- His tsv,ii2t'f. how
eycl. would have been a. recar to minor ;eii'-a-d
the Want If IL had no, det1act>l from she oorn,t
ness c: tL. plaintiff, ,-l>c. Their we've Sa.e- WI
r->~e, NJ. Z vsch said vho bad b~0 ca.,-l 70 -5c
pa4rt.a. whose testimony had nct trcG - -a-.F
dz,sn eut - the p'..ai:I's co1n>rl taf 'Hier .ct
that !; should be. on a,coun; ot cl.cilc's iro- Tie
Other sit-. Among these hsd l-,a hr. Bowen. Nj
Hldg. ard two OF threv o;ho-S
Thr statement IL = morning paNc- t"a' jnic' f'r-
&. vold begin SUNNI 1c ~ los TIRE defendant: ,h-;
Nj 3 .a, would follow hun o. behalf 4 tie pair-
tF 2ul that Mr E,A-ts would U..kc the tina. s'l-
6rvss - The jury NJ Beach o...l..c1tr.7ec a:o-
Eefhel incorrect Sad absurd
Nj >hcarnsn told , tribune reporter Yesterday
NAt Ae wished - make oo-Ttti'vn. Sor- Of I.e
morning pspers hal incorrectly reported Nj ksars'
rr.aaIA, on the some between Mrs- Oyinatoa and
Nj Fullerton. rDallrc him say tasi NJ Fll ertoH'S
wo7.s were proper Tx TEInvNr'S report was
rlcaL Mr. EvaIts s,.l nothing OF toe KIND. WHAT
b. saii vas in spir.. vul.ca;o-y ~ M oVia-ton.
whiic he ahstajael iTo:n oon-urns Ar. Fullerton
err,iv because he desired 70 Svoli another cutig-ak
81 fr<llsg.