New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-06-24
eouu.e bcing called upon 70 support The rule ni Earle

arat ground think II very Objectionable proceeding
As advocate in the cause and rule absolute for new
| trial was granted.
In Goblet sgt Hndson In Ellis and Blackburn, Mr.
Chef,Justice Campbell delivering the Judgment OF the
Court of Queens Bench. Campbell. Colerdge, wheman'
ana Earle being associate Justices Campbell CmefJus-
tice expressed strong dsapprobaton OF such
tioe "A permitting party act alternately as advocate
| and witness, and further said
wemay hope that without any positive rule against
marty addressing the Jury and being examined ~ wiz
ness on oath, his behalf practice 50 ooecnon
able not likely to spring up for II Is not only
ing sq TO the minds j jury generally 3 njarIous
who IT. color IN os ,so pase Il to Tor the
plaintiff suing IN Cormd anpers had ~ nnot
s ts Sf r ai the &c esecso he had that the plaintiff
| had good eouse OF acton.
But yous Honor in those where the law docs not
extend TO the limit OF the English practice so far as 10
grant new trials improperly Of that character
the practice Is seriously condemned and think
there Ii no precedent be found In the books where
lawyer has ever testified i'm the cause In which he was
employed material question at Issue, and mas con-
timed after his evidence, connected with the case mas
ever the approval Of court; though some OF inc
decisions do recognize possible emergency In which
LAWYER may properly called to testify for his Client
but in such uniformly recommend and require that
he should at his connection as counsel with
| the particular cause
In Potter agt Ware, in LIST Cushng's Reports Mass.
| Metcalf, Justice, said:
In counsel cannot testify for their clients
without subecng themselves to just apprehension But
Without dshonor but in which It their duty to do it.
such cases. rare. and whenever they occur
they necessarily cause great pain TO counsel OF the right
| spirit
In Reid agt Cacock LIST Mott & McCord, johnson.
| Justice, says:
It's matter Of much delcscy and one which the pro,
fcsson ought and do. much to their credit usually avoid
| when it is not indispensably necessary.
In The State agt woodside, 9th rede Nash says that
il was the practice receive such testimony in the courts
| of North Carolina, but added
Ia practice not be encouraged and In most cases
has we believe been accompanied by surrender ON the
| part OF the attorney OF his brief In the case.
In Little agt McKcon, LIST Sandford Of our own courts
sandford Justice delivering the opinion OF tho Court
anin,adverted strongly upon the degradation OF the
character Of tho bar. and the probable injury to the
cause of truth and justice, by means OF at
orneys and counselors tesyng in the suits which they
were conducting" and he said
We think the evil will work its own cure. Attorneys
| "a well as cOunscors Of standing and character Will
never except In cases. present themselves be-
fore jury witnesses in their own causes on tgated
ouestons and only because OF unfore
seen necessity Those gentlemen who habitially suffer
hecome marked both by their associates and by the
cors and forfeit in character than ever VIII be
compensated to them by success In such clients coh'ro
| vcrsies.
Moreover testimony by attorney Of such admissions
made 10 him by the opposite party always regarded
with extreme suspicion and dsrst by both courts and
| juries.
The same learned judge, in the samo case, rcferredap
knowingly to an article the Penn. Law Journal sixth
volume page 4O5 entitled Lawyers no witnesses in
their own cases." have read so much from this sir
that omit quotations from this article in the Penn. Jour
nal" only portion Of which intended to read as 1t 10
very lengthy and exhaustive upon the subject in the re-
| view both of authorities and tho discussion Of
| principle. And I beg leave, also, to refer
| your Honor TO tho case Of Tell Tread
we'll to be found at 9Th Wendell, 676
That 4, the Judgment OF the courts upon the pr0prety
of such an exhibition have had from Mr.. Tracy
But there Is another element in that position which did
not appear in tho in which these learned Judges ex
pressed their opinions and the Judgment OF the law upon
| it, Mr. Tracy not simply tho advocate OF Mr.
Beecher and witness his behalf, but he had given
plclge under the circumstances to which have referred
that he would occupy such position. The circum-
stances are intensified and deeply characterized by
tho circumstance that Mr.. Tracy appearing In oppo
ston that pledge. TO the assurance under which he
had received from Mr. TiIton his confidence. Now, re-
member gentlemen, that Mr. Tracy testified upon the
stand that he was still connected professionally with
| this cause, and with Mr. Beecher, that he
| had not thought 1t duo to the delicacy Of
| his position that no should retro and relieve
himself from this double and suspicious character and
he has appeared In the subsequent stages OF the case fol-
Lowing his evidence actively In that character What is
the excuse given for It'll Why Mr.. Tracy says Mr.. Til
ton, you changed your ground you altered your COM
n,an: and therefore am relieved and discharged from
| my personal and professional obligation TO YOU You
charged this in substance he says"yOu charged to
me that there was Oense the part Of Mr. Beecher
except base solicitation to your wife to impurity, and
Dow YOU have changed that accusation to adultery"
Suppose that to true did that justify Mr. Tracy in
yeling and swearing the transactions and declara
tons made by Mr. Mouton to him, under the influence Of
his pledge secrecy Mr.. Tracy might have said,
| haps, with entire propricty. "Mr. Titon, you have
| atiaua q T. no
longer serve you; you must employ other counsel" But
could he take single step beyond that consistently with
propriety and honorable obligation, and reveal to Mr.
Beecher or anybody else the secrets extored from Til
ton by the relation and the pledge in which lie Stood and
which he voluntarily gave to him. and which Mr. Tilton
viii any gentleman OF right principle of true spirit and
maniness justify that revelation He may approve the
action OF Mr.. Tracy in separating himself from a
which he believed to DO dishonest and unfair II he did
40 believe; from which changing its aspect
according to the necessities OF circumstances but will
any gentleman Of sound manly principle uphold lawyer
in revealing tho secrets Of the which he deserts
obtained under not implied but expressed and posi-
tive pledge of fidelity to the But gentlemen, ia 1t
true TltOn did change his groundl do not stop
to refer the evidence Of either TtOn MoutOn,
Mr. Woodruff, except perhaps word or two from the
testimony Of Mt Woodruff upon that proposition. 1t is
sufficient for say and questioned will refer to
the record that these three witnesses all affirm that the
charge made by Mr. Tlton in express terms criminal
intimacy, or adultery, in unmistakable language.i
ANOTHER DISPUTE
Mr.. Shearman-We do question that Mr..