The Hawaiian gazette., 1875-04-07
The Law and Mrs. Triton.


There is one feature of the Beecher tria |
ity, the sense of justice of every man wor-
thy of the name. 1t is that Mrs. Tilton
is not allowed to say one word in her own
defence, whatever accusations may be
heaped upon her by her husband or any
one else. True, she is not on trial, as is
Beecher, yet she is on trial by the public,
and that the public will make up its YER
dict based upon testimony given by her
husband, who, to gain his suit, swears
away his wife's reputation. And although
the jury may exonerate Beecher, it will
not necessarily do away with the suspi-
cions which her husbands testimony and
that of few others, have thrown upon
her. Day after day she sits in that trial
her moral trial-hears whatever may be
testified to concerning her, no matter how
great the falsehood, and yet she is not
permitted, under the New York Code of
Laws, to go upon that stand whence the
arrows have been shot which may destroy
her character and her life; and yet she
must hear it all in silence and without re-
dress, when perhaps the opportunity of a
minute on the witness stand will make the
whole story clear
This may be all right, but we fail to see
the justice, the reason or the common
sense of it. Why woman's honor may
be allowed to be attacked with impunity
by her husband, or any one else, and she
be barred the right to testify in her own
yindication, is more than we can under
stand or appreciate as either necessary or
just toward any one. 1t seems most
lamentable failure in the New York Code
that allows a woman's moral character to
be attacked and ruined so far as testimony
may ruin it, and she not be allowed to
testify word in her own defence. Yet
this appears to be the law and the prac-
tice. The theory seems to be that it
would be dangerous to allow wife ac-
cused, as these charges against Beecher
do accuse her, to testify, because she
might be in collision with her husband
for the purpose of extorting money. And
so, upon such an assumption, her reputa-
tion may be irretrievably made infamous.
and she, although hearing the infamous
falsehood, may not say word to save her
character from the effects of SANDER, how
ever atrocious. We do not think that the
common conscience of mankind can re-
ceive this as good law or correct policy.
We believe that law such as this, that
allows a husband to testify against his
wife's virtue, although he knows literally
nothing against it, but who may before
a court and society to whom the press
sends forth every word of suspicion, every
detailed incident that may add any cumu-
lative weight to the prosecution, while it
denies the poor privilege of even denial to
the wife, and the reason given in iustifea-
ton of the law, are outrages upon human
rights. And this law and practice which
puts legal gag in the mouth of the vic
tim which is being led to the slaughter,
has no more potent reason, as given by a
journal which condemns the injustice of
it, but yet opposes a change in the law,
than this-that if both husband and wife
were allowed to testify, that fact would
be an aid in case they had colluded for
the purpose of extorting money. So a
honor, a mans character and
may be allowed, even before
what is called court of justice, to be sac
rificed, because otherwise conspiracy for
might be successful. This pre-
tence is a sham, a wrong, disgrace. We
know nothing of the real merits of this
whole Beecher case and scandal, but the
one scandal evident is that a woman may
be thus legally sacrifced.-Ahd.