The Rutland daily globe. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1873-1877, 1875-06-26
REGENERATION TRIAL.
Conclusion of Judge Nelson's Charge.

New YORK, June "a.
The judge next referred to the policy of
silence, and said that Mr.. Beech
er's course throughout was to be carefully
scrutinized. You will inquire whether at
tentions were paid to Mrs. Woodruff to
conciliate her at the instance, or
with the appreciation of the defendant
whether before Miss Turner was sent off
to school he favored that as a precaution-
airy measure or contributed money in that
view, and whether he repressed the present
action and prosecution of the West
charges. Yon will also inquire whether
the defendant refrained from publishing a
denial or refuuaJion OF the allegations cUu-
tanned IN the paper known as the Wood
hull scandal from answering the partic-
ular inquiry made by Mrs. Bradshaw in
her letter, to which he sent reply, or was
held in the bondage of fear to Mrs. Morse
from q sense of the guilt now charged.
In any view of the case you may be dis
posed to ask why Mr. Beecher If innocent
should have garnered up in his heart all
that pain and fear so long when he might
have made proclamation to the world and
trampled out the scandal as with iron boots.
The question upon all the proofs is wheth-
er the defendant understood that he was
charged with the adultery, land spoke, wrote,
acted and suffered from and in consequence
of that, or whether, laying that out of view
he understood the charge to be that he had
made the improper proposals or advances
and had robbed the plaintiff of rich in
heritance in the love of his wife, and
whether coupled with those charges he be-
lieved that he had wrongcd the plaintiff by
favoring family separation, and the dis
| missal by Mr.. Bowen, and for those rea-
sons spoke, wrote, acted and suffered as
| described. Ii the wrong was the adultery,
| the solution of what followed is easy. But
| if the wrongs or ottenses, actual or impu
| ted, were of the other character stated then
just apprehension of the relations be-
tween the defendants state of mind, and
| his conduct, involves several consider
atoms. What was his personal estimate of
| bis relation to the church, to the world, to
literature, and of the reputation he should
leave behind him what his conception of
the nature and gravity of the charge of i'm
pure solicitations /; of alternating a wOman's
| love from her husband and of the effect of
such accusations, if properly made What
| is his notion of the extent to which Mr..
Tilton had been injured as journalist, in
his family, and as TO their means of sub
! sistence?
| Judge Nelson next called attention to
the credit due TO witnesses, and referred as
| follows to Moulton's connection with the
case. 1t is proper to refer in less general
| terms to one or two witnesses Mr.. Moul-
| ton seems to have interviewed as the open
and avowed friend of Mr.. Tilton he ap-
pears to have undertaken to mediate be-
tween the parties to reconcile them, and as
far as possible to prevent the specific char
acter of their differences from obtaining
publicity. He states that such was the real
purpose and character of his Intervention,
| and the defendant in his letters and other
wise has borne large and generous testi-
mony to that effect. Yet Mr.. Moulton on
various occasions, as he himself testites,
aud rs other witnesses state, declared that
the defen liant was not guilty OF the sexual
intercourse which he now says had been
admitted 1t is for you to consider how
far the inconsistency III his statement goes
to discredt him. If you shall be of opinion
that he intended to state the truth in his
examination here and that his previous
declarations were inspired by spirit of
loyalty to the defendants reputation, and
that of Mrs. Tilton, and from an earnest
wish to divert the minds of others from
| tuc buOJCSl III Out tnc pDllty
suppression adopted, you are at liberty to
make such allowance for that as shall seem
proper. AS to Mr.. Tilton you will CON
slider whether his testimony to the confess
sion of the defendants guilt can be recon-
ciled with his previous declaration that his
wife was innocent. The peculiar theory
which he has explained to you has been
sufficiently illustrated by counsel and may
be accepted as far as you think proper ii
his purpose was to protect the fame of his
wife and not to injure unduly or malicious
ly another If in the fitful conflicts and
emotions which may have possessed him
you discover moral purpose as contrasted
with depraved spirit, you will give him
the benefit of that view. The general rule
as to persons who have wfuly testified
under oath to what is false on any material
point Is that their testimony is discredi-
ted. You are not bound to disregard it all.
The witness, to be entirely discredited,
must have given the false testimony
with reference to fact as to which he
could not be presumed liable to mistake,
and given it with the knowledge that ii
was false. You are to apply the rule eau
tiously and discreetly. The maxim wi!ful.
ly false in one thing false in all is sound,
subject to the caution stated, and to your
right to decide how much credit you will
give the witness. The testimony of En-.
ma G. Moulton Is sought to be discredited
on quite different ground. 1t Is claimed