New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-06-25

reasonable doubt peculiar to criminal case, and as
books show does not apply hero. do not conceive
Il to be Of any real moment.
vi The verdict must be the defendant unless the
result of the whole evidence both sides be such as TO
prodnce in the deliberate conclusion OF the jury legal
certainty OF guilt.
We'll reasonable certainty means a legal certainty,
suppose, and in that view I accept that.
VII The charge Of adultery is that not merely In
eliminates the plaintiffs wife. and tends disgrace her
and % items the %arsgo relation 0rn ssr and
natural consequences OF conviction in scrutinzng the
Susaon involving such grave permanent and remedies
consequences to others.
We are not trying the others gentlemen Very early In
case and when perhaps had not got reconcied to
the elaboration and patience with which We aferward,
for month two proceeded. threw out sugges-
lions and then about its being question between
te plaintiff and the defendant not having regard 10 Mrs
Tton upon this trial, although in certain sense OF
course we that the effect OF the determination does
lap and reflect upon her. But, STILL that is TOO re-
mote for to be guided by The charge OF adultery as
affecting this defendant say to you that involves
q pecuniary claim and also does involve grave moral
considerations affecting him. That is the extent to
which think called upon to say anything In regard
to that question.
VIII IT, on weighing the evidence on both sides, there
remains in the mind OF the jury doubt or perplexty as 10
the actual adultery, they must ind for the defendant
Well. II that means that, after considering and weigh
ing all the testimony, you not as reasonable and pru
dent men, satisfied heart and conscience that the adu
terry was committed you should find for the defendant
then 1t is correct Thus interpreted charge 1t.
TX Tho higher the crime, the graver the wrong
sought to be established the more srngently the rules
Of evidence should be enf0rced and charge OF criminal
conversation is not to be fixed upon person but by the
highest evidence.
That is correct, gentlemen We are not dealing with
evidence here II it were an action on promssory
note or as action OF SANDER one gentle
man calling another a liar.
X If thore were any evidence in the case pointing to
adultery at any specno time ana place. lhe ueiehuant
might have of supporting, by other witnesses
his own testimony TO his innocence
Doubtless that is so.
But upon the evidence adduced by the plaintiff the de-
edSe Of what the relations between himself aud Mrs
% speak as witness as TO those relations
That Is so, gentlemen.
XII Cfcunls antia evidence to establish guilt must be
such exclude to moral certainty every hypothesis
not ali BE- consistent with and point to guilt but they
must be inconsistent with innocence.
In a sense that is true gentlemen; but think have
stated my charge the true doctrine and see no
occasion 10 change II.
KILL The law does not dispense with direct PROOF OF
the sexual act, and accept crcumstaanal evidence III
Circumstantai evidence OF intimacy, Of course,
would not be substituted in place Of actual evidence
unless there ia actual proof OF conduct OF the par
ties dcvang open and honorable adherence to the
position.
lido not conceive that there any substance however
change that oense OF this character Is not usu-
ally proved. indeed prOvabe by direct evidence and
may DO proved, from necessity, in any other way that
will BIO satisfactory to the minds and conscience OF the
jury and have the certainty to question of such
Importance.
XIV The circumstances must be such o would lead
the guarded discretion Of reasonable and just nan-
had the words reasonable and prudent man )" l
suppose 1t Is about the same thing
to the conclusion Of actual guilt.
W.. cha NJ I pattf
"guilt" is "actual guilt" and whenever you have
question of guilt fact Of guilt it is not well to load
1t down with adjeotiyes and explosives. 1t is ques-
ton guilt orinnocence that Is OF course for you For
IL lead harsh and Incorporate Judgment, NOV
upon appearances that equally capable OF two in
terpreations have tried TO illustrate that idea
"nethcr is it to be OF artificial reasoning, judy
ing upon such things differently from what would strike
the careful and cautious consideration Of discreet
man" Well that is matter OF Illustration and argument
which Is sensible; but think it does not call for any
thing in addition to what have said in the general
charge.
XIV. The proxmate acts relied on must lead, by fair
to conclusion so Tar ne as tnat ,s
Reasoning be reconcied with 1t.
That is a logical proposition.
XVI Mere proof OF opportunity to commit adultery
evidence whatever OF guilt there must be coupled
with evidence of circumstances at the same time,
which canuOt reasonably be explained except by criln
inal disposition and design.
This proposition is very clearly worded, and some
how there special property in it which do not quite
approve. Mere proof OF opportunity to commit adu
terry evidence whatever OF guilt "-certainly you
don't need be told that have told you that There
must be coupled with II evidence of circumstances at the
same time now suppose I should say to you, there
must evidence of circumstances affecting that ques
toni II would not he precisely the same In FORM but
think 1t would be in substance; and In either view 1t
ought reasonably explain the conduct and reasonably
satisfy the jury When, in addition TO the open rela-
ton OF intimate friendship there Is superadded the
toral relation ~ have explained to the theory of
that.
XXI No charge or confession on the part OF the plain
tif's wife is evidence against the defendant
That is
None OF the letters and writings OF Mrs Triton put in
evidence upon their face matter OF law import con-
feSslon OF aduItCty
Well Of course have given you to understand the con-
trary II they were in evidence before you and imported
ever so much or ever 30 little would be question Of
fact for you to apply.
XXX. Where party has destroyed paper material
20 his and the contents OF the paper are disputed
the presumption arises that II 1t had been produced II
would have against his interest in some essential
particular unfayorable TO his representation OF lts con-
tents.
Now, you sec how sensible that if you have a
troversy respect dealings contracts with your
neighbor and the of lawsuit Of bringing one,
or when II Is certain there will be litigation you, having
the only copy Of the contract deem expedent 10 tear
II up and aerwsrd introduce evidence TO its terms
there the law very Jealous in excluding the interpreted
ton party thus tearing the paper up But we have
before to which that principle does not quite
apply because here Is paper which Mrs Tflton from
the correspondence put in was DESTROYS Of retaining
She writes Mr. Beecher TO his influence with dear
Frank 20 have the papers somehow destroyed and also
makes an application to Mr.. Moulton himself Finally,
on what would appear from indications 10 be her imper
tuny in respect IT, the paper torn up and you
should think that done at time when there was no
To-