The Portland daily press., 1875-01-12
NEW YORK.
The Scandal Suit.
Judge Morris Opening.

NEW YORK Jan. 1.-THE crowd attending
the Brooklyn City Court room this morning
was as large as ever, aud the crush to obtain
entrance was fearful. An hour before the court
opened Judge Nelson was on the bench, and
issuing instructions as to the arrangement of
seats throughout the trial. Judge Shakeifori
of Virginia, occupied a seat beside Judge Neil
son on the bench.
Among the first arrivals were Theodore Til
ton aud +. d. Mouiton. Rev. Henry Ward
Beecher, with Mrs. Beecher, came into court
about II o'clock and took seats behind his
counsel,
The names of the jurors empanneIled were
called over and one of them, Henry Taylor,
was ab3e Mt. When the absent juror had arriv
ed and taken his seat, Judge Morris opened
the case to the jury.
He said that this was trial in which every
person was interested. 1t had reached to every
home in this and every other land throughout
the universe. The plaintiff once had home
and happy family, but he came this morning
from cherries freside and unhappy home,
and asked them to consider his case. Against
whom did he make this charge? Was it against
a casual acqua ntance? No, it was against
one of the foremost preachers of the world, who
united HIM in marriage at the altar, who in
stead of becoming his protector was his de-
stroyer. Who was it made the charge? 1t was
no insignificant person. 1t was young man
man who was writer, and the records of his
pen were known over the entire world. 1t was
TheoC ore Titon, a man whose prospects were
now bghted Where there had been once
sunshine and happiness. there was now misery
and isolation. The counsel would not now
picture this scene, as it would appear sufficient
Iy well during the trial.
In this case there We're features which rem
dered the crime more heinous than any other.
MIR. TiltOn, as boy, grew up in the church of
this man. and was associated with the defend
ant once in the editing of a religious journal,
and was frequent visitor at his house, until
this calamity ,ccnrrp1 Hin fo this they
spoke and wrote of one another as only men
Can who would reDose the utmost confidence in
each other. The plaintiff and defendant were
associated il the closest bonds of friendship.
This crime was one of darkness and of secrecy,
and it was not therefore expected that they
could bring an eye witness of it here.
Quoting from law authorities, the counsel
said thai it was not necessary to show that
adultery had been committed at any particular
time, to prove that such act of adultery had
taken place. The counsel quoted largely from
law authorities as to the relative merits of Cir
cumstantial and positive evidence. There was
another sort of evderce, said he, that was con
sidered of the highest character, and that was
when confessions were made by any of the
parties concerned. He would enumerate brief
ly the acts of the party accused and the con-
LESSONS Of the party accused.
The case opened on the 81 of July, 1870. On
that day the wife of the plaintiff, with an I'M
burdened heart, confessed her guilt and here
W
the relations of the plaintiff and the defendant
had been most cordial up to that date, but after
that date the plaintiff never crossed the thresh-
hold of Plymouth church until the Both of DC
tober OF that year, when he went to the church
for the purpose of confronting the defendant.
Something had induced the plaintiff to keep
away from the defendants church; he had re.
ceived wound which caused him to keep aloof
from the author of that wound. -Four months
he bore the great wrong in sience, and for that
ha b., hoa nd oh, ,.ad hao he
did not strike down the sedu cer of his wife, be-
cause he had risen to a higher plane, could
forego revenge, thus carrying out the Christian
doctrines. This was why he was abused and
arraignea.
The counsel read the letter from the defend
ant to Moulton. asking for Tilton's forgiveness
and humblipg himself before the plaintiff as he
did before his God. 1t must be conceded, said
the counsel, from this letter that the defendan
had done SOME terrible wrong to the plaintiff,
who says that the wrong was adultery, and is
supported in his belief by Mouton. No human
ingenuity could devise any other explanation.
To do the thing the English language must be
botted out That was the reason of Mr..
Moulton's connection with the case for four
years. 1t was to save the the defendant from
the charge of adultery.
All the letters which have passed between
the parties represented two points: First, the
honor. aud second, the grief-the honor of
Mrs. Tllion and the grief for the facts The
ton's leaving the Independent, and then passed
on to the employment of Francis d. Moulton
in his relation as friend of the defendant and
his endeavor to keep the matter secret. Why
could not the defendant have trusted some of
his parlshioaers of long standing. On the 30th
of Dec. 1870, when leaving Mr.. Moulton's house
the defendant gave vent to the expression,
This Will kill me-" Why was this said? And
again, when he stated that if Tlton had been
in his place he would have been better man.
Why this expression if there was not some ter
rible wrong done? Tue counsel would during
the progress of the trial, produce no less an au-
thorty than the defendant himself.
Judge Morris continued bis opening after
recess, speaking until adjournment and re-
hearsing the same facts as have already been
given to the public. He spoke in a voice
scarcely audible except TO those close to him.
His afternoon speech would make over two
columns in this paper.