The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1875-07-01

alternating Woman's love from her hus-
band and OF the effect of such accusations, If
publicly made; what his notion of the ex-
tent to which Triton had been injured as a
journalist, in his family and as to their
means OF subsistence. The judge next called
the attention of the jury to the credit due to
the witnesses and referred as follows to
Moult0n's connection with the case. Mr..
Moulton seems to have interviewed as the
open and avowed friend of Tilton.
He appears to have undertaken
to mediate between the parties. to
reconcile them and, as far as
their differences from unnecessary pub
Lefty. He states that such was the real
CHARACTER OF HIS INTENTION
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 testifies and
as other witnesses state, declared that the de-
fendsnt was not guilty of sexual in.
tercours which he now says
has been admitted. It is for you to consider
how far the Inconsistency in his statement
goes to discredit him. If you shall be of
the opinion that he intended to state the
truth on his examination here, and that his
previous declarations were inspired by a
spirit of loyalty to the defendants reputa-
ton, aud TO that of Mrs Tilton from an
earnest wish to divert the minds of
others from the subject, in car.
rying out the policy of suppression
adopted, you are at liberty to make such
allowances for that as shall seem proper.
As TO Mr.. Tilton. you will consider whether
his testimony as to the confession of the de-
feDdant's guilt can be reconciled with hi
previous declarations that his wife was in
nocent. The peculiar theory which he has
explained to you has been illustrated
by the counsel, and may be
accepted as tar as you think
Moulton, it is claimed that there is an inhe-
rent improbability in the supposition that
lady of her confessed refinement and deli
cacy would have conYersed so freely with
the defendant as to his adultery, or under
taken to advise him on that subject. 1t is
also said that on the occasion when she
claims to have had an important inter
view with the defendant, he was not at her
house. You will consider and apply the
proof which stands in conflict and
in confederation, In the discussion, that
proof has been recited and illustrated so
freely that 1 have but to commend it to
your careful consideration. Did she, at or
about the time stated, have that interview,
and was the conversation substantially as
given by her? IT so, and she were
in error as to the length of the in
would not be conclusive, gentlemen.
rests with you. Another observation may
be proper. Had Mrs. Moulton got the inn
preston that the defendants guilt was sdul-
terry, and in her conversation regarded that
as the subject in his mind, as it was in her
mind? Do you believe that, whether mis-
taken or not, she testified honestly? Her
MANNER ON THE STAND,
and the opinion which the defendant him.
self had of her moral character and worth.
as stated in his letters, commend her to your
respect. l had occasion to state in your
hearing my view of the suggestion that this
witness testified at the will or instruction
of the husband. / will hold to the
opinion then expressed. There is no
proof or srtifice or coercion or undue infiu-
ence. The fact, however, that her husband
is deeply concerned in this controversy, and
that her testimony, without repeating, con-
ours with his, is to be considered. On the
mere question of bias in sustaining the
PLAINTIFFS cause, she is sustaining
her husband as witness. AS
to the witness Kate Carey,
it is proper to state that the persons called
to prove an alleged bad character tor truth
and veracity. should have general knowl-
edge to be fairly derived from the opinions
expressed by the people who knew tho wit
ness. Such an impeachment is weak in
proportion the circle in which the un-
favorable opinion prevails is narrow, and
as that opinion can be traced to
special difficulties. As to another
witness, Djamin F. Tracy two suggestions
have been made. The first is that having
acted as counsel for the defendant he should
not have been called as a witness for him in
the case. The second Is, that owing to an
arrangement with, or promise to the plain
tiff, he should not have acted as such coun-
sci. The judge commented at length upon
Tracy's case and said: / have only to add
that my own view of the propriety
- H. f.
with that OF his associate counsel in the
cause. l think with them that there has
been no violation of duty on his part, per-
sonal or professional. The question OF dam
ages was next considered, the Judge calling
the attention of the jury TO the large
amount of evidence, including the plain
tiff's alleged misconduct at home. and
abroad. Peculiar to this was the question
of damages. Such misconduct, said tue
JUICE, may reduce the amount of recovery,
but IS no defence to the action. Some
OTHER FEATURES OF THE CASE
remain to be noticed. Upon principle and
authority, and also with reference to our
accepted rules of social order, the ul-
timacy and intercourse which is al
lowed between a married woman and her
legal adviser, physician or pastor, is greater
than that which would be considered proper
or becoming between woman and man
holding no such special relation. That
principle applies here and the defendant is
entitled to the benefit of it. We are wont
to say that all suitors are treated alike
and in most respects they are
But yet in a case of this charac-
ter, man grown old in
proper and pious service has prirns facie the
benefit of a presumption which the mere
men OF the world has not. Mr.. Beecher's
advances OF money, which, through Mr..
Moulton, went to the benefit of Tilton and
bis family, appear to have been mere acts of
generosity That money was not extorted
by Mr.. Moulton. nor does it appear to
have been the fruit of any improper
artifce. Although it is of no special mo-
ment, think it proper to say that uncontra-
dicted evidence shows that Tilton did not
know that he was thus benefited by
Beecher. We have before no evidence
which could support charges OF conspiracy
and blackmail. and. II we had, the defend