The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1875-06-25

concealment to which Mr.. Beecher was o
party their assertions to outside persons
while pursuing such a policy do not discredit
this evidence given in court. In speaking OF
AIoultons testimony the Judge says:-"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 q
spirit Of loyalty to the defendants reputation
and TO that of Mrs. Tilton, and from an ear
nest wish to divert the minds of others from
the subject, in carrying out the policy of sup
preston adopted, you are at liberty to make
such allowance for that as shall seem proper"
This, as we understand it, is an instruction to
the jury that they are to disregard the vehe-
ment arguments of counsel that those denials,
made while carrying out the policy Of sup
preston to which Mr.. Beecher was q party
do not necessarily discredit the testimony of
these men given under oath in court. The
jury are at liberty to decide for themselves
what weight they will give to this testimony
in view of all the circumstances. Mrs. Moul-
ton is treated with respect in the charge. The
jury are instructed that the attempted alibi,
the discrepancies respecting the duration of
the memorable interview or even a mistake in
its date is not fatal to the general truth of her
testimony. But, with the discriminating inn
partiallty which pervades the charge, Judge
Nelson cautions the jury against possible
misunderstanding on the part OF Mrs. Moul-
ton. II she had been led to believe that Mr..
Beechers offence was adultery and his mind
was burdened by the consciousness of a diff
ferent wrong, she might innocently have
understood him to be cohfessing different
offence from the one he intended. If the
jury should adopt this view they can give o
verdict for Beecher without impeaching the
veracity of Mrs. Moulton.
Judge Nelson utterly dscredits the charge
of conspiracy and blackmail, which has been
defence. lie shows as little tenderness
to the other side, in defending Mr.. Tracy
against the fierce assaults and denunciations
Of the counsel for the plaintiff He shows
that Tracy learned nothing from Tilton which
he did not previously know from other
sources, and thinks that the advice and sane
ton of the eminent counsel associated with
nm was o SuInclenJ warrant LOT MS course.
Judge Nelson goes further, and states that,
in his own opinion, the conduct of Mr..
Tracy has been entirely consistent with pro-
fessional honor: This clears away great
mass of vituperation, in which Tiltons coun-
sci have INDUCED to no purpose.
On the great question Of all, that of adul-
tery-the question which alone gives the
plaintiff any standing in court-Judge Nelson
is studiousy non-committal limiting himself
to instructing the jury to disregard the argu-
ments OF the defendants counsel that the oral
evidence on this point deserves no considera-
ton. He instructs them to fairly weigh it
all, and tells them that they are not to throw
out without examination the testimony of Mr..
Richards nor even that of Mrs. Carey. The
charge is eminently fair and impartial, and
directs the attention Of the jurors to the
points on which the case really hinges. 1t is
the general sentiment both of the legal pro-
fession and the commun nifty that Judge Nelson
has borne himself throughout this protracted
trial with the frmness, independence, impair
TALLY and considerateness which beft his
office, and with an unruffled courtesy and
wisdom that will reflect permanent lustre on
his judicial chara cter.