The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1875-01-29

Theodore Tilton ~ . witness.
The suit against Mr.. Beecher reached an
exciting stage yesterday when Theodore Til
ton was offered by the plaintiffs counsel as
the next witness. Before he could be sworn
Mr. Evarts vigorously interposed and pro-
ceeded to make an argument against the adj
instability OF Tilton's testimony which bore
marks of long and thorough preparation.
Mr. Pryors reply evinced equal research and
care, making it apparent that the counsel on
both sides have looked forward to this as one
Of the chief battle grounds of the suit Judge
Nelson must also have foreseen that great
contest would arise over this witness, and he,
too, has doubtless investigated the question
in the time he was able to command out of
court, and If with less diligence than the OPP
posing counsel, with moro impartiality. The
authorities which he may have failed
to And by his own research will
be brought to his notice in the argu-
ments and there is no reason for doubling
that he will render correct decision. The
press is precluded from taking any part in this
discussion, even if it were competent. Judge
Nelson will have to decide it on strictly legal
grounds, even though he may thereby deprive
one or the other of the parties to tho suit of q
moral advantage in appealing to public opin-
ion Il Is undoubtedly the duty of Mr..
Beecher's counsel, unless otherwise instructed
by him, to take advantage of every possible
technicality of law which may tend to secure
q verdict in his favor. 1t is only legal ac-
rnifto1 and mt moral al hot kha~v
are bound to strive for when acting in their
capacity as lawyers, looking to no other in
terest of their client than his protection
against an adverse verdict and pecuniary
damages. They have no right to deviate from
this single dim, and we are not sure
that their client himself is not bound
to submit as implicitly to their judg-
ment as a patient is to the professional
Judgment of his physician. But if the de-
PENDANT were at liberty to control his counsel
there would be greater air of innocence in
admitting the testimony Of every witness who
has had good opportunities for knowing the
material facts. It would seem better to break
Tilton down by cross examination, or CONTRA
dict him by other testimony, or destroy his
character for veracity, than to give the public
the impression that damaging evidence has
been suppressed. The jury, indeed, must make
up their verdict on the evidence actually pre-
sented; but the public, who desire to see the
character of the defendant fully indicated,
would have more confidence that these dread
full aspersions are unfounded if they were
given no reason to suspect that a part of the
facts are withheld. The Court, indeed, must
aim at nothing beyond strictly legal result,
even though it perceives the difference
which sometimes exists between O legal ver-
dict and o moral vindication. Mr.. Beechers
counsel doubtless feel very sure of their
ground, for if Judge Nelson should rule
against them as to the admissibility of Mr..
Tilton's testimony the resolute vigor with
which they are fighting it will give it addi-
tional importance in the estimation both of
the jury and the public. To admit Tilton's
testimony and expose its worthlessness would
be the best thing tor Mr.. Beecher's character
in the view of the outside public; but the
outside public must remain passive spectators,
and whichever way Judge Nelson may decide
this question they will be satisfied that it is
in accordance with the rules Of evidence and
consistent with the legal rights of the parties
The moral bearings of the case will be freely
discussed by every press in Christendom after
the conclusion of the trial