New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-06-26

4
that the wife and the paramount defendant had
the same room all night in such tended to tho
nted his guilt that would be circumstantial evidence
Y TO letter received by the defendant explicitly
charging him with the adultery he had answered simply
saving am sorry, and hope to be forgiven, or IT, on
being thus charged in conversation by ono having an
that by natural process Of reasoning, would be pre-
presamptve evidence jury Should exercise great care
proceed caut0usy men wont TO do when travel
sash the notion arising on suspicion or copecre from
the relation existing between the observed and the In
Within the spirit and terms Of the Illustrations stated
you will have occasion to consider the existing facts and
The differences must have healthy growth spring
from the facts naturally fruit from the vine, and
feel the links OF the chain which binds material objects
together yet to satisfy the rule you should ercey,e
and be fully convinced that the connection does exst
MRS. MoUIToN's TESTIMONY.
Tho testimony OF Emma c. MouOn is sought TO be dis
credited quite different ground. II Is claimed that
there is inherent improbabty In the superstition that
lady Of her confessed refinement and delicacy would
have conversed freely with the defendant az to his
adultery or undertaken to advise him that subject
IL is also said that the occasion when she claims TO
have had an important interview with the defendant nc
proof which stands conflict and in confederation The
question, gentlemen rests with yon Two othcr opser.
sion that the defendants guilt adultery aud in her
conversation regarded that a. the subject in his mind as
II was In her mindi Do you believe that, whether mis-
taken not she testified honestly Her manner on tho
stand and the opinion which the defendant himself had
OF her moral character and WORTH as stated In Ills letters
commend her to your respect
had occasion 70 sas IN your hearing my Te oy OF on tns
instruction of the husband still hold to the opion
undue influence. The fact however, reans that ncr
husband deeply concerned In this controversy anc mat
that is to be considered on the mere que OF bias
In sustaining the plaintiffs cause, she Is sustaining her
husband as q witness
The counsel were called in by the Judge to consult
tba Of rpUu
defendants counsel were DESTROYS of sending up the
whole charge to the jury but Mr. Tilton's counsel
objected though willing to grant the request of the
Jury as to the parts indicated. No agreement could
be reached and the jury i'll the end were denied any
part of the charge. Mr. Tton's counsel construed
this request as favorable to their side of the case.
/, About o'clock several juIymen were seen to ap-
proach one of their number and warmly shake his
hand which was assumed to Indicate his conversion
TO the views of the majority. Later in the after
noon Mr.. Carpenter was quietly resting with
his feet on the window, and apparently alone From
this position he arose to join Mr.. Whelan. long
and seemingly earnest conversation followed, III
which Mr.. Carpenter appeared to take the more
active part In this the two were afterward joined
by one or more of the jurymen. Mr.. Jeifreys ap-
peared to be the central figure in another circle, in
which the conversation prolonged for at least
an hour Mr. Jeffreys was afterward seen quietly
smoking as he sauntered back and forth in front of
the windows. MIR. Whelan's wagon was driven along
In front of the windows, where it stopped
moment and Mr.. Whelan waved his fan in recogni-
ton of the driver. Mr.. Case sat for long time at
the middle window, where from the position as
sumed it was supposed that he was taking quiet
nap. He was afterward joined by Mr.. Jefireys, and
with group at each window-in which eight of the
twelve could be recognized the jurymen again
assumed the attitude of men engaged in earnest
conversation between and o'clock.