New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-06-26
DELIBERATIONS IN THE JURY-ROOM.

4 eLEEPI.ESs NIGHT FOLLOWED BY DAY OF DIS
CUSTOM AMONG THE JURORs-IN1ERFsr MANI
VESTED CONCERNING THEIR sTANDING-CIAIMs
OF THE PLAINTIFFS CoUSsEI-THRHe MEN CON-
sIDERED PROBABLE SUPPORTERS OF Mr. TILTON
-THB SHIFTING GROUPS AMONG THE TWELVE
THEIR MOVEMENTS WATCHED FROM THE OUT
sDE-CoNJECTUREs CONCERNING THE RESULT
OF THE OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES REQUEST FOR
PARTS OF JUDGE NELSON'S CHARGE.
The jury in the Titon- Beecher case passed an I'M
easy and, it is TO be presumed an uncomfortable
night Judge Nelson. consderate of their comfort,
had directed that the jurors be removed from the
mail room known as the jury room to the spacious
City Court ROOM where benches and chairs upon and
In which they might reclne were provided, and
where better ventilation was aor died. But they did
not sleep though they reclined. The officers watch
without heard loud discussion or what they denomi-
mated growing" during the whole night, and it Is
certain that debate on the subject went on almost
continuously the whole night. The nature of the
discussion it is impossible of course, to Indicate all
that heard outside the room was the low
rumbng grOwl and the occasional exclamation of
impatience-and possibly of snger-which marked
the discussion. About eight o'clock yesterday morn
ing when the jurors called for breakfast they were
removed again without observation and under the
strict guard of the three officers of the court
10 the room ordinarily occupied-by the jury.
Here they were the object of observation during
the whole Of the day by a large crowd of persons
who assembled in the park west of the Courthouse
and looked up with curiosity and possibly eager in
terest at the windows. The interest displayed in
gard to the deliberations of the jury in the case be-
trayed itself in many queer manifestations of which
this not the least singular. On large open
grass plot adjoining tho Courthouse about one hum
dred persons constantly coDgregated; the num-
Der hardly increased or lessened during the whole
Aav thonuh he ppreOnDpl always changing
These persons were scattered about in rather striking
attitudes ALL it may be said were respectable in
manners and attire, but all gave tokens of an over
mastering curiosity which quite comical tOnoice
As the afternoon approached their look OF eXpecta-
ton became less marked. and they seemed to resign
themselves to circumstances. They grew more list
less in appearance. Many threw themselves on the
peen swaId, and others took seats on the cope
stones of the railing about the inclosure. Many,
however still remained standing, gathered In little
knots and groups, discussing the various questions
raised IN the course of the trial. and venturng all
manner of conflicting opinions to the result of the
tury's deliberations. All were agreed Oh one point,
and that was that Mr.. Beecher would obtain the
majority of the jurors votes.
All ewes were turned in the direction Of the jury
room the three windows of which abutted on the
open space. All three windows were open. At one
time there was seated at one of them Mr.. Carpenter
the foreman of the jury, vigorously plying his fan
and stopping at times TO mop the pelspiration from
his face. This window the only one shaded
from the SUM- Through the others the sunshine
poured all the afternoon, and it must have made the
room well nigh uncomfortable. At times Que or
another of the jurors would show himself at one vi
the windows All had discarded their coats and ap-
peared in their shirt-sleeves looking weary and
fatigued. At intervals MIR. Carpenter would leave
his seat by the window and mngle with the Others,
Who were either walking about the room or sitting
down moodily beside long table which was IN the
ROOM At these times the jurors would be apparently
arguing the disputed points of the case. Such at
least the impression Of few persons who mad
managed TO get places at the windows of the Poly
technic Institute adjoining, whence they could look
within the jury room. About m. it was rumored
that the Jurors had ordered their suppers for the
evening and afterwards all hope of speedy verdict
seemed to have been extinglisbed, and the crowds
who had been gazing Open-mOuthed at the jury-r0om
began TO dwindle away and disappear.
All sorts of rumors prevailed the standing Of
the jnry; but of course nothing definite in the way
of information was obtanable, and conjcctures had
such little reasonable basis that they were generally
rejected by any unprejudiced person who heard
them. At one time Mr. Jeffreys and Mr.. Davis sat
smoking at the window, taking 10 part In the Wig
srous discussion going in the center of the roon
stubborn, and would not longer listen to the other
reasonable ten. This conjecture, however, was made
absurd by later displays which appeared TO be as
baseless and ridiculous indications of the status
Of the jury as the first mentioned incident.
At no time during the day did the counsel for Mr..
Tlton claim more than five votes and the friends OF
Br. Beecher confessed that the plaintiff had III his
favor Mr. Jeffreys Mr. Davis, and Mr. Thyer Mr.
Pryor claimed tive for his client, but upon what
ground he based the claim cOnd not be learned. Mr
Norris was ubilant during the afternoon in evident
anticipation of a disagreement Dir. Evarts, the SELL
nor counsel of the defendant dscredited all rumors
about the jury smiling complacently at the various
sonjectures he heard and remarkng one occasion,
that the indications and appearances could not be
analysed by any rule Of evidence.
In fact the only significant indication from the jury
was their request 10 be furnished with the parts OF
The Judges charge upon circumstantia evidence and
That relating to Mrs MoutOn's evidence. And from
these various conjectures TO the point IN dispute
Or under discussion, might be framed according to
the hope or bias of the reader Of them. They are as
follows;
CIRCUMsIANTIAL EVIDENCE.
You are TO understand that tho evidence shouio nc
@eh 20 carry conviction TO the MINDS OF Jus'
End prudent men should point 10 the actual guilt
nore directly than 10 any ether reasonable ny
pothesa The wrong charged IN this complaint
might be proved by direct or BY eircnmsta1al
evidence But such chargr 10 not usually proved or
Indeed provabe, by direct and positive evidence Inc
tesson obvious. In most instances where under socn
lsstraints apparently proper intimacy degenerates
INTO centious acts the ev intent and life put on the
eafb Of innocence To such cases to all cases o. doubt
and difficulty the law Of evidence searching ana nefie
epplies peculiar t0sspresumpti0ns ana differences
efawn from facts sad fTom conduct. according W 'he
dictates Of experience go that finally. the question Of
or lDun may Ia defer iued0