Yankton daily press and Dakotaian. (Yankton, Dakota Territory [S.D.]) 1875-1875, 1875-06-24

ready rejoinder. Third, it of evil
dence in the arraignment stated as to
the fact or implied admission in the
principle Of presumptive evidence.
II is assumed that on such occasions
most men have such a regard for
their own interests that on being un- uun
justly charged or maligncd, they will
offer in denial or Justification; hence
it is that silence may often be regard
ed as confession.
Plaintiff claims that 1t was in defer
encc to the wishes of his wife he had
written. The letter in respect to
Mrs. 1ilton's wishes and relations to
defendant, was then held by Moulton,
a copy Of which plaintiff had was torn
up, after having been read or stated
to.defendan:. The original also was
torn up afterwards by Mrs. Tilton,
with her husbands assent. II the
contents of that paper we're written
denial, communicat ed by wife TO hus-
band, because she was party to its
distinctions; but that act was no dis
cretion, as no charge made by Mrs.
Tilton could have been evidence
against the defendant. That same
evening Mr.. Beecher, with the assent
of the husband, called on Mrs: Tilton.
Passing to the second branch, i
shall call your attention to the alleged
oral admissions. The confessions Of
party made against his own interest
as to acts known and understood by
him, if alleged, he regarded as high
class of evidence, and decidedly SO
because it is contrary to experience
for man to admit what hurts him il
not true. Experience proves rather
that men evade or deny the truth.
The testimony to prove oral admis-
sions shall be carefully scrutinized.
The destination of the paper which
was destroyed, raised the presumption
that its contents would be unfavorable
to the party who destroyed it; that
none Of the defendants letters we're
destroyed; but on the other hand his
expressions of.contrition and reproach
for what he had caused, was in favor
of the innocence of the defendant.
The judge referred to the policy OF
silence and suppression early in the
trouble as an artificial expedient which
failed. He continued at considerable
length taking up the evidence and
concluded before recess. After he
6uishcd reading his chsrge-he took up
the requests to charge and instruct the
jury that defendant was not obliged
to prove himself innocent; that the
failure Of the defendant 10 oppose
was not proof Of guilt.
When the judge completed his COM
ments, on request to charge, he asked
if counsel were content. Mr.. Beach
replied, eve are, SIR"
On the jury being asked if there
were any papers relating to the case
which they wanted.to be sent to. the
jury room, he said he had no objec-
tion. Evarts stated there were some
papers which were not evidence, and
Judge Nelson replied, the Jury could
have any papers they desired in rela.
tion to the case.
Judge Nelson asked the court of.
ficer what arrangement had been made
for the jury's accommodation. He
was told all necessary preparations
had been made for them. He in.
structedl him to conduct them into
the jury room, and allow no commune
cation with them except in presence
of the court. ~.
At six minutes past one the jury
retired to the jury room. After they
retired spectators remained in the
court room discussing the merits oi
the case and the judges charge, and
it was agreed on all hands that it was
very favorable to defendant.
l Beecher, with his wife, son and
daughter, were in the room, and DR.
Edward Beecher and wife also stop.
ped in court awaiting anything which
might come to them from the jury
room, but up to three p. m. there
was nothing from them.
Condemned.
WASHINGTON, June 24.-The com
missioners who inspected ihe Chicago
custom house have submitted thei,
report, which condemns the founda
tion and stone used, and recommend
that the building be torn down ane
- .a-