The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1875-07-01

to by the witnesses. You should be prudent
in reference to mere probabilities. You are
not to indulge in speculations or to lightly
consider a matter which has been affirmed
because il may not seem reasonable. The
Judge said that reference by him to the other
papers would be nearly unnecessary, Dut
from them it appears that the defend
ant was conscious of having committed
some wrong or offence affecting the pialntin
and his family. With that observation as TO
the import of the papers, submit them to
your consideration that you may, taking
them in connection with the proofs at large,
determine what that wrong or offense was.
Passing to the second branch of evidence. as
to the principal charge In the order stated,
call your attention to the alleged oral ad-
missions. The confessions of aparty made
deliberately against his own interest as TO
facts known and understood by him, II
clearly proved, is regarded as OF high
class of evidence, and deservediy so, because
it Is contrary to experience for men to admit
what hurts them, if not true. Experience
proves, rather, that men evade or deny the
truth when the truth hurts them. Testi-
mony to prove oral admissions should be
carefully scrutinized. The jury should be
satisfied that the witness clearly undertood,
correctly remembered, and fairly repeated
what was said. But caution against relying
on such testimony too implicitly, should
find it's counterpoise in the caution
against the too ready rejection of
It. TIE third class of evidence in
the arraignment stated, is as to the tacit or
implied admission. In theory it appeals to
principle peculiar TO presumptiye evil
dence. 1t is assumed that on a suitable Oc-
casion most men have such regard tor their
own interests that, on being uDJustly
charged or maligned,
THEY WILL SPEAK OUT IN DENIAL
or justification. Henceit is that silence may
be often regarded as a confession. The most
obvious difficulty in applying this doctrine
arises from the consideration that all
men may not act alike in the same
circumstances, and that the jury may POSI-
bly, ascribe TO a sense of guilt what really
was due to mere surprise or to some un-
known restraint. The testimony of the
plaintiff and of Mr.. and Mrs. Moulton is as
to the two forms of admission, the one oral
and the other tacit or implied. In consider
ing those portions of the testimony which
relate to the defendants actual admissions
OF guilt, you will recall the doctrine stated
under a former head, to the effect that
a reasonable doubt as to a
want OF apprehension. or OF
memory, or fairness in the witness proving
such admissions, imposes upon the jury the
exercise OF great caution upon the testl-
mony. You will inquire whether the wit
nesses are correct in their statements, or
whether the defendant was misunderstood
by them. In considering the other portions
of their testimony as to the implied admis-
sions, also contradicted by the defendant,
you will inquire whether in the converse
lions had by him with the witnesses,
his adultery with the plaintiffs wife
was spoken OF In clear and expressI terms.
If you find that he was thus charged, so
that acting on the impulse common to limo
cent men he would have denied, if it was
without foundation, you will consider the
inference to be drawn from il and any APP
parent excuse for his silence The remain
ing class of evidence, as to the principal
question in issue, relates to the conduct OF
the defendant. In the first place, you will
consider his conduct in his intercourse with
Mrs. Tilton, as proved by Joseph w. Rich
ards and Kate Carey. The circum-
claimed to disclose an undue
familiarity. Your attention has been called
to a series of events, to the reasons which
may have led to certain modes of action, to
an acquiescence to restraints, TO occasional
disturbances, apprehensions and resent
ments, lapsing into seasons of peace and pa
tient endurance. The counsel have given
you their views as to
THE SIGNIFICANCE OF EACH FACT
and circumstances. But in and through it
all, the vital and absorbing question re-
mains, not whether the defendant acted
wisely and well, but whether it was as
he would not have acted if innocent
of this particular charge. recur to the
letter of the Goth of December. delivered by
Bowen, in which the plaintiff said to the de-
PENDANT, Il demand that, for reasons which
you explicitly understand, you immedi-
stely cease from the ministry of Plymouth
~ hr1- oh not rr1ff fHsa of a
Brooklyn" The question is as to the
manner this demand was received. The
plaintiffs theory seems to have been that
as the offence charged in this complaint
had been perpetrated, the reasons thus
generally referred to would be apprehended
on reading the letter. The defendant
said, "This man is crazy" 1t is for you to
consider whether that remark was or was
not in the nature OF suggestion that there
was no sensible reasons for making that de-
mand, and whether in the conversation. or
in tone and in the manner, the defendant
betrayed any consciousness of guilt. The
Judge next referred to the policy of silence,
out was to be carefully scrutinized. You
will inquire whether attentions were
paid to Mrs. Woodruff to conciliats
her at the instance or with the appreciation
of the defendant, whether before Miss
Turner was sent off to school he favored
uted money in that view, and whether be
repressed the presentation and prosecution
of the West charges. If you find that Mr..
Beecher did not thus act, those questions
will give you no trouble. But if you find
that he took such part in these trsnsac-
tions, or any of them, then you will inquire
whether he did so in apprehension that his
sexual intercourse with Mrs. Tilton might be
exposed or from some other and independent
cause. You will also inquire whether the
defendant refrained from publishing de-
NAL or refutation OF the allegations con-
tanned in the paper known the Woodruff
scandal, from answering a particular in
quiry made by Mrs. Bradshaw In her letter,
to which he sent reply, or was held in
THE BONDAGE OF. FEAR
to Mrs. Morse from sense of guilt. Now,
charged in any view of the case, you may be
disposed to ask why Mr.. Beecher, if limo
cent, should have garnersd up in his heart all