New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-06-24
THE READING OF AUTHORITIES FOR
REQUESTS OBJECTED TO.

Mr. MorTis-One moment. This IL entirely
out OF order understand your Honor has permitted
counsel TO have right to submit their smpo requests
not to argue and cite your Honor TO authorities and sub
nit an argument That Is certainly ont Of order IL Is
not proper II your Honor permits this, submit in
stead of handing up agreed upon their PROPOSE
tons In open court this way in the presence of the
ury submit that they have right TO make IN argu
ment aud cite authorities In respect to the proposto "a
they submit to the Court.
Mr.. Abbott would not be ont OF order
Judge Nerscn-Mr. Morris, take the case that we had
IN respect 20 the steamboat whore Mr. Beach was
counsel as opposed 10 yOu and where on MI Besch's
part 81 requests handed up After ing charge had
occasion to read them one by one to the jury; IT
amounted 20 the thing this Thus far am pre-
pared to answer the requests AMI want To do think
1t will come to the conclusion.
Mr. Morris-Yes Sir, but in that your Honor VIII
recoIect where SO ss handed up there
was no argument presented in the OF the jury
nor were citations from authorities made The counsel
is proceeding now TO make legal argument.
judge Neson hardly think be intends to argue these
cited cases.
Mr. Morris-T submit this is not permissible in submit
ting the requests to your Honor to charge.
Judge Neilson-It will do no harm I am familiar with
the cases. We will soon be through with it, think he
can go
Mr. Abbott-I have simply quoted the language Of one
or two support the propositions. submit that
your Honor may the gnitcance OF the authorities:
The defendant entitled 70 rest the defect OF proof
and is not bound 10 disprove the case King aS kng
Scotch Sess. Cas-, 2d Series 80 Opin by Id Mon,
criedl Aud even when the defendant in an acton or
Grim does not testify IN his own behalf the omission
does raise any inference against him. Lowe agt
As stated ~ Merrick. j., in Dalton agt. Dalton lSu-
preme NJ Massachusetts, $3.50 1t is not necessary
that should affirm the innocence OF the IN
order entitle her verdict. II is not necessary that
you should lind armativey upon the evidence that mas
been submitted TO you, that she Is not guilty that she ud
not commit the act so that you affirm 1t truth
proved necessary TO 90 To that extent TO entte
her to "A verdict hue IT, upon the whole evidence N me
the OF minds Is hiSa good deai OF evil
dence 20 show that She might have been guilty good
deal OF probability that she might have been guilty nut
libel not proved and though you cannot say on tue
contrary that fully satisfied and clear III your
minds That she Is innocent she Is crlueu 10 your
verdict; that is II the heant ms not proved that
which its essential for him To prove 10 enutle MIN 10
yoGr verdict then you must lind for the respondent"
Mr. Beach-If your Honor please must protest against
this reading Of authorities II your Honor takes cita-
ton of authorities well and good have objection to
correction with the requests to charge But that
now without any notice reference Of authorities
70 U.S. they should be permitted read those authorities
and through present argument to the Court and
the jury it seems peryerson OF the right OF
making requests 10 charg, IN open court
Judge Neilson-Mr Abbott, won't il answer your pur-
pose TO state your requests
Mr. Evarts-If your Honor please. think my learned
friend who has Just addressed you has overlooked the
fact-s well as ordinary occurrence at the close OF
the summing up-ovel0Oked the fact that in his final
argument land very properly and as part Of it, he in
alluded the pres antatOn OF authorities which were new
10 us then IN are now the first time to DO c0nsd-
cred by U.s. and present authorities upon the points
concerning which he has presented them We would
limit ourselves 10 that wishing 10 impose on the case
in point of argument.