The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1875-06-25

IUCuLIlY sIUJECI1
erect anu application OF an admission.
The testimony as 70 actual admissions OF quit
BY Francis ID. Moulton, and by Emma Y. Moulton,
TnaI testimony has been contradlcted by the
TAcT OR IMPLIED ADMISSIONS.
The third class Of evidence IN the arrangement
stated Is as u tacit or implied admissions In
theory II appeals 10 principle peculiar 10 pre-
sumptve evidence. ~ IS assumed that, on sulta-
own interests tnat, on being unipstly charged or
maligned, they VIII speak out IN denial or JUSTIN
cation. hence II y That silence may often De re-
The most obvious dinlculty in applying this doc.
trlne arises from the consideration that all men
NAV not act alike III the same circumstances anu
that the jury may possibly ascriUe 10 a sense oil
guilt wAat really WAS que TO mere surprise Or 10
piled, the doctriue seems quite reasonable. Is 1t
not consistent with our experience, Just INFER
ence, that man asked 10 pay money not
due VIII ueny his lndeetecness-Uhat II unjusty
accused lie viii assert his innocence
IL is OF the essence OIL the presumption arising
from mere silence tnat tue accusation or charge
pe made IN express terms. When the testimony
appears TO come within the rule the inference, II
any 10 be drawn from and the excuse Tor silence
are TO be considered oy the jury.
The testimony OF the plalntln and OF Mr.. ana
Mrs. Moulton IS as 10 TWO forms OIL admission: the
one oral, previously noticed; the other tacIE or
implied, now unuer consideration.
You may not ind the application or some OF
another, difficult. But some specific directions
GREAT CAUTION ENJoMEp
In considering those portions OF tnat testimony
which relate 10 the defendants actual admissions
a former head, 10 tue effect that a reasonable
DOUBT as 10 want OF Apprehension, or OF memory
or OF fairness, III tue witness proving sucn admls-
slons imposes upon the jury the exercise OF great
caution. Upon tue testimony you VIII inquire
whether tae witnesses are correct In their state
nents or whether the defendant was mIsunder-
stoou hy them.
In considering the other portions or their testi-
mony as To lnIplled admissions, also contradicted
by toe defendant, you inquire whether IN the con-
versztions mad by MIN with the witnesses mis- adul-
terry with. Tue plalnLlfl's vile SPOKEN of In
clear and express terms. II you IND that he was
thus charged, 20 THAT, acting on the Impulse com
mon Innocent men, he would have denied 1t
II without foundation, you Will consider tine in
ference TO be drawn from, and any apparent ex-
cuse LOT, us silence
rAe remaining class OF evidence as TO me prin-
cipal question IN issue relates 10 the conduct Of
the oeIeudan-.
TESTIMONY OF MRS TILToN'S BROTHER AND NURSE
In the first place, you VIII consider his conduct
IN his intercourse with MRS. nlton, as proved by
Joseph Ii. Richards and Kate Carey. rne CIR
cumStanceS stated by them are claimed TO DIS
close an undue familiarity.
Your attention mas ueen called to a series OF
events. to tue reasons wnicn may nave led TO GER.
tain modes oil action OF acquleScence, OF restraints
10 occasional disturbances. apprehensions and
resentments, lapslng mo seasons OF peace and
patient endurance. The learned counsel have
gwen you their views as TO the slgnlncance OF
each TACT and circumstance But, in and through
II all, the vital and aosorbIng question remains,
not whether the defendant acted wisely and well.
but ne would not nave cled II innocent OF this
''sTEP DOWN AND oUT.n
recur TO the letter OF the 26th OF December. de-
llvered by Mr.. Bowen, IN wnicn the plaintiff said
the defendant, II demand that. Tor reasons
which you explicitly understand. you imme-
cnurcn, ana that you quit he city or Brooklyn
resldence.n Tue question Is as to the manner
IN which this demand was received The plain
TINS theory seems 10 nave been that, as the
offence charged in this eomplalnG mad been per-
petrated, the reasons thus generally referred TO
would be apprehended. ON reading the letter the
defendant SAID, This man Is cIaZy.n Ii IS Tor
you 10 consider whether that remark was or was
not in the nature OF suggestion tnat there were
no sensible reasons for making that demand, and
whether, In Conversation, or IN tone and manner,
tie defendant betrayed any Consciousness OF
guilt.
1t may be observed, also. IN reference to the in.
terview OF December 20, 1870, at Mr.. Moulton's
house. when the copy OF the paper called 1.-The con-
1esslonn was torn up, that tue Oral presentation
OF the subject, whether Ia the exact terms OF the
written paper or not, may have Deen sufficient TO
awaken the apprehensions OF the defendant and
TO enable you ~ Judge, upon The evloence, OF his
THE POLICY OF SILENCE
Inc policy OIL silence or suppression, as it has
been called, deserves notice with reference 10 the
motives which led the defendant 10 act upon
II. II was adopted upon conference, at an early
stage Of the trouble. initiated system
oil management ana led TO many devices. In some
aspects 1t may nave been prudential; Ia other
aspects unwise. But, whatever the ugly circum-
stance" underlying IL may have been, tue parties
sough peace in tnat way, ana we have no occa-
sion TO condemn the EFFORT. Like many artificial
eXpedients, however, Ii failed. Mr.. Beecher ana
Mr.. Aoulton held 10 that course until the COM
mlttee VI inYesti2atlon was appointed. Mr.. TtOn
was not equal 10 sucn strict adherence though IL
Is claimed tnat, ntIuly 10 may De- like one troubled
IN spirit, he performed some service in that cause
until service became hopeless. But there were
unchxrltable wnlsperings IN the pubic ear, their
source or origin not new material, and finally
actual denunciaton came.
Your attention has been called 10 the meetings
held by Mr.. Beecher. Mr. Moulton and Others. 10
the discuasIons mad, 10 the papers prepared or
the woodruff card as published, and 10 the So
called aWOodnun scandaln 10 the alleged dis
IAvor vita which the West charges were met and
finally suppressed, 10 the spirit OF timidity. vacil
lation aud mystery which characterized the
period. Mr.. Beeener's course throughout Is to be
some OF the events claimed TO have occurred
under that arrangement are In dispute.
PRECAUTIONARY MEASURES.
You Will inquire whether attentions were paid
TO Mrs. Woodruff 10 eOncllate her at the instance
or with the APPRECIATION Of the defendant; whether
yored that as a precautionary measure or contri-
putsd money IN that view; aud whether he re-
pressed the presentation and prosecution ~ the
Il you md that Mr.. Beecher did not thus act
you find that ne took sueh part In those trans
actions any u them, then you viii inquire
whether ne dld 80 IN the apprsaa,enson thar Dis
exposed, or from some otner and independent
cause.
framed from puDllshlng denial or recitation Of
tne allegations contained in the paper known as
the Woo nun scandal. IRON answering the partic-
ular INQUIRY MADE by Mrs. Bradshaw In her let
ter 10 which he sent reply, or was neld In the
bondage or fear to Mrs. Morse from sense Of tRe
guilt now charged.
You Will remember, in rnis connection, that as
70 ne several acts Of repression admitted W the
defendant on his examination. Two views, as n O.
tlves OF action, are pat lorth the one, hat having
agreed with Mr.. MoullOn, 70 whose saEacity he
deferred, taaL silence should be observed, he
merely actes on that; tue other, that IN those in-
stances ne was governed by sympathy Tor the
plaintiff and his family.
PLYMOUTH CHURCH COUNsELLED SILENCE.
The learned counsel sought 70 qualify some
what the pressure resting upon the defendant
from thls policy " silence, as applied TO tue Wood
hull scandal, oy showing tnaf the church shared
that view. thought that due 10 the defendant
and II appeared tbat AZ a stated meeting q the
Official representatives OF tue church, neld soon
alter the publication. the subject was mentioned,
and the sense Of those present was that no action
should be taken. Ii also appeared that such had
been the opinion or the Rev. Mr. Halliday, gen
tleman entitled 70 great consideration IN MS re-
lztiong 10 the church.
He MIGHT HAVE TRAHPLED 1T OCT.
lou have before you the evidence as 10 what
was done ana suffered by the defendant unoer toe
Policy oil silence ana suppression, and the cues
ton - as 10 his motives. The inference you might
be justified in drawing could be readily applied II
kWriUNa n44ff al