, 1875-06-25

A.A] ~3 Ao3cs
whether defendant rcfrAincd from published
denial AMI rofutation of the allegations con-
tanc1 in tho paper k,sown a. tho Woodruff
scan.lal. from answering particular Inquiry tnao
bT arr Bradshaw IN or letter, In which lio sont
Il snply, ur was l,eld In bondage OF fear to Mira.
:tnFa". from Il anuH' OF tho guilt now chstEed.
In ANY view OF the caso, yttA may bo diHposcd 70
AJAX why SIr. Mochor, II innocent ehonld Eayo
garncred m III hs hsart all that pain and fear
Ao long, whou he might have mailo proclamation
to tho world and trnmpIed ont tho Bcaudal ~
with iron bonts
TIE QUESTION urox AL1 rnooFa
In whether slofoDian: understood he was charged
with adultery, and spoRe, nFot., acted. and sur
fe!od from and III consequence Of that or
whoshert laying that ont Of WOW. ho understood
tho charges .ob b. that he had n,alo improper pro-
pnsa1a OF advances. and l.ati robbed plaintiff OF
tho tic1, inhetitancs aud lovn OF hts wirn, and
whether, coupled with those cfas9cst 10 helieveh
he hal wrongcd plaintiff by favorinE family
separation anu IIatnanal by 3fr. Bowen, atnI for
s|l0so reaAhnA Hpuko.! !Wrolo, acted. suffered, M
described. II tho wrong was adultery, tho solu-
lion Of What followed IN oasy but II tho WRONGS
or onAnaos. actus! or Imputed. were Of tho other
character stated. thena tuHt apprehension OF tho
sclat'nn betwean dctondants stato of mind and
!nH cnnduct invDlven Revcrai considerations.
What waB Lin porxonal estimate OF hin relation,
to tbs churci,, to tho world 10 literature mud Of
tho reputation he should leaSe behiud lin what
his conception Of tim nattro and gravity OF tho
cAarEGH Of impure Bolfc[tatiOua. OF aonatinR q
woiaan's 1oro from her husband, and Of tie ef-
feet Of Hrch accueatinrs II publicly made; what
il!s notion Of the ext'nt 70 which 'll'ton had
a3ecn injured ae jnurnatist, In his family, aud
to tlofr mGant OF subsistence.
MOtEros's rEsTiMoSr.
The Judge next caI1ol tho attention Of tho
Jury to the credit dlH witnesses, and re-
sotrod 81 fellows to Moulton'a connection will.
tbo caAc: a1r, Mollson scoma to have
int ar AfIAS anil ri nta3
III T!lton. l1o appeara 10 haro undertaken to
mediate between partiea, 10 reconcile them, and
as fat ~ possible TO prevent tho specihc charac
ter Of their differences from obtaining publicity.
1lo states Anch WAS sllo real purpose and c!lhrac
tor Of his Intervention. and tho defendant, In
hiB lettera and otherwise, has borne large and
generous Testimony 10 that effect. Yet Mr.
Noulton, OH snaily occAsinus, aB le tcs:ifcg, aud
other witnesses Htate, declared iliat defendant
WAS not guilty OF Roxuai Intercourse, wAcls he
now Rtyh had boon adnitto1. It Ia for you to
cons;der how for tho Inconsistency in hiB sta.o-
mcutH goeH to d,acredt him. II rou shalt ba Of
opinion TINT he sntendea to state tho truth in
hin examination, and that his pro.tonB declnra-
tionB wore inspired by a spirit Of loyalty
to Defendants reputation aud to that Of 31rs.
Tllton, and from Ill earnc8t wish to divert the
faiuda Of others from the subject IN carrying out
tho policy Of suppression, you arc at libor.y to
'Iako such allow hnee for that shall bo proper.
TILroS'a TESTIMONY.
A to Mr.. Tilfon. you will couHIder wlsothcrhi
Testimony to tho confession OF defendants guilt
can he reconcitcd with bis previous declarations
which he has explained to YOU has BEEN sstf}-
GENTLY illustrated by counsel. aud may bs nc
cebtcd ~ lar az you think proper.
Mrs. MotLTuH.
IA to the testimony Of Emma c. Moulton, 1t is
claimed that Moro IL an inherent impfotabihty
in the superstition that lady of her coufcrbed
Refinement and decacy would haye cns,-
versed with defendant - to biz
him Of, TINT subject. It ~ slso said TINT on 40
| occasion when Alo claims to have bad Ill inl.
portant interview with defendant he was nor ut
her houss. You will consider and apply the tuoof
which stauda IN conflict and in corroboratiou,
1n tho discussions. sbat proof has boen reclted
| and ilustrntod 30 freely that have but to COM
| mend to your careful confederation tncse ques-
tions: Did she at or about tue tins Htated hago
that Interview. and wns tho conversation sub
stsntially ss given By hori II 40. mud she were
nero incident would not DO conclusive, Ihe
question, gentlemen. re5;s With you.
Two other observstions may bo.. proper :
HID M5s, Monlton got the i'm
adultery, aud in her conversation regarded that
az the subject IL hIa mind ? DO sou bolieye thnt
whether mistaken Or not, sla testified honestly 7
uer msnuor, and tho opiuion which defendant
had hirnsolt Of har moral character and worth,
IS stntsd In bis 'ettef, commend har to your ro-
| Bpect. I had occasion to state In your hearing
my viow OF ths suggestion tlat this wltnoss sca-
titled 1t the will Or on tue instruction Of her huB
that thore is no proof Of artitco, OF coercion. or
| undue iutluouce. Tho fact, lo~ovof, that tho
| husband ia deeply conecrnol i'll tAfs controversy,
and that hor testimony. without repeating. oon-
curs with his sloull not be considered on the
nlaee question Of biAs In sustaining plaintiff 3
Cause. sho ID sustaining her husband
| KATE uAREY'A TESTIMONY.
AZ to the witneBs Ktto Carey. 1t IL proper to
atate that persons cai1ed to prove Au alleged bni
character for truth md yeraeity shouil hare
gopesal knowlodgo to 30 fairly derived from
| opinions Expressed by people who knew Witness.
!uch impeachment is wesk IN proportion as the
circle In Which tho unfasoEab}b opinion prevails
IL nnrrow. aud NJ that opinion cAn be traced to
special lillcultiea.
| As to another Witness, benjamin 7. Tracy, two
| suggestions have beon mado: First. that, hny-
ing acted Al counsel for defendant, he should
not Lave been called as w,tuesa for him tn the
case; second, that, owing to M arrangement with
a promise 20 The plaintiff, he should not have
| acted ~ such counsel. Tho Judge commented Ut
,ongth upon Tsaoy'a caae, and baid: IT harc
only to add that my own Wow Of tho propfiety ol
tho courso pursued BY Mr. Tracy agrees will
think with thcIn that tlsore has boen 10 violation
| OF duty OIL his part, parsopsi Or professional.
| 1I1H QUESTION Or DAMAGES
was next considered. Tho Judge called the atten.
| t1uA " kAQ ~ WV ah@VHAF VI QFtASAk0,
including piaintfi alleged conduct at hutne and
abroad. peculiar to this moro question Of DAM
| ayes. 6ucL mjHco1tluet said tbs Judge, uay re-
dice tho amount Of recovery, but IL no defense
to tho action. Bonn other features Of tho case
remain to be noticed upuu principle aud
authority. nnl, although With reference to our
acceptod rules Of social orlsr, tho Intimacy and
intercourse which is allowed between = married
woman and hor loyal adviser. physician, or pns-
tor, iH greater than that shic', would be consid-
cred proper OF becoming between WOMAN aud a
man holding no such special re%tion, that prin.
cip1o applies here, and defendant ia euhtlsd 10
tho boneat Of It. Wo Rre wont to SAY taat al
su,tors arc treated alike, and 10 most respects
they Aso but yet . man in case OF tl.s chatso-
ter, grown old III PRAYER and n pous service, hA1,
pri,na faoie, the benefit OF presumption whlct
tle mara man OF tile world 1aa not.
NO DtACkuAIL.
LII. Bcooher's advances OF money. which,
through Mouton. went to the bonoht OF Til.on MIC
family, appear TO have been tnero acts OF generos
ity. TiIat money waa not extortod By h1r,
Mou!ton, nor doea 1t appear, to have been tht
Vt