Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1875-06-25

taken 10 mediate between the parties, 70
reconcile them and, IS far IS possible, t.
prevent the specific character of theil
differences from unnecessary publicity
He states tina. such was the reGi charac-
ter of his Intervention; and the defend
ant, in his letters and otherwise, has
besn large and generous in his testimony
to that effect; Vet Mr.. MOultOn on vsri-
GUS OcCGsiOns-as he himself testities,
and as other witnesses stGte-declaTed
that the defendant wss not guilty of sex.
usl intercourse, which he nov says has
now been admitted. 1t is for you 20 con-
slider how far the Inconsistency in his
statement goes to discredit him. If you
shall re Of opinion that he intended to
state the truth in his examination here,
and that his previous declarations were
inspired 10y a spirit OF loyalty to the de-
feDdants reputation ana to that of Mrs.
TiltOu's, and from . an earnest
wish to divert the minds
OF others from the subject, in carrying
out the policy Of suppression adopted,
you are st liberty to make such allow
ance for thst IS shall seem proper. AS
to MIR, Filton, you will consider whether
his testimony to the confession of the
defendants guilt can be reconciled with
his previous declarations that his wife
was innocent. The peculiar theory
which he has explained to you has been
illustrated by the counsel, and may lie
accepted as far as you think proper. AS
to the testimony of Emma G.. MOulton,
it is claimed that there is an inherent
impTobsbility in the suppOsition that 8
lady OF her confessed refinement and
delicscy would have cOnversed so freely
with the defendant as to his adultery, or
undertaken to advise him on that SUBJ
iect. 1t is also said that on the occasion
when she claims to have had an impOr-
tant interview with the defendant, he
was not at her house. You will consider
and apply the proof that stands in con-
fijct and in confederation in the discus
sions; the proof has been reeited and il
Illustrated so freely that l have but to
commend it to your careful cOnsidera.
ton. Did she, at or about the time
stated, have that interview, and was the
conversation substantially as given by
her? If so, and she were in error as to
the length Of the interview, that one in
cident would not be conclusive of the
question. Gentlemen, it rests with you.
Another observation may be proper:
Had Mrs. Moulton got the i'm
preston that the defendants
guilt was adultery, anu in her
conversation regarded that as the SUBJ
ject in his mind, as it was in her mind,
10 you believe that, whether mistaken
or not, she testified honestly? Her
manner on the stand, and the opinion
which the defendant himself gave Of her
moral character and worth, as stated in
his letters, commend her to your respect.
l had occasion to state in your hearing
my view of the suggestion that this wit
ness testified at the will or instruction OF
the husband. l still hold to the opinion
then expressed, that there is no proof of
artifice or coercion, or undue influence.
The fact, however, that her husband is
deeply concerned in this controversy,
and that her testimony, without repeat
ing, cOncurs with his, is to be considered
On the mere question CT bias, in sustain
ing plaintiffs cause she is sustaining her
husband as witness. As to the witness
Kate Carey, it is proper to state that
persons called to prove 81 alleged bad
character for truth and veracity, should
have general knowledge, to be fairly
derived from the opinions expressed by
people who knew the witness. Such
is weak in proportion as
the circle in which the unfavOrable
opinion prevails is narrow; and as that
opinion can be traced 10 special difficult
ties as to another witness, Benjamin F.
Tracey, two suggestions have been
made, that of the first, that hav-
ing acted as counsel for the de-
PENDANT, he should not have been
called as witness for him
in the case. The second, that owing to
an arrangement with or promise to the
plaintiff, he should not have acted as
such counsel. The judge commented at
length upon Traeey's case, and said, /
have only to add that my own views of
the propriety of the course pursued by
Mr.. Tracey agrees with that of his assO-
ciate counsel IN the case. ! think with
them, that there has been no violation
Of duty on his part, personal or profess
siOnRl. In the question of damages,
which was next considered, the judge
called the attention Of the jury TO the
large amount Of evidence, including the
plaintiffs alleged misconduct at home
and abroad. Peculiar to this were ques-
tions nj damages. Such misconduct,
said the judge, may reduce the amount
Of recovery, but Is no defense to the ac-
ton. Some other features of the case
remain to be noticed upon principle and
also with reference to our &C.
cepted rules Of social order. The intima-
cy and intercourse which is allowed be-
tween a married woman and her legal
adviser, physician or pastor, is greater
than that which would be considered
proper or becoming between a woman
and man holding no such special rela-
ton. That principle applies here, and
the defendant is entitled to the benefit
Of it. We are wont to say that all suit
Ors are treated alike, and in most re-
spects they are, but yet in case of this
character a man, grown old in proper
and pious service has, a1riD1G fdcie, the
benefit of presumption which
the mere man OF the world has not.
Mr.. Beecber's advances of money,
which, through Mr.. MoultOn, went to
the benefit of Tilton and family, appear
to have been mere acts of generosity;
that money was not eXtOrted by Mr..
MOulton, nor does it appear to have
been the fruit Of any improper artifice.
it is Of no special moment,
think it proper to say that the uncOntra-
dicted evidence shows that TiltOn did
not know that he was thus benefited Dy
Beecher. We have before us no evil
1ence which could support the charges
Of cOns piracy and blackmail; and if we
mad the defendants position would re,
main the same, if innocent, to be so de-
clared. Independently of such articles,
the nearest approach to blackmaiI would
seem to have aIis0 between Tilton and
Bowen, il the former did threaten to
publish card injurious TO the latter IN
less the money was paid. But we have
no interest in that question. Moreover
ne did not publish the card, nor was he
paid until after due course of investiga-
ion. 1t seems that the covenant of
Bowen and TiltOn, in respect to COM
pensation for the services of the two
papers, provided for certain payments on
! termination of employment before the
end Of the term, and that the claims or
disputes should be determined by arbi-
ration. In the notice of dismissal put
IA evidence, Mr.. Bowen proposed that
mode OF adjustment. He had a legal
tight to stand on that. He did
50, and the arbitration was had. the
gentlemen acting as aTHitTatOrs,
men Of character and integrity, found
hat seven thousand dollars was due, and
hat was paid. No special purpose could
nave led such men to that determina-
ion if the money, in their judgment,
lad not been actually due. Ii seems
proper to refer to two subjects OF cOnsid-
srsble Importance, which to some extent
nave been brought into the case: The
)ne the proceedings and report of the
Investigating com mittee appointed by
Mr.. Beecher after the defendants letter
10 DR.. Bacon had been published. That
was matter which concerned Plymouth