The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1875-08-03
The Case To Come on the Sep
TENDER Calendar.
VIEWS OF OPPOSING COUNSEL
Determination Of Morris, Surprise Of Tracy,
Confidence Of Sterling.
WHAT PRYOR SAYS AT SARATOGA.

IN some OF the local journals that the counsel OF
Theodore Tilton had given notice to the legal
advisers OF Henry Ward Beecher that new trial
would be demanded People who heard the news
scarcely credited 1t, bur when IL appeared TO be
fact the proposed new trial became a leading topic
OF converse tiOn on the street and in the horse
cars. Men once more took sides for the plaintiff
and defendant in the great scandal suit, and 1t
almost seemed as II the wonderful trial was again
In progress. All OF the old phrases that made the
famous were heard, and IL was amusing to
see how readily people ran into the old grooves or
debate. Ragged edge" "steppng down ana
out" and other familiar quotations were Ire
luently uttered thus bringing back TO mind the
long, tedious and wearisoEe proceedings In the
City Court OF Brooklyn that occupied the nrst six
months OF the year.
TIE LEGAL NOTICE.
Yesterday afternoon ex-Judge Samuel D. Nor
rs served the following formal notice on Messrs
5nearman and Sterling, attorneys OF record Tor
Mr.. Beecher:-
City Court OF NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS. Tilton against
Henry Ward Beecher.-Please TO take notice that
The issue OF TACT In the ABOVE action WIZ be
brought on for trial and an inquest taken therein
at the next term OF the City Court OF Brooklyn
appointed TO be held at the County Court House,
III me city or Brooklyn, IN SAID county OF kings
on the first Monday or Sept nber next. at 10
O'CLOCK IN the forenoon OF y at day, or as soon
thereafter as counsel can be heard unless sooner
tried.
Dated the I'd day Of August, 1875;
4or1s S o nap Mo- iss naparSe Sheet
Brooklyn, N. 7.
TO SHEARAAN & STERLING, attorneys for defend
ant.
lhus fixed for the new trial demanded by counsel
Tor Theodore Titon was the earliest that could be
ieected, for the reason that all OF the courts in
Brooklyn have adjourned until September. Mr..
Norris declared that 1t was his Intention to place
the suit on record in the City Court, and hoped
that 1t would find leading place on the calendar.
de took this view because the Issue between
Theodore Tilton and Henry Ward Beecher Is as
ret unsettled, the jury having disagreed and
failed to bring in verdict.
In the meantime speculation Is rife among peo-
pie as to whether the plalntir, Theodore Tllton,
really is in possession OF any new evidence upon
which to seek verdict. Ex-Judge Morris claims
hat ne has some new evidence 10 bring be ore
Oh jury, and General Tracy OF the opinion that,
in svent ola ne W trial, the defence will be long
one.
TIE JURY DIFFICULTY.
1t is also argued that it Will be almost an Inn
possibility TO find twelve men In Brooklyn who
are not thoroughly "read up' on the case and
have formed an opinion either on side or the
,ther. There are very lew citizens OF Kings
county VINO could relish the idea of being forced
one in the scandal case. Brooklyn jurors VIII not
DO likely to forget that the Tilton- Beecher Jury
were taken away from their legitimate business
Tor MALI year at stipend OF So per day and
nnner. That they were voted "extra' compen-
Iation by the State Legislature, which act
raised their expectations OF reward and
the Board of Supervisors failed to give
them the money; that finally they were locked up
IN q court room, and, Tor eight days discussing
The testimony, failed TO agree. All these crcum-
stances combine to create a natural adherence
to jury business where the principals are the
same as appeared In the great scandal trial OF the
age.
THE DEFENDANTS COUNSEL
took the matter very coolly and they declare
themselves quite as ready for trial the plaintiff
could be. They will take the usual steps, and If
'he case comes TO court fight the issue 10 the Bit
Ter end. Judging IRON the statements made by
The counsel on botn sides quite q lively contest
Will be the result though it is very evident that
the proposed trial Will not be a very long one.
WHAT Ex-JUDGE s. D. MORRIS SAYS.
Ex-Judge Samuel ID. riis, the Attorney OF
Record in the case, was visited last night by a
HERALD reporter In reference to the renewal OF
proceedings in the great scandal case. He stated,
In answer TO the numerous questions addressed
to him, that although notice OF trial mad been
". Beecher, yet there appeared to be a mistaken
notion abroad in regard to this, for 1t was gener-
ally looked upon as 'newu trial, while in fact it
was no such thing, but simply tral OF he origl-
nal issue, the first proceedings having resulted in
a disagreement OF the jury, which made the
case stand as IL was before 10 ever came before
the Court. lie stated that he wished to correct
this erroneous opinion, and to have It understood
that there could be no new trial or retrial until q
jury had rendered verdict either for one side or
the other. SAT present the case stands,u said
Judge Morris, "simply as though 1t mad never
been argued before a Jury, and the papers we
have served ON Messrs. sherman anu Sterling as
the legal representatives OF Mr.. Beecher, were
simply the ordinary notices given in any cause of
action that was placed on the calendar. The case
OF Tllton vs.. Beecher Is stnl undecided
and remains on the ns5 OF causes to
be tried, for the reason that there has
been decision in the case. With re-
gard to the question OF damages / can only say
that the amount tsloo,OOO), as stated in the
original papers, remains the same; but whether
any steps viii be taken to bring the case TO trial
without any such question being Involved | de-.
cline TO say. the issue which we propose TO try
In the present instance Is whether Henry Ward
Beecher committed adultery with Mrs. elizabeth
dlton. We have hao enough OF trying outside
ludLLelA, anu LHlS blihc VIC Hdub w NOu-
nne the trial TO the main issue oil fact. There Is
no reason that cariesee why the whole pro.
ceedlngs should occupy more than ten DAYS
or fortnight at the outside. There is some
testimony OF the greatest Importance, which we
Hhall introduce In the trial which was not'orought
to the notice OF the jury IN the late proceedings
ana which VIII materially alter the complexion OF
he whole alair We know
Mr.. BEECnER IS GUILTY.
and this time we intend to prove him So what
tue aew testimony Is must decline to say but IL
Will undoubtedly show MIR. Beecner up III his true
colors. The disagreement by the jury, which
was the result OF the protracted proceedin Is
which closed some four or Ave weeks ago, we
considered, most unsatisfactory ana now we
propose 10 nave the point al issue settled in
manner that VIII leave no possible room
Tor doubt irrespective or any question OF
manages. ms counsel on either side had
the right to bring the case again before the courts
and have stmply cxprrispd nur nrarooa tfva IN