New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-01-29
ARGUMENT OF Mr.. EvARTS.
Nr. Evarts-Wait moment, Mr.. Clerk.

EvarS-I object 10 him as witness IN tue CduSc l"0
psutlr Is now called understand and offered to be
9, orn as witness in his behalf tie issue Of this trial
Yhat issue ss Question OF fact solely and distinctly the
adultery Of his wife That the fact which his right
Of action arises that alone; ana as his vines
adultery. and the question Of whether Mr. Beecher IS
man Of upright in ts behalf, guilty OF this crime
l. wholly inmateria in respect Of Mr. Beechc relation except
s. the responsible person against whom the law gives recourse
or the injury that has arisen from the wfes adultery
shSch has invaded the family destroyed its unity'
Ind In the language OF the law. been the cause by
which he has lost the fellowship Of his wife Now
II the common law there would seem to be no question
that neither husband wife be called witness not
only upon an grave this against the character ana
conduct OF the other and deep It's penetration into the
unity Of marriage but any Of the ordinary asper3ons
Of character incrfcrnces with the family relation; and
il only suppose from there being some impression that
in certain limited statutory ntercences with the integrity OF
the common rule in this behalf there have come to be &C.
cason in which husband and wife testify against or for
one another that it can presumed pretended that Mr.
TGon witness here This issue But was satisfied
your Honor that the law rule as obtaining IN TINS
state Of the regard completeness that have imputed to
H. think shall have difficulty In satisfying your Honor
that the LEGISLATION OF this State so far from permitting
any such disturbance or deviation from that rule in OF
this kind has the other hand completely confirmed it and
refused disturb It, 1t TO be utterly unquesuonable
that the wife cannot be witness in this case The wife Of this
plaintiff cannot be a witness sustain her life and character
The wife Of Mr. Beechcr cannot be witness TO defend her
husband because the law has said great as is the in
tere-i the administration Of justice apoweu as should
be 10 draw into Court all evidence that speak the truth
within rules Of evidence yet the administration Of justice
was made society society FOR the administration Of JUS
ce certain institutions Of society lying at the
civilization sustaining the whole fabric OF its
pcrty purity dignity and its strength which must not
undermined corrupted disfgred defed under the
notion in administration Of justice the truth must be
sought in every quarter and from every witness.
Thus the great minds legislative judicial the great moass
the great religious teachers have all combined 10 that there
are certain limits imposed by the Of human society in
the fabric as is constituted for defense and protection
that cannot oyeased That Of client aud attorney that Of
clergyman and penent that Of physician and patient
however trivial compared with the relation Of husband and
wife against the introduction OF evidence from sources
thus protected because without that respect Of the law to
tho, relations no client could conde in lawyer defend
him. patient in physician to save him, no
p,ntent In q priest clergyman 10 aid him.
But when we the relation Of husband and wife, b the
foundation Of civilized society for though nature provides
the sexual attraction vet il the civil and religious institution
Of marriage makes civilized Christian communities instead
Of loose and lusfu herdngs Of the human Now the
law, built up by masculine understandings that have
a-ed it, great establishment fine and sentimental
phrases snch from platform orators or from eloquent
lawyers but understands the institution that it has under
taken frame, and protects II accordingly provides
that when man and woman together under the
Divine law Of purity, that they twain shall become one
flesh and thus that the population OF the world shall
BE- furnished and otherwise consistently with the
Divine command. Ana when the common law says
that and his wife one in Lord Cokes language
As Two souls in one person lit is said shall put
s.under those who are Joined together and least Of ALL
in The name Of law shall the administration Of justice pull and
asunder this conu relation by the step Of the sheriff
the prccpi Of the judge that compes 10 and betray
the is the question comes before the Court
much the interest the duty the particular circumssn-
Of the individual Of marriage that is thus brought up
attention the institution itself 1t is the happy marriages.
fl The unbrokeu marriages the whole system Of marriage
by which and wife in the supreme confidence
within ther household and in each others embrace that no in
tere.ts Of society the land invade And every
ai.hman and every American prides himself upon the ny
oaby Of his Threshold against the king all the power Of
except within certain strict mandates Of the law
authorizing forcibe passage Of it, how much important
ihs, all that the nyiosbiy Of the Threshold important
wit the inyiosby OF the family and the protection Of the
marriage should sustained by the law against the king the
mandate albeit, o. the law!
DFYERENT ASPECTS QUESTION
Nov there are various aspects ia which this presents
Ell ia respect 10 hi, institution Of marriage that do not per
ha readily rise 10 The mind suggested By the particular cir
sumances Of any in which the question asated Letus
sppo,e that happy marriage has been invaded by seducer
that the wife Ea confessed her husband and the husband
pardoned aud they TWO, their fidelity continue
preserve the threatened unity and have children born them
their renewed love Now while that fidelity continues. and that
happiness is maintained stranger by libel suit undertakes
10 for;y himself by compelling the husband 10 come and prove
his wife pardoned fault and break that marriage and disgrace
,d DEGRADE h children Does the law do that think not
S,e that in the have imagined the guilty wife had as
mariner in her guilt husband IN another marriage and after
nsrdor and these years Of continued affection fam
Ill, the fruits Of IT, then comes up difficulty in the fret family
IN the family Of which the seducer the husband and
oves OF Jealous wife there il institution Of suit IN
regard 20 that husbands adultery wit his adultery with this
wife Of the other marriage Now docs our sw permit ths "ie
ung for her divorce TO prove the sdue Of her husband by
bringing from h. other family the husband 10 prove the adu
ery Of lie wife hs wife, under those circumstances
think not, And no case can found that iustfes any snch
proposition VIII the law then allow The question OF whether
the marriage relation thus be disturbed to depend upon the
voluntary disposition husband! l. that the way the law
deals with the general interests society: And you can i'm
anne the baeness that could bring husband into Court after
having received and psrdoned and lived with his
wife years n that relation If you conceive the baseness
that such husband should voluntarily appear as witness
law change it's respect Of the sancty and pro-
lection Of marriage by the difference between whether the law
ooms or the law allows OF voluntary production Of testimony
BY husbsnd' think your Honor will find nothing In the
books thst justifes any such opinion.
But there another general relation OF this subject in differ
ent attitude in which the community interested Suppose
that husband instead Of having discovered an adultery OF his
wife has invented adultery Of his wife. Suppose that
through the processes Of law there is sought to be worked out
scheme Of degradation and the community,
We" known TO the police that is, combination Of
0"'ruP married pairs 10 make victims Of third per.
CONS Now, is it permitted by law that the wife
~'-4 O~s soo attitudes duplicating any Improperly, aud