Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1875-03-19

TACTICS or THE Defense.

tremelv reticent a. to the line OF defense re
solved on Later developments indicate,
with sufficient clearness, the general Objects
of the defendants lawyers.
At the beginning the defense was put to
the disadvantage Of calling some Of Its wit
ne,ses out Of order, but the general testimc-
nv of the first was intended to bear upon
and affect mainly the question OF damages.
Of course the great issue of the suit Is not
mere matter 'ot damages but naturally, IN
q ca.e where such heavy damages are clam
ell. il becomes a necessary precantlon to show
TINT damages were not sustained Mr.. III
ton had set ap the plea that Mr.. Beecher
had dcspoilei " an ideal home broken re-
lat.ons 80 exceedingly happy a 10 justify
him in claiming an extraordinary sum a.
d,mape- The defense therefore brought
forward witnesses to show-Gr~t, that the
domestic relations Of Mr. and Mr.. 1ilton
We're not happy and second, that IN, reiA-
ton. with other women were not moral
The general drift Of the testimony ot,Mr-
and Mrs. Ovington, Mr.. Putnam, Miss
Moore. and Miss Oakley, were upon the hr-t
question. the domestic relations of plaintiff
and wife. What was disclosed by each viii
be remembered As depicting a very unhappy
state Of affairs indeed Mrs Pd:nam's tes-
timonv was clearly intended, judging by the
course Of the examination, 10 lead up t.
what the defense consider and concede to he
q very important feature of their case. and
wls stopped py an objection and rullng OF
the i1dge which form curious Illustration
NJ the manner in which the rules OF eVi-
dcucc sometimes ob,truct the Development
of important facts essential to the under
standing Of the whole case Mrs Putnam
bs4 testified 10 the reception by Mrs. Hilton
of = l,tter from her husband which 1t was
,d..,t..' was Of a character 20 cause Mrs
lVt,n the n most distress 1t vas the sub
eeouent rurposs Of the deferse to shcE that
NJ. Tilrop som <iter receiving this letter.
returned to Brooklyn and applied TO Mr.
E,ecber and bi. wife for aiSses as to seFard-
lion ir1m her husband but inc GeivH9s
was stepped hY the requiem Snts % ihs ~"
that before Giving verbal EVIL eh.e ~ ''S
contents of a letter it mus. first VI prosea
that the letter had been destr5yc-.. i1e
counsel asked questions to prove this. IN al
-wer TO which Mrs Putnam replied that
Mr.. Til,on had told her she had destroyed
the letter. The law f1rbids testimony o. I,
tae declarations Of third person in the all
scuce vt plaintiff or defendant, and 50 the
content, af the letter and the subsequent &C.
clrreuces when Mrs. Tlton asked Mr.. Beech
er'S aayice were thrown oGt of the testlmu-
av Mr. Tracy, OF counsel for Mr. Beecner.
Wa asked Yesterday if other foundation Tor
the introduction OF the contents OF tins JET
ter would be laid. bat be answered with the
n1n-committa formula. &c don't know.
whieh counsel on both sides seem u have
prescribed for Themselves Mr. and Mr.
Oyington were questioned upon points not
bearing wholly IN the question Of damage,
iut their main evidence was IN this direr-
ton
Several witnesses were called 10 testify O.
immoral conduct on the part Of Mr. Iiiton.
Ma. Holmes. Mr. Norton and Mr.. Lincoln,
all Of " instead. Connecticut, directly icsti-
ned. and Oliver Johnson incidentally stated
facts concerning the adventure at the place
named. For the frs; time the name of the
lady thus involved was brought out, Mr..
johnson abruptly naming her q " Mis-
L9yeiJv." The maine has been repeatedly
published without authority IN reports Of
the case. bat never correctly, bat 1t was put
upon the olicn record yesterday ilr the
first time 1t now appears that the lady
full maine i Sophia \. L0yejoy, not sarah,
as rencully printed. The evidence coz
Meeting her vita Mr.. Tilton in an improper
way was almost wholly circumstantial. Mr..
Holmes swore he saw her in Mr.. Iilton's
room in disheycled state Of hair and dress
Mr.. Lincoln saw her lying On Mr.. Iilton's
led, while Mr.. Tilton was in undress Mr..
Norton saw her in Mr.. Tl,ton's room - all in
white" the next morning at daylight and
Mr.. johnson said Tlton had confessed to
him that the two had stopped the night pre-
vious AZ the same hotel in New York. Mr..
johnson also swore that Mr. Tilton had al
lnitted other indicate but not criminal re
lations with another lady.
Passing from this stage OF the case To
more important matters, the detense really
began with the introduction of Mr.. Belcher
He has been followed by Mr. Mckelway and
Oliver johnson, and will be followed still
further by John q. Hartman, jackson ;.
Schultz. Ii. Is. Clahin and Others, to eStab-
li,h the same general fact-namely, tina; MIR
Tilton never claimed until a year ago that
Mr.. Beechcr's ofiense was more than - i'm
proper solicitation. This Is the present
purpose OF the defense, and other witnesses
than those named will probably be called.
The disproof Of the allegation Of IN
proper solicitation" and the explanation OF
the letters will be left mainly to Mr.. Beecher, !
whose evidence will be reserved to the last
|; is not likely that Mr.. Beecher will be call |
ed for week and a half or two weeks long
or. if indeed 50 early as that. lie will pro |
badly occupy the stand fortnight or ten !
DAYS. After that the summing up on both !
side. and the Judges charge to the jury viii |
occupy fully the first half Of April.
From the New York Star.
While all this preliminary matter Is Of IN
terest. and all this dissection of Iilton and /
Moultons is necessary and vital, the great /
public LOOK with anxious eagerness for the |
appearance and testimony and explanation OF
Air. Beecher himself One blast upon his (
bugle horn-so to speak-will be worth |
10 ,OG0 Moores, Ovingtons and Belchers roll |
cd into one. The great thinker, orator ana |
teacher will be put to his mental trumpS /
Of course, lie will deny adultery. vi course,
he will deny improper proposals. lie Will I
adlpit that he thought he had done TIlton Il [
erie yous wrong, and will claim that he was !
misled. when he so thought. But, then. |
those letters! Can he explain them? Can |
he convince twelve men that those expires
sous of agony aud remorse referred TO this |
grievous wrong he thought he had done his |
moody friend? We believe he can. |
careful studvof those Jurors will change the |
general belief that gooC men and intelligent |
men were not impancled. There are some
obstinate men there there are two Catholics !
there there are two men uown to be rath-
er preiudiced against PlyInou IN churcn. But |
what of il? These obstinate men VIII be
tenacious of their own rights, ani VIII stand
By the law, which says every man Is to be
considered innocent until proven guilty.
Those Catholics would be the first 70 spit
upon the inference that their religious bs,lief
can in any way influence their duty as JnT-
ors. And, unless We misjudge human ma +,
ture, those men who are prejudIced against |
Plymouth church are so fearful OF yielding !
TO that prejudice that they will be tliler |
than iron for the right We believe that to
be a good jury for an innocent man: II
Judge Nelson preserves his health, and the !
jury live, the fair presumption Is that, ooy
the first of June, the city of Brooklyn Will
have n day of jubilee.
1t il told for true, that in Richmond, Nir-
einia, last Sabbath, the Rector of Chris |
tan church dismissed his congregation
rather than have it contaminated By the
presence of an old colored woman who had the |
effrontery to enter their sanctuary to wor-
ship God This, fit occurred, and it hard
" seems credible that il could have. was
probably considered way Of manifesting
proper indignstionet the passage of the civil
rights bill.