The New York herald., 1876-09-05
THE -BEECHER SUIT.
OBJECTION TO THE MOTION FOR CHANGE OF

OBJECTION TO THE MOTION FOR A CHANGE OF
VENUE MANGUvRING FOR POSITION.
Yesterday forenoon, in the Kings county Supreme
Court, before Judge Dykman, argument was heard IN
the matter OF tho motion recently mado by Counsel
lor Shearman In behalf of his client Rev. Henry Ward
Beecher for change OF venue. The suit is brought
by Francis d. Mouon 70 recover damages In the
Of $50 600 against Mr. Beocher for malicious prosccu-
ton. The counsel for defendant seeks to have the
venue changed from this vicinity to Franklin county,
or to quarter Of the State where unprcudccd
jury be found readily than either Kings or
New York county. Mr.. Mouton, who present In
court yesterday represented by General Pryor
Roger A. Pryor, Jr General Tracy, Thomas shear
man and John A. HIN appeared Tor the defendant
General Pryor said nc objected to the jurisdiction
OF tho Court to entertain motion for
change OF venue and in support OF his objection read
affidavit setting forth that the answer to the
plant served plaintiffs attorney on August IL
and that August 81 plaintiffs attorney de-
fcndant amended complaint In the words and figures
following, which complaint literally identical with
the original complaint, that specified tho place
OF Trial to DO the city Of New York. IN these Words
''Placc Of trial city and county OF Now York"
Mr. Sherman argued that their affidavit did not
conta a word showing that either party reside In
the city and county OF New YORK. II certainly shows
that tho residence OF defendant In Kings county and
always has been. Therefore the papers establish that
the place OF trial was properly located IN Kings county
and the presumption is that Mr. Aoulton did reside in
that county ut the commencement OF the The
paintin only have made this change by way Of
concession that there could be a iar impartial and
successful trial in Kings county
General Pryor said tho counsel sought their re-
lict at the wrong place and at tho wrong time;
let them go TO New York, and he would meet them
there. The motion was not to change this venue to
any particular place, but TO change II from Brooklyn
the ground Of popular preposscsslon and prejudice
making a trial mpracticablc. Tho Cnso had already
gone to Now York. and II would bo legal solcclsm
change this from Brooklyn when It is not IN
Brooklyn
Judge Dykman said this point was important, and
he would consider u separately
General Pryor road AFFIDAVIT from Mr. Mouton, in
which 1t forth that defendants papers In the
ton for a change or venue served the alter
of August 26. Those papers consisted OF notice
OF motion and twenty eight atidavita IL ap-
pcarcd by the morning papcrs that Defendants
attorneys required moro than eight days for
preparation OF the aidavits, whereas dcponent had
but secular days 10 obtain counter afdavi,s To
rebut defendants aldavits II would be necessary
get acavts OF residents OF Kings, Westcheslcr Gin
ton Essex and Lawrence counties, and deponcnt bad
not been able TO complete their preparation. He
thought would be imprscticablc for hun to complete
them until the third Monday Of September. General
Pryor agreed TO make stipulation that II the place OF
trial is changed he would take short notice oil trial
The then adjourned until Monday, Septom-