Year: 1875




question at issue is defined. The question upon
al the proofs is whether the defendant under.
stood that he was charged with the adultery, and
spoke wrote, acted and suffered from and In con-
SEQUENCE of that, or whether, laying that out Of
view he understood the charges to be that he h1d
made the improper proposals or advances ana
had


ROBBED THE PLAINTIFF


of a rich inheritance in the love Of his wife, and
whether, coupled with those charges, he believed
that he had wronged the plAintin by tavoring
family sePaIau.9n sno tne nsIs GIs SIo,s " .csai
and suffered as described. II the wrong was the
adultery, the solution Of what followed is easy.
we're of the Character stated, then a Just sppre-
hension of the relation between the detendant's
state Of mind and his conduct involves several


What was his personal estimate Of his relation
to the Church, to the world, to literature, and OF
the reputation he should leave behind him?
What his conception of the nature and gravity Of
the charges Of impure solicitations, OF alternating
q Woman's love from her husband, and OF the
WHAT his notion Of the extent to which Mr. I'll.
ton had been injured as journalist, In his family,
and as to their means Of subslstence? The
Mr., Beecher had no occasion for grief, as his sd-
vice that Mrs. Tilton should separate from her
husband was not followed, or as to Mr. BoWen's
action as that was not Influenced by Mr.. Beecher.
You will consider the evidence and that view.
But did the defendant, under Q misapprehension,
believe that he had been inStrumental In innict-





If any, effect had that upon his conduct?


Imake these suggeftions that you may give
sstye Tbs mucS as to the SrncIpai question in
issue. have new to call your attention to 3
question which, as have said, belongs exclu-
sively to you, namely:


THE CREDIT DUE TO WITNESSES.


The statements Of witnesses are to be considered
al weighed with o due regard to their relation
to the case as in interest," to the bias prejudice
they may have in respect to the parties or the
subjectmatter under investigation, to contra
dIcGions, previous Inconsistent statements, 10
their knowledge Of facts and the apparent dis
position to make just and true disclosures, and to
their known or ascertained characters. A good
degree OF respect and confidence is due to every
citizen who has occasion to speak under oath IN
a court OF justice as to his own rights, or the
trinity may be, and often does attack the mom-
Ory, dates and events may be confOunded.
Witnesses, supplemented and honest, contra
dicted themselves and each other. On trial
some months ago, remember to have been much
impressed by the testimony of worthy man, the
president OF an insurance company, who, while
the case was still on, came back from the city Of
New York to acknowledge his error and make q
correction. He was as honestin his first as in his
last affirmation. There was no actual perjury in
either. This offense, as such, is the fruit Of
wicked intent or a Willful perversion Of known
tton of this State has borne striking testimony to
the virtue of our people in allowing parties to be
witnesses in their own behalf-eyen the prisoner
or trial for q crime to testify to his innocence.
But while believe that perjury is of less com.
mon occurrence than is imputed by the popular
view, it is crime Of the gravest magnitude and
Is not qualified by the special circumstances lead
ing to Its preparation. He who, upon any mere
theory Of honor would be guilty of IL might II he
had the temptation, commit any other crime. 1t
has been ssfd end upon high authority, that there
is a distinction between mere falsehood and lie.
The former, an untrue statement, made with
out guile and without knowledge Of its want Of
truth; the latter, a statement of what is known
to be false and with intent to injure another !
am disposed to respect the distinction. So, too,
when it is proper to be spoken"-s theory of
value as applied to mere social intercourse. But
good men have stood for the truth


THOUGH 1T COST THEIR LIVES


So good men have uttered falshoods when only
their own interests were concerned. Walter
he was the author Of the "Waverly Novels" 1t
was his secret. It is the duty OF Jury, when
cile the conflicting statements, to make allow
ances for honest errors and to accept the sugges-
tions Of perjury reluctantly and from necessity.
risk Of imperfect knowledge and imperfect
memory. Witnesses who appear equally entitled
to credit may give different accounts Of the same
transaction; the difference going to the substance
and effect, or only to the immaterlal details In
such cases you have substantial identity with
circumstsntial variety. Too much Importance
the discredit Of witnesses. You may believe that
they intended to tell the truth, unless the con-
trary Is reasonably clear, and as far as you can





the 81 ubstantial truth. It is proper to refer in
leEs general terms to one or two witnesses Mr.
and avowedSriend Of M. Tilton. He appears to
have undertaken to mediate between the parties
and reconcile them, and, as far IS possible, to
prevent the specihc character Of their differences
from obtaining publicity.


He states that such was the real purpose and
character Of his Intervention, and the defendant
in his letters and otherwise has borne large and
generous testimony to that effect. Yet Mr.
Moulton on various occasions, as he himself tes-
tiies, and as other witnesses state, declared that
the defendant was not guilty Of the sexual inter-
course which he now says had been admitted, IL
was for you to consider how far the inconsistency
in his statements goes to discredit him. II you
shall be Of opinion that he Intended to state the
truth in his examination here, and that his pre-
viOus declarations were inspired by q Spirit of
loyalty to the defendants reputation and TO that
Of Mrs. Tilton, and from an earnest wish to d.
vert the minds of others from the subject in car
ryinR out the policy Of suppression adopted, you
are at liberty TO make such allowance for that as


AS to Mr.. Tilton, you wiIIconsider whether his
testimony to the confession of the defendants
guilt can be reconciled with his previous declAra-
tiOns that his wife was innocent. The peculiar
theory which he has explained to you has been
sufficiently illustrated by counsel and may be ac-
cePted as far as you think proper: Ifhls purpose
inJure urduly or msliclously another: If in the
httul conflicts and emotions which may have pos
sessed him you discover moral purpose as con-
trasted with depraVed spirit, you will give him
the beneht Of that view.


The general rule as to persons who have will
fully testified under oath to what is false on any
point is that their testimony is discred
tied. You are not bound to disregard Il all, The
witness to be entirely dlscredited must have given
which he could not be presumed liable to mistake.
and given it with knowledge that It was false.


After referring to che testimony Of Tracy and
other points, the Judge concluded as follows:


1t seems proper to refer to two subjects Of con-
siderable importance which to some extent have
been brought into the case. The one the proceed
inKs and


REPORT OF FHE INVESTIGATING COMMITTEE
appointed BY Mr.. Beecher after the defendants
letter to DR.. Bacon had been published. That
was matter which concerned Plymouth church
and the defendant as its pastor. The report of
the committee, after such Investigation as they
thought proper, was In favor Of the defendant.
have simply TO remind you that that determine
tion should not have any weight or influence with
you here.


The other subject is the advisory convention
held at the instance Of two Of our principal
churches. The question presented here had no
West charges, which are in evidence before You,
not having been presented BY the Plymouth
church, and Mr.. Tilton's name having been
standing the charge OF slandering the pastor had
been made by Mr.. West, tie advisory board had
,ogniEance Of that as question Of discipline and


You viii readily perceive that that proceeding
did not affect or assume to reach Mr.. Beeoher
You are not 10 accept the notion that those two
powerful churches were purs suing Mr.. Beecher.
simply call your attention to this subject that
lhe defendant may not suffer from any miscon-
,eption as to the ground on which thai council
was convened.
Gentlemen, the case Is now submitted to you.
II ig Of nature to call for the exercise of your
highest Intelligence and most scrupulous care.
on will retire to your deliberations with an i'm
partial and earnest purpose TO be lust to the wit
1esses, just to the parties and TO render verdict
lion as duty honestly performed In the presence
of God and Of men


REQUESTS OF COUNSEL.
After the judge had got through reading his
,harge he took up the request to charge, and In.
.tructed the jury that the defendant was not
obliged to prove his Innocence; that mere proof
oi opportunity to commit the act was not a proof
)f the guilt Of the party concerned; that the de.
Itruction Of the paper which was evidence In the
sase raised the presumption that Its production
would be unfavorable to the party who DESTROYED |
1; that none Of the defendants letters declared
bis guilt, but only commisseration and reproach
or the troubles he had caused: the fact that the
plaintiff cohabited with his wife after learning OF
1er guilt, in favor ofthe innocence Of the de-
endAnt; the judge thought IL was not very ap-
Jlcable 10 this case, and would not, therefore SO
charge; the Jury were to take into consideration
he fact OF the plaintiffs six months silence after
he alleged confession at his wife's request
when the Judge had completed mis- comments 4
IN the requests To the charge, he asked If the /
counsel were content, and Beach replied, ave L
Ire, sir" One Of the jurors asked II there were
my papers relating to the case which could be II
given TO them when in the Jury room and Beach Il
aid he had no objection. Mr.. EVarts stated that
here were some papers which we're not in evil L
ien7e, and Judge Nelson replied that the Jury II
,ould have any papers which they desired relat.