Tilton v. Beecher: 1875

Although Tilton and Beecher both testified during the trial, Elizabeth Tilton never took the witness stand. This was because of the common-law principle of interspousal immunity. When Tilton's attorneys attempted to put Tilton on the witness stand, Evarts objected on Beecher's behalf that the same interspousal immunity rule prevented him from testifying as well:

Neither in a civil action nor in a criminal prosecution are they [spouses] permitted to give any evidence which, in its future effects, may incriminate each other, and this rule is so inviolable that no consent of the other party may authorize the breach of it.

This rule, accurately expressed by Evarts, meant that spouses couldn't testify for or against each other in court for fear that, if the testifying spouse committed perjury or revealed something adverse under cross-examination, the marriage would be hurt and possibly result in divorce. Marriage was sacred to the common law, which held that "two souls are joined as one."

Although Elizabeth Tilton couldn't testify, Judge Neilson allowed Tilton to take the stand but stated that Tilton couldn't testify concerning any "confidential communications" with his wife. This was an accepted exception to the interspousal testimony rule, but it meant that the courtroom testimony about the alleged adultery took place in very elliptical terms. Further, much of Tilton's testimony suggested that there had been no adultery. An example is the following cross-examination of Tilton by Evarts:

Question: Now, up to the time of [Mrs. Tilton's alleged confession] had you observed in the demeanor of Mr. Beecher toward your wife, or of your wife toward Mr. Beecher, any variance from that ordinary relation which you had been familiar with?

Answer: No sir; one or two little incidents happened a number of years before that, which Mrs. Tilton explained away, and which left no impression.

Beecher's testimony was equally unimpressive. He contradicted himself and his supporting witnesses many times and repeatedly claimed that he couldn't remember the specifics of certain events. The trial dragged on for nearly six months, as Beecher's attorneys brought in nearly 100 supporting witnesses. These witnesses' testimony was often repetitive, and frequently consisted merely of vouching for Beecher's character.

The jury deliberated for several days, and on July 1 reported to Judge Neilson that it couldn't reach a verdict. Nine jurors believed that Beecher was innocent, the other three that he was guilty. There was no retrial. Beecher was vindicated, and Judge Neilson even expressed his belief in Beecher's innocence when he spoke eight years later at a party given by the Brooklyn Academy of Music to celebrate Beecher's 70th birthday:

By the integrity of his life and the purity of his character he has vanquished misrepresentation and abuse.

Beecher never quite regained his previous stature as a spokesman on social issues, however, because of the scandal.

In addition to its notoriety, Tilton v. Beecher demonstrated the severe limitations of the interspousal immunity rule concerning testimony. The woman Beecher allegedly committed adultery with never testified, because her husband was the plaintiff. The judicial system was thus unable to get at the complete truth. Although Beecher may well have been innocent, there is no way to determine what additional facts would have been brought out by Elizabeth Tilton's testimony. In the 20th century, courts and legislatures began to recognize the problems that the rule imposed on the judicial system, and today it has been virtually abolished.