New-York tribune., 1875-02-17
THE yExEp QUESTION AGAIN DEBATED.


THE vEXED QUESTION AGAIN DEBATED.
Mr.. Evarts-If the paper needs to be identified by
your Honor may Marked but for this right when
there is the exclusion of paper independent OF Its contents
to read it
Mr. Beach [nterruptng-Tt seems to me, II your Honor
please that the should be permitted TO rearsue tho
question upon which your Honor has ruled.
Judge Neilson--r may be beneficial to me, perhaps
Mr. Beach-s he asking you review the decision which you
have madef
Judge Nelson-No do not so understand It,
Mr. Beach-Then there is question before your Honor
Mr. Evas-I do not know that. This is in certain sense
within the discretionary control OF your Honor
peraps governed by rule OF law to that exten pus
when the procedure the learned counsel has indicated that
tho reading Of paper which has been excluded then sub
NIT that within the rule which excludes paper and Its
reading cannot be permitted.
Mr. Beach-In the first place, deny that It Is within
your Honors discretionary power to forbid my making an
proof and in the next place when make such an
Offer have right derive my information from any source,
and it counsel the Court to decide whether
shall hear it from my learned associates or read it from writ
ten offer prepared draw 1t from the evidence actually given
before the body to which the question relates.
Mr. Eyarts-There / think my learned friend Is wrong
Qaugher The Court has restraint over s such proceed
ng The general proposition doubt Is this that in res
counsel and their zeal in the better rule Is to
conane them to questions without offers. Offers however
are admitted in the discretion Of the Court when
appears the Courts observation that an offer appa
reny necessary useful raising the point to be decided
by the than by question Now when after
the the Court that the paper shall not be offered In
evidence received in the counsel thereupon under
take to read the paper renewed offer to prove the Court
sees that substitution in form that introduces the
excluded for the ruling that has been given 10
siude the matter.
Judge Neison-Alow to remind you, Mr. Evarts that
that is the precise position in regard to the Bessie Turner
letter.. letter.:
Mr. Beaeh-Your Honor the Clarke letter
Judge Neilson-No the Bessie Turner letters They were
offered in evidence and excluded and then recollection
me- they read in this precise Mr. Beach
made the objection nrst and then in your Offer Mr. Eyas
you stated contents and Mr. Beach withdrew his objection
TO the first letter. and then, in like manner to the second
Mr. EyarIn that case your Honor please, after you had
ruled letters had not the right to ask this witness
whether these the Bessie Turner going
away
Judge Neilson-And in doing that you read the letters.
Mr. Eyarts-It does not follow that l could
paper the basis Of proper inquiry to the Wit
because had been ruled out rs evidence never nave
oontended for that doctrine.
Judge Neilson-The letter had been rejected
Mr.. Eyarts-It had. evidence per Sc; but it did not
follow that | could not make it the basis OF an IN
quiry the witness 1t might be made evidence
by the witness statements concerning It, But my proposition
your Honor that this nothing but the reproduction OF
proposition evidence in form that produces the matter OF
paper that been excluded which paper your Honor has
excluded, whatever its matter was.
Mr. Besch-Your Honor has permitted me to pre-
sent part OF my offer, and the counsel then interrupts
me- in OF my proposition with the objection that
there Of professional improperly in the course
which am taking, introduces the immediate sub
ec in the shape Of Offer proposition or question
which had been excluded by the Court Your Honor
excluded the Victoria Woodruff biography your
Honor excluded the Victoria woodhu statement OF this
.H md
each and every OF these particulars introducing the very sub
ec matter which you did exclude and for the purpose Of get
ting IL upon record the counsel read the
very matter which excluded and he appears
with the objection to my imitation OF that example
Judge NeisonAm right In my recollection about the two
Bessie Turner letters
Mr.. Beach-Yes, Sir.
Judge Ncilson-I ruled them out
Mr.. Beach-Yee, Sir.
Judge Neilson-on your objection Mr. Beach,
MI Beach-Yes Sir.
Judge Nelson-Then the point is that in the form OF
offer they and withdrew objection
TO the first letter. and IN ike manner to the second
Mr. Beach--Yes, Sir.
Judge NcsonNow you have right to make your Offer TO
the Court
Mr. Evars-I have believe the right to close the objec
don
r, Reach do not know whether It follows that the gentle
man has the right to close objection when make ox
M Evsrts object your o and have the Affirmative
ot the proposition .
Mr. BescA-No Sir have the Affirmative Of the proposition
IN making the offey
Judrv Neison-I think But still would like 70 heaE
Nj Evars
Mr. Beach-f your Honor thinks me right hope you Will
y,e me the benefit u being right occasionally
Judpe Nelson Hereafter, yes, Sir. tLAught@l
Mr. R,ars-sow, II your Homes please here is paper
written and signed by the witness said which has been
offered in evidence The Bessie Turner letters were letters
s nv third person and as written equally with the
Clarke letter until they broush, into connection
with the witness, with tho party, rhe Psinth-they
eosh no, be given In evidence. hooght they could be
rd under the degree Of evidence thai had affected them
Your Honor and they were excluded therefor being
the acts OF third persons and rtr se until such evidence
Vas given connecting the psty with them Now having in
formation tha, the Bessie Turner letters conveyed TO me- and
a, the Clarke letter conveyed undertook 10 extract
from the witness testimony THAI the statements therein
tanned had brought h notice and 10 inquire concern
ing them, aad there my examination, and only there
| | submit 10 your Honor Now, this point that have
s,bmitted 10 your Honos mat the Court will exclude
repodue,on orp OF document thai is excluded
when all that served get rurag Of the Court upon
one carried far In OF tho Courts Of the nelshbounn,
States they will not permit to be made subject Of
exana in Court when basis is proposed to be raised
desired to be raised for introducing the instrument Now
our CourH we have not gone so far as that on tn
ground advised that that rule OF the sister States
Courts which requires basis 10 be msdo by affidavit TO b.
al 9slegs sa4.s. gsaA be. eaiscsA viii W ceayar