New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-04-07

certain declarations Of the wife to be given in evidence
declarations OF complaints declarations exhibiting the
sas OF the household of the matrimonial relations COM
plants OF unkndness brutality, or neglect accom-
panyine her acts Of deseron separation or the act
with which accused explanatory OF that; but "
Is an indulgence which the law from necessity and with
reluctance and qualification extends even TO that cohd
ton OF things But whore Sir it been heard,
under any singular condition Of circumstances, that inc
declaration OF adversary party In regard 10 tne SUI
eot of litigation be given In evidence wheh mhoo AZ
the absence OF the opposing partyi Andupon wha' Pn
ciple Is it that Beecher, after the point OF
made against him, shall be permitted, as am enteo W
suppose to fabroae by his declarations and by MS ac's
excusatory and excupatory evidence against his adver
sarv, And what your Honor heard of principle or OF
reasoning the part OF my learned friend winch usu
es that departure from the cardinal rule OF evidence ana
of justcei Why 1t is said, Sir that We have not been
content with our original accusation located about De-
cember 1870. but in obscure and indefinite ana mex
p,cit way have charged renewal OF improper or crin
nal intercourse We have done nothing Of that kind sir
but In support Of original accusation against hS u
PENDANT we produced his own recorded letters VIII
ten to Mrs Tton after that occasion, and IL Is true tha
we rely upon those conrmafory OF our accusa
ton of primary and original oense The gentleman says
no IA at liberty TO explain them. grant it, The gentle
man says he is at liberty show the circumstances sur
rounding those publications. Igrantit The law gVesh MN
that liberty but under fixed settled rules OF evidence
which shall secure the immunity OF his adversary no"
improper proof lie cannot explain them by his oecar
tons he cannot explain them blythe declarations Oh MIS-
Titon; but the law does allow certain explanatory -.
cumstapces those which Immediately surround tho
transaction those circumstances existing as iac'sa
condition surrounding the acts, for the purpose Va "a
planning their import, effect, aud origin. But nus !o
Honor ever heard that for the purpose OF explanation .no
parcs inculpated by the accusation made IN the aeo
NAV Inv conference between themselves, ana by co-
puniosop of certain facts between themselves not
cognizan 10 The opposite party produce expahauon'
or answer the accusing eyidencet why, ST. IL Is ioi-
hidden by the fundamental maxims OF the law Ii Is
abhorrent TO our sense of Justice that these two ncu-
mated parties Mr. Beecher and Mrs. Tilton, after the
offenss which we charge, shall be permitted TO
give their declarations, their own fabricated
statements possibly, for the purpose OF RESIST
ing the accusing evidence which we produce
Now it is said that evidence Of an interview between
these p,res was given with reference to advice sub
mttcd by Mr. Beecher Mrs Tlton upon the difficulties
between her and her husband advice looking TO sep
aratien Well that was proper Sirproper for the pur-
pose of proving explanatory Of the letters and as
we say the confessions Of higher ofense made by Mr.
Beecher Mr Beccher says he was appned 10 by Mrs'
ton for advice upon that subject that he gave the adj
vice favoring separation with provision or allowance
Now that evidence made proper by the circumstance
that that subject separation as Mr. Beeeher tesnes
was a matter of communication between himself anu
Mr. Ton He says the onus of repeated conversations
about tina: period between him and Mr. IlItoh, IT.
ferred To that very subject and that the revelation was
made by him M Tilton and Mr. Mouon OF the fact OF
this advice and therefore became competent evidence
How far it would have been admissible In refer
cnce to the interview and the details OF
the interview between Mr.. and Mrs. Beecher and
Mrs Tton except for that fact has not been question
raised or scssed because it could not well be under
The Circumstance to which have alluded. Now, the
counsel has very kindly conceded to liberal DISPOSE
ton Indulgence upon the examination OF this Wit
For various Sir not necessary 10 enume-
rate VIC have been inclined to indulge that lberality.
but when it comes details Of interviews and con-
vesaons rs between these two ncupated parties not
Immediately surrounding the event Of the original Of
tense and its COMMUNICATIONS knowledge OF 1t, to Mr.
Beecher must Sir in the interests OF justice and OF
legal propriety object. We have means OF answering
it. We were not there. 1t revealed to us.
What ii may we don't know. We have never had the
opportunity of presenting against it dissent and pro-
test or our explanation and qualification but 1t stands
II given at all made by these two parties, without
any possibility of answer 1t places us in aposition or
Injustice, which think your Honor will not permit
Now your Honor has intimated that conversations can
not be given suppose that must be clear. But your
Honor has also said that 1t is possible that
Tie acts of the parties in that interview may
he admissible. Well. for myself, Sir l am
not particularly inclined TO object to that. 1t is at
the will OF this defendant TO deny the improper inter-
charged and suppose that covers all his acts ana
all his relations to this lady and shall be dono
by general declaration of denial or by relation OF the
physical coInmuncaon-the acts. between these two
parties when they met 1t me, is matter of
entire Indifference To that extent far as the conduct
or the acts parties separate from their declarations
made at the time particular reason for Directing