The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1875-02-16

\ Il
o9IoIs Sne tupartite agreement was pre-
PaI0d' IA Isct u formed part Of that CIV
enant. do not remember whether I showed
- - 1i5n oeiore the arbitration was agrssd
I, bon' l nau tnen suit pending against Mr..
Bowen IN one Of these courts. Mr.. Ward he
gan II IN my absence do not know v-bet hsv
!. Nas a sul'' OUT IL was a suppleme ntary pro-
ceeding at law, if you cali that suit.
Three slips, think, were printed # this ar
tlcle- one OF them went TO YiItSison and
was put into the tripartite agreement: one I
think incomplete, was picked m bv
printer, and one remains in NV rloesasioY,
Win Mr.. Johnson's amendments Ithinh
mad complete slin ofmy own besides the
/ ton,- sn1weo BeecheT, which made the
ioufIh. think these slips were struck of
at two different times. l do not know
"het0er the type composing the article we're
preserved. loaned
JOHN HARMON
one OF these slips. Before the Woodruff
publication be was an intimate friend of
miHe, and often consulted with him about
my affairs donot remember saying TO Har-
mon that did not care what he did with II.
l committed 1t to his care to use as might
, seem best TO him in his discretion. said
{ 70 MIN that l lsft it 70 his judgment and
care. went TO his house. with il. He was
not there snd left il for him, with ? ste
conveying his request, OF which L d. not
now kno~ the phraseology- Mr.. McKelvey,
of the Eagle, asked me te show him his
slip, whica ! think he heard OF through
! b5Tman. So / put ic into the latter gentle
mans hand to De given TO MeKelYey. Har-
mon judged It right This slip was pub
lisned aeeut five or six months after
this, and ] saw Il in the Fagle. 1t
was threatened to be Published in tire Fsgle
before this, and L went down 10 the orfice
TO have it suppressed. IknOw Mr.. McDer-
mott. He used 70 De on the Sunday Press.
/ a f1r &rrrA
tell me OF this before il was published. He
called TO see me in the Golden Age Office
after / said be vas the man that published
it, and ordered him out of the ofice. do
not understand That the copy given to Har-
mon was the means of this publication. 1
heard that Beecber showed the tripartite
agreement to kin3ells. This Was the reason
OF its publication in the Eagle. do not
know where HarmOn's slip ia now, bat
think it was returned with Harmon's letters.
There are only four copies, either complete
or incomplete, of this slip that know of /
think attended Plymouth Church all the
way down 70 the spring of 1870. do not
remember how many times went there in
1866, probably eight or nine. Nor can
recolleet how often in 1867. 1 never passed
but
ONE NIGHT AT lERs. wooDHULL7s-
house, but generally left there about II at
night never stayed there until the small
hours of the morning. went through the
house on one occasion with her, and found
that all the rooms were bare exceut the
room she occupied with her husband This
was shortly after my acquaintance with
her. On the lower floor only the
parlor was furnished. She told me that her
house had been called house of i'll repIte.
and she took me through it TO show it ygas a
bare, empty house. That was one of the cir
cupstanees that led me to believe she was a
traduced woman. L never heard it was
ever furnished duriRg the perlod OF my ac-
quaintance with her. 1 do not remember
that any letters or papers came into my
hands from Moulton after the Bacon publ
cation. Invent 20 him before my sworn
statement was prepared, and asked bin to
see some Of the papers in his possession. I
never copied or received copies OF eny of
these documents which were in Moufton's
possession, for he was very angry when
asked him and ne refused me. The
court here took the customary recess.
After the recess Evarts continued Tilton's
croSs-examinatiOn. The witness had a few
papers in his hand which he handed 20
Evarts. and said: This is the first draft Of
the True story" and is all that have been
able to find. Evarts then read portions.of
the true story" and asked the witness if
be remembered the parts read The
reply was generally that he did not
remember the phraseology, as 1t was
so long ago, but he was of
ment WIS the same as read by the counsel.
Fullerton objected to the reading OF this
paper and getting it into evidence. He ar
gued that IL could not be read and placed in
evidence until it was shown that the orr
ginal was not in their possession. Beech
contenGed that II must be shown that the
other side lost the original document and
made search for it before
ondary evidence. Judge Nelson
ruled that Evarts could continue his reading,
and it wa resumed at the point where the
interruption occurred. At a certain point
IN this reading, the witness wheeling around
in his chair, faced the court, and requested
Judge Nelson to instruct him what an
swers he should make to the questions if
be had written so and so couple Of years
ago.
HIS MEMORY
of what he had written so long ago was not
very clear. and he did not wish unWillingly
to swear falsely. The witness was st his
own request allowed to say whether what
was read to him was like or similar in any
degree to what he had written in his state
ment at that time, and Evarts continued his
quotations, to nearly all of which he
got the answer that the witness did
not remember any such phraseology.
Evarts read the account OF the interview in
the statement between Bowen and the wit
ness, in which the former stated that the
latter should demand Beecher's retirement
from Plymouth pulpit and the editorship
of the Christian Union. The witness replied
that he remembered something like this,
and he also recollected Incorporating
his demand for Beecher's re-
tirement in his ''true storyn One
portion of the statement read contsined
letter from Mrs. Elizabeth Cady Stanton
to friend, after the Woodruff publication,
declaring that the words put into her mouth
by Mrs. Woodruff were all false. The wit
ness continued: have known M Jackson
s. Schultz, OF New York. for some time.
He was a subscriber for the Golden
Age. don't remember saving
that Beecher was responsible for any
quarrel with Bowen, or that the whole