The Grange advance. [volume] (Red Wing, Minn.) 1873-1877, 1875-02-09

dent came to close.
Beecher's Lawyers Unable to Make
Any Points.
At the afternooa session Of the Court,
on Thursday, the cross examination of
Tilton was resumed. The biographical
sketch of Woodruff was offered by Evarts
and ruled out by the Court. Tilton tes.
tilted that he became acquainted with
Beecher when he (Tilton) was sixteen
years old.
Question. Was he man of mature
years and settled position in his profes.
sion?
Answer. I always regarded him as a
big boy and not man at all.
y. In what sense was he big boy !?
A. His manner was large, hearty and
companionable.
Q. Guileless?
A. No, sir.
@. Does thas come within the de-
scription of boy
A. No, sir f; the craftiest people
know are boys.
Q. You use the phrase in the sense of
generosity of demeanor
A. meant to say there was a certain
cunning way in his manner, and he was
fond of things that boys are fond of: 1
thought him the most charming man l
ever knew, and in every way. was
never as intimate with any man as was
in my early life with him.
@. Give us the dates when your opin-
ions began to change.
A. In proportion as enlarged my &C.
qaintance. Here and there one rose
above Mr.. Beecher. He was still a great
man. There were great men before
Agamennon, and there will be great men
after him. The change was unpercepti-
bic in it's progress and beginning.
@. How early did there come to be any
GOODNESS in regard to your affections for
Beecher2
A. | don't know as there was any
great GOODNESS between US in consequence
of our partial differences. understood
that he WAS very sore in regard to my
comments on the Cleveland letter.
Q. Do you ascribe the change in your
sentiments to him or to yourself?
A. think il was in consequence of my
own growth. I was not responsible for
Mr.. Beecher's betrayal Of the Republican
party in 1865. He was, and his church
rose against him and he retracted it.
@. In your discussions with Mr.. Beech
er in regard to the missionary appropria-
ton, did you think you had overmatched
and beaten him!
A. He was wrong. 1t is not difficult
to ovcrreach man who is wrong.
@. In the Cleveland letter matter did
you think you had over matched him!
A. No, sir; all did was to enter my
protest against the crime against liberty
that letter committed. If you ask me to
state that crime will.
Evarts. No. no.
Witness said he and Beecher were al
WAYS personal friends until 1870. He
frequently visited Beecher's house. He
asked Beecher to his house, becausewhat-
ever enjoyment he had he wanted Eliza
beth to share. He always consider ed
himself very much honored when his wife
was appreciated. My first prolonged alb
sence from home on lecturing tours in the
West began in 1864 or 1865. These con-
tinued up to 1872, and lasted from the
fall until the spring. I don't remember
asking Mr.. Beecher to visit my house
during my absence, though may have
| done so. The last time I visited his
house think was in 1866, when brought
| commission in the army from Wash.
ington for his son Arthur. Owing to
disposition on Mrs. Beecher's part, 1
stayed away after that. Mr.. lBeecber re-
garded my action for his son as very
great service. My purpose was affection
ate, and he 50 understood it. He said l
had saved member of his family from
destruction. 1t had relation to his son
who had been out of the army. and after.
wards went back into the army. I had
= portrait of Mr.. Beccher, for which he
Esat ii the fall of 1868, and it was finished
! in the spring of 1869. told him want
ed the portraits of men who had been
connected with my earlier days, and in.
terested in the cause of liberty. These
men were Greeley. Phillips. Sumner and
Mr.. Beechcr. That portrait Was sent to
Moulton's in the summer of 1870, to the
best of my recollection. 49,.
:: The receipt of $500 paid to Page, the
artist, for the portrait of Beecher was
placed in evidence.