The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1875-01-27

was Ia cont oversy then, after tnat being ex
nausted, we submit the question whether that Il
the letter concerning which he mad the converse
ton with Mr.. Beechcr. But the doubt the whole
doubt that Withdrew the TACT once testified tC
that he shows TO MIN that he either read 1t to hin
or it was read 10 him. that dlsurbs the whole mat
otter letters. when he stl h. d. ana the matter
was reserved now TO snow that there were nc
other letters, and we submit that we nave entirely
Identified that letter. There Is no doubt OF the
TACT mat The letter was shown to him, and 1t was
talked about with Mr. Bescher.
Mr. Evarts then added-We now offer II In evil
dence.
Mr.. Reach--rhis question, when it was pre-
seated 10 Your Hoaor, IN me original oner OF TINS
paper, was decided lully after arguments by coun.
sci. Your Honor then Thought that the paper was
no sufficiently Identified TO authorize the defend
ants counsel 70 have IL marked for ldentlncaton.
Your honor SAID TO counsel that the paper was not
SO idenuhed; That ne wasn't within the control OF
the plaintiffs counsel, and Your Honor permitted
them 10 withdraw it, Has the evidence now given
changed the attitude or the question: The wit
ness says he knows he had other letters from
Clark, but ne does not know what mas become OF
them; and the fact that he had other letters. and
( whether they arc lost is not in controversy upon
this question:. He says that ne cannot
reeol!ect whether this letter or any OF the
( letters which have been destroyed were SHOWN 10
Beecher or formed the subject OF Conversation
between them. Tue cnief tenor oil the letters was
in regard to the condition OF the Golden AGE, and
was matter OF discussion between this witness
ana beecher,' and thar or course, is competent;
out how the correspondence or clark In written
lorm 10 Moultun, not communicated 10 either Oh
these parties bearing ON ihs subject is admss.
Die. cannot sees and submit that this question
having been passed upon by Your Honor, ana the
/ defendant having necn allowed an exception, mat
puts an cad to It's being reintroinced
Mr.. Evafts--Ihe evidence IS he Is not right IN
ing ether this letter or the oiner Is admitted
We are perfectly clear. This reads thus 20.
not clear IN regard to tnat; want to cor ect my
abatement in regard 10 that; the letter was SUB
the Jnoge i think, Mr.. Evarts you Will have TO
Identity The letter Iurther.
Mr. Evarts-Ne have got through with this
witness IN regard 10 his letter.
The Judge--ll Is MOI sufficiently Identified.
AR. Lvarts-Yoar Honor Will please note our ex-
Nj. Moulton resumed-I do not recoliect
whether that letter was shown 10 Mr.. Tton;
do not recolect whether the letter was subject
Mr.. Evarls-I submit the whole subject OF this
letter Is gone over oy this witness IN his direct
examinations.
The Judge-Tnerc may have been another letter
on the same subject.
Mr.. Evarts-We are not 10 take the assumption
tnat there vas another letter.
he Judgc-ue SAID he had other letters.
Mr. Evarss-Well. Your Honor sees that as il
stands this present examination there is no
clear statement or memory that ne ever any
other letters. He has not said 50 Ior some time,
aud we would ike 10 present such urtner evidence
as may be necessary. 1t 10 not subject OF dis
cussion as To whether IL shall be reserved or eX-
Guided
rhe Judge-I exclude 1t because II is not sum.
Moulton continued-Tne conversation in which
the letter was mentioned was VITA Mr. Beecher,
Golden Age; i think l repeated to MI BE echer
what AIR Clarke had SAID about 1t: do not know
whether | repeated what Mir. Clarke had SAID.
whether told MIR. Beecher that Mr..
Clarke had said he would get some other
person than himself TO purchase the Golden Age;
| i do not recollect telling Mr.. Beecher that Nj.
Ciarke's trial TO ind such person had iaed
| do not think told Mr.. Beecher that Mr.. Clarke
said that men he had spoken 10 on the subject had
! sucn painful impressions, II not deep-seated pre-
JUDGES against Mr.. Tliton that they were unwll.
ing to even seriously consider it; Go not recol-
| lect teDg Nr. Bcecher that Mr.. Clarke had been
| blamed lor MAINTAINING connection with such a
| IN al
| Beecher that Mr. Clarke Old me that two or three
men. who had no preiudces against Mr.. Tiiton,
saw no field, no future Tor the paper, and advised
It's going up; DO not remember saying that Mir.
Cake SAID that tue name Oi the editor was a
about IT. II re objected i would tell You ;
my impression - that ala not; don't remem-
SAID that a newspaper man with whom he
HAD convcrsed, ADVISED the starting OF a news.
impression is that did not tell Mr.. Bsecher til al
! Mr Clarke told me trat ne had found on inquiry q
mucn deeper and stronger prejudice against Mr.
Titon tDan he uad imagined; / did not tell him
that Mr.. Clarke sad ne had written this letter be-
cause he could not tel! 1t to luton without wound
ing acerated hearts; do not recoect telling Mr..
Beecner mat Mr.. Clarke informed me that he
thought Triton ough: TO go abroad INTO another
atmosphere and IN new scene; think COM
muuicated the substance the letter oil Clarke re-
ieTrug to the purchaser OF the Golden Age 70 Mr..
Beecne-; | 90 not think the letter you have
handed Inc IL the referred 10 will swear that
1t Is my Impression that &c Is not the letter;
the letter to wnch / refer a shorter one than
this and SIMPLY communicated the intention OF
Mr.. Clarke TO purchase the Golden Age; Will try
10 lnd the letter, and II do find it viii pre- Sc n I
it 70 you; the letters from Mr. Beecner that /
nave produced are all that had IN my possession
have DESTROYED some; certainly destroyed them
intentionally; l would not have done so uninten.
tlonaily; supposed i destroyed them when re-
ceived them; nave destroyed none since re-
Mr. Evarts-l mere was letter identified and not
put IN evidence.
post marked, "Brcoklyn. Nav 6, r. NJ. New
YORK. Mrs: Elizabeth K !Iton, care Theodore TIL.
Mr.. Snearman-Wnat will be the number Of
this ?
MIR. Beach-is
writing tnat envelope, Mr. Aionlton lis that
Mr.. TIlton's handwr,ngY A. Yes, sir.
his handwriting A. No, sir; not the whole OF 1t,
but tie superscriptlon.
rue Judge-The answer applied TO the direction
OF the letter.
Mr, Evarts,Giye US the letter That was In that
envelope. (rO the Court)-I ask them to produce
the letter that was In that envelope.
MI. Morrls-l say, what letter was in it?
Mr.. Shearman-we ASK them to produce the let
ter written by Mr. hilton to Mrs. 11lton FEBRUARY
Mr. Eyarts-We now ask the stenoarapher to
Mir. snearman-''B 4a.r
BY Mr. Tracy-Is that the letter that came In
that envelope Mr.. Moultons tsxRwlng letter.. A.
Mr.. Evarts-I ask to have them both marked Tor
Identification; '.B 30 and 81" for Identification.
By ar. Tracy-we have called upon You Tor all
envelopes IN which letters were received by you
and you nave producci tnree. TWO OF which nave
been marked for iden tincation. Have you any
otheraf
the Judge He can answer II he has got any
more than those produced.
Witness contnued-I have not any envelopes
that belong 10 papers that nave been put IN ev.
dence; think they were destroyed | do not re.
member destroying tnem; do not really remem
Der whether there was u lettes enclosed from MT
Iilton in that envelope marked exhloit No. 40.
Mr.. Fullerton-I think there ought to be some
way OF quickening the other side In their move
ment5.
Mr.. Evarts-wnat do you SUGGEST
Mr.. FuiiertOn-l suggest you 20 90.
Mr.. Evarts-lnat Is what We intend to DO.
Mir. Fullerton-it takes you too long TO make
suggestion.
Mr. Evarts-would you 70 on any quicker II yor
were Our side
Mr.. FuIlerton-No, II were on your side woult
not 20 on al ALL
witness continued IL have identified Mr.. Swan
as Mr.. Armours partner; do not reconect say ms
to him since tue publication OF MIR. Beecher'
statement that you and Mr. Beecher vera in con
troyersy, aud tnat you had got 10 destroy MIN Of
he would destroy you; do not remember talkln: