New-York tribune., 1875-02-16
THE FINAL CRoss-eUEsTIoNs OF THE DE-
ERNSE

FRNSE.
promptlv at II o'clock Yesterday Mr.. Evarts re-
sumed his cross-examination of Mr.. 11lton. FROM
the first il was evident that the questioning by the
defense was drawing 70 a Close and when recess ar
rived Mr. Eyarts announced that he would finish
with the reading of three letters after the interval
The queries followed no regular line of examination.
but were intended to close all the gaps
In the investigation by the defense. The
first question was regarding statement
in the True Story" about Mr.. Beechers
alleged immOrates. which Mr.. Evarts said
lie overlooked when reading 1t last week. The
stereotyped reply Of the witness that be did not
member the exact words, was given. The examiner
next inquired what the witness meant when he
raid that he would shoot Mr.. Beecher if he resigned
from Plymouth Church casting shadow on his
tthe witness's) family and Mr.. Tilton replied that
he meant Just what he said. Would you have shot
hmp asked Mr.. Evarts, with tone Of surprise.
." presume should" replied Mr. TltOn in the most
hstless manner.
After bringing out the denial of the witness that
he wrote or dictated the letter of Mrs TtOn in Sep
tember 1872 IN which she denies the story of crime,
Nr. EvaTts passed to the consideration of events
surrounding the conduct and support of The Golden
Ags. The letter from Mr.. Clarke, formerly its assO
ciae ettOr, in which the writer said that Mr.. Til
toms name milestone on the paper, was offered
1bf lV6 la time, anu dgdlu OuJ lcbJcl
was first introduced by the plaintiff and objected to
By the defense and ruled out. Twice after that the
defense has attempted to introduce it but
has not succeeded, but yesterday most of
its contents were made known by putting
the statements contained in it in the shape Of ques
tions. The witness was asked if he had heard of
pr, ject of starting a new political paper founded
EpOn the situation of politics existing at the time Of
hP. Greeley's death. he had beard of such
tsrprise, but had no part I'D 1T. Then the witness
was asked il he were ever editor of the paper The
Lerosthon and he SAID he was not A prospectus of
that perodical-a little sheet Of paper-was shown,
srd it gave occasion for the first joke of the day.
which Was the observation of Judge Nelson that If
that The RcUOla it very small revolution
f. was ascertained that Mr. Titon received nothing
for The Golden Age when he disposed of it to M
Clarke The money transactions between Mr.. TltOn
and Mr. Moult0n turned to- but that part Of the
inquiry was a dull one. The witness was next asked
wnat induced him to write the Bacon letter. He gave
Eve or Elk reasons which he said made the prOvOca-
ton. The questioning brought statement that the
witness believed that after 1872 Mr. Beecher intended
to strike him down at the first opportunity
The witness was questioned about some
If his statements while under exami-
nation before the Plymouth Investigating
Committee. particularly in regard to his letters
written to the NOAGfcRIJlOnal OOuuCll ne udNluE
sad as is alleged than he did not whether the
scandal came out a result of these letters OF not
I.ere was also close inquiry about the manner in
which his Statement came to be published in
The BrooEIyn Arqus. The witness said that he was
at DenOuico's when he first heard that II had been
published. He repeatedly asserted that be had no
hint Of It's intended publication before it was
printed.
Nj Tit1n il seems from his testimony, has had
no emplOvment since be left The Golden Age, though
lie has an income. When asked what his occupation
had been after that time. he SAID "We, Sir. mainly
struggling to live In city In Which plymouth
Church has 800 men seeking to pull me down. /
have been mainly dealing with this scandal since
last May, fighting for lite" The witness swOre
that Mr. MoultOn had contributed nothing
toward the expenses Of this suit. At this
stage the hour of recess arrived, and the court
adjourned for an hour. The cTOss-examinatlOn
only lasted fifteen minutes after the interval, that
time being occupied by the reading of three letters
from Mr. Titon to his wife, written in 1853. With
out formalty Mr.. Evars sat down his task finished,
and ex-Judge Fullerton arose and began putting the
questions of the redirect examination. The hrst
matter of importance reached was. whether Mr. Til
ton knew that his wife was to leave him, she did
10 1874 soon after her appearance before the
Investigating Committee. He said that be did not
Perhaps the most comprehensive explanation that
the witness has yet made regarding his remarkable
theory of his wifes alleged ln was called out by
Mr. Fullerton's question, how he recOnclled the
statement that his wife loved everything good and
hated everything bad, with the fact that she
is charged with adultery. The substance of the
exclamation was that be had known bis wife at 10
wears was her acknowledged lover at 49, and that he
married her at 20, holding her during the 10 subse-
quent years in his reverence almost to the point
.os1
rapt in her religious guide. surrenderina her con
victons to him, and going at his beck and call. be
thought she sinned one in a trance and that she
would have done his bidding if, like the heathen
priest in India he had hidden her throw her child in
the Ganges OF cast herself under the Juggernaut
1,,r,in0 10 a court officer the witness
osked for the Bible which is used in
svearlng witnesses, and opening it he card
that be would give a still better answer. But MI
Fvarts objected. saying that If Mr.. hilton read
porion of the Scriptures IT would give the DEFENSE
a right TO put the whole book In evidence mat
would be your condemnation" retorted Mr. Fuller
con The latter told the witness. however, that he
need not read
still more literature was added to the already
large collection now in the hands of the lawyers
Resides the letters read during the last moments OF
the cross-examinatien MI. Fullerton introduced MI
Tilton's protest in The Independent against MI
Beechers letter TO the Cleveland Convention. which
the defense had introduced also the portions of the
plaintiffs reply TO Ar. Greeleys letter regarding
voman's rights, which in its reading the defense
had omitted.
The witness was made to give his views of mar
rage and divorce. The former he said was the
pnon of one man to one woman for life, and
possibly beyond life for better or for
worse. His views of divorce, he said were
.harsh hr the MAS of the people of the United