The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1875-01-20

a let or from Mr.. Beecner. dated August 4.
@ At the t,me taat reply was prepared was any
Q. VINO Ind the writing OF that letter A. Theo-
dOre lllton; do not RENE Der whe her en-
crossed II or not DO not remember If 1t was in
INV ha adwrtIng; I think 1t was engrossed by a
copylst u was IN reply to Mr.. Beechers letter OF
"" Letter handed to witness The witness read the
court court a! the time Having read It. the wissess
SAID. .'rhat IS the document"
Mr.. Evaris-We propose TO read the letter to
which tine document Just read Nv the witness was
answer. Your Honor thought the letter was
not necessary, because the test imony showed the
MouitOn ana Mr.. Beecher before the 2Sth OF July
letters. The real point OF The letters was to show
the friendly relations between these parties. rhe
witness stated that those relations had been
friendly, but that could not be gathered
nss1e tine k there was n nc
Beecher to Mr. Mouton became the subject
OF conference between Mr.. Moulton and Mr..
Triton. They then prepared this answer which
Nj. Tllton drafted and Mr.. MOulton signed. They
then sent IL forth. That therefore, makes II an
part OF the transaction between those two parties
In reference TO the investigation the suppression
OF ne investigation. The letters stood in Your
Aonor's appreciation oil them, as mere letters OF
Mr. Beecher, because. whether or not they broke
on their reiatlons. Your Honor will see by those
Triton IN withholding access to Mr.. Beecher, that
was the immediate concern Mr.. T1lton had with
the matter
Mr.. Beach-rhere was o letter addressed by Mr.
Beecher TO Mr. Monlton on the 24tn OF July making
this controversy. rhat letter, without our 0biec.
ton to IT, 10, believe, In evidence. believe, also
the lie ter Mr.. Beecher to Mr.. Mouton OF the 2sth
OF July, 1874, was also given In evidence.
Mr.: Porter then proposed to read the reply OF
jected TO that letter and it Was ruled out, on the
ground that the statements made by Mr. Beecher
what was sao to- be- the Of & Of
their friendship, were lnadmissible-that any par
ticuars Of the controversy between the witness
RQAcnar cDuld a daC ra tion
or introduce the declarations OF MI. Beecner and
the witness as bearing upon the main lssu, OF this
controversy. am not aware, sir. tnat the letter
to which reference 10 now made, August 5, 1874,
was then presented Ior discussion or consldera-
that letter. or any objection made to 1t on our be-
hall. y he only objection we made, or now offer
to make is to the lie ter OF August 4 by Beecher to
Mouiton. II the object of the letter Of August
Is 70 lay foundation for letting IN the letter of
Mr.. Beecher OIL August 4, why. then, we object, so
far as 1t IL now offered, and so far as 1t IS pro-
posed 10 prove declarations on the part OF Mr..
Triton, in so lar as those declarations are material
to the main ISSUE | see no objection to their in
PRODUCTION; but desire to press the objection
made yesterday, on which Your Honor ruled, In
stated yesterday what supposed TO be the rule OF
law, without any specific examlDdtlOn OF the CUES.
ton in regard to the admlsslOnlty OF The details OF
conversations between a witness and q party
against whom he IS introduced for the purpose OF
proving the presence OF malice or Ill viii. have
looked at the case oil POynton VS.. Poy ltOn, decided
IN the Court OF Appeals and at page $50 OF the re-
port from which quote there Is the following
In action for SANDER the plaintiff as witness on
his own behalf stated on cross examination, that he
had litigation WITH the defendant ne was then asked
action Held that the Court below properly excluded
ii was N no way naier,a or pertinent to the issue 4:
only collateral to the issue.
Now, SIR, the authorities seem to me peculiarly
applicable to the preseat question here. The dill
cnitles which supposed to exist becaus Sc
estrangement and Ill feeling between the witness
subject OF the litigation OF this action, and if in
controversy between the witness and Mr..
lions wnicn are material to the main ,ssue
which directly effect .he interest OF Mr..
Tlton and this litigation mere, Your Honor will
perceive by that mode Of inquiry Mr.. Beecher is
permitted 20 produce his declarations TO third
party against US while we were not present. II
necessary, sir, II you will permit me. will look
moment to the opinion winch may be luller than
the marginal note. The opinion says, sir, 'The
evidence proposed to be given by the answer that
SO nucn Of the question as was excluded was in
no way material or pertinent to the issue found
between the parties, and which formed the sub.
cct OF the trial. It's materially constituted solely
its bearing upon the credit due to the plaintiff as
witness, and was therefore, collateral IN Its ma
be made IN another way, Otherwise the trial OF
Issues upon feelings would be often far ex-
tended by them as to obscure the real points In
VOWED In the controversy, and obscure the minds
OF the jurors called upon to decide them. The OBJ
ject OF such Inquiries s to show that the witness
feeling or impulse inconsistent with an i'm.
partial disclosure OF the truth. 1t is material
10 inquire the particular process or the
detail OF circumstances by means OF which that
feeling may have been produced, for the fact
itself Is all that the case can require be proved
and ali that the law will permit to be shown. The
discovery OF the motive under which the witness
and object to be attained, and that can always
be accomplished by the direct inquiry concerning
its existence or concerning the facts them.
improper motives. 1t Is sufficient to show
that the difficulty. Affecting his feelings and
the witness and the party IT. may given
against, and that can always be shown without
sances attending It's rS Sirca anu
rhorlty, Sir, very aonndantly sustans the prop
ositon which / submitted to Your Honor yeser-
day, and which you at once recognized as law.
Now 1t may be SAID, sir that TINS letter OF Mr..
Beecner. upon August 4, necessarily came under
the observation OF Mr.. lilton at the time he was
engaged mutually with Mr.. MOulton IN preparing
the reply to that instrument. 1t viii be ior Your
that letter TO Mr.. nlton-il 1t was submitted to
him, which does not appear-and now lar MS ac-
ceptance or reputation OF the statements OF that
letter may be admissible. Certainly, sufficient
vet mas not been gwen 10 allow the production OF
that letter under that aspect Of the question.
objected to.
Mr.. Beach, object to that letter, or any part
OF that letter which, In the Judgment OF Your
Honor, Will lay a foundation Ior the Introduction
OF Mr.. Beecher'S letter
The Judge-Ar. Evarts may read the last letter.
WHAT MoULroN SAID TO BEEcHER WHEN ASKED
FOR DOCUMENTS.
Counsel Tor plaintlf then read the letter as fol-
l0wS:-
No. 40 RExsES STREET, Aug. g. 1874
Rev. HENRY WARD BKEcHER-
My Dear sir-ln all our acquaintance and friendship
have never received rom letter OF the tone OF
yours August seems unlike yourself and 70 have
been Inspired by the same i'll who had so lament
ably carried your private affairs before committee OF
your church and thence be ore the public.
In reply let remind you that during the whole of
the past four all ne documents and memoir
aDda which you and Mr. Tiiton have intrusted TO me-
have been inrnsted because they had reference to
your mutual dIhereuces. hold papers, either
Of yours or his, except such as bear this
You speak OF memoranda Of affairs not i'm
mediately connected with Mr. TIton's mattern
You probably allude here To the memoranda OF
difficulties with Mr. Bowen, but these have direct
reference 70 your present case with NJ iiIton and
were deposited with me by you because Of such refer
ence. You sneak also OF n letter two from your
brother and sister. and am have Drgotten
the Apprehension which entertained lest Mrs Hooker
should fulfil design which she ioreshadowed to invade
your pulpit and read to your congregation confession
0f your intimacy with Mrs. Titon.
You SPEAK Of other papers, which hold subject TO
your wishes ! hold none such do / hold ay SUBJ
.lect to Mr. Tilton's wishes The papers watch hold
both yours and his were given to me to be subject
20 the wishes Of either Of parties But OBJ
t.AfF hsffft