New-York tribune., 1875-02-17
we that is very familiar rule, sa 10

|
taned her innocence explanation Of that declaration Mr.
Tton 10 that effect Isn't proper 70 ask this witness bo~
by what language by what form Of expression MIS-
Tilton thus maintained her innooencef II tne seaf~
ton OF Mr. Tilton 10 that effect upon solemn
occasion establishes the fact in the absepcs Of al
other evidence that is his wife did as-et her pnry
isn't proper for him. explanation Of that declaration, 70
In what she made that asertson' Inc IS1
h Sir the proven by this evidence s that she dd %
way, either express or modified, more on ~"
emphatic and that is arayed Sir, a. fact con
trary the charge which made by Mr. Tflton In hs ~
ton. Mr. Tilton says Mr. Beccher guilty OF Improper
connection with his wife. Why, they say mo hr in
ton your wife constantly denied this you acquesced IN
It you promulgated that denial upou an occasion when
this very subject under examination" Now. isn't h
proper for show Sir, what were the circumstances
which induced him make this declaration, and how II
that the declaration happened TO be made how
the circumstances and surroundings, as wen NJ
the character OF the language used modified the forco and
effect Of the declaration which he made n proof OF the fact
which they establish that Mrs Tton thus asserted her
nnOcence' And psssbe that party upon the stand can
be placed that position Of making naked declaration which,
uncontradicted II conclusive against him Of fact asserted,
without having from him any explanation Of the Circumstances
out which declaration and what the meaning
and the purpose declaration qualified By these crum
stances! 1t 70 your Honor 10 De admissible.
Mr. Evarts-n your Honor please
Mr. Fulle-ton-Just wait moment, II you please
Mr. Eyarts-I want the closing
lAfr Fullerton consults with Mr. Beach
Mr. Beac-Te sugeeston my learned friend s hsa this
brings the question q very simple and present teS sup
pose putting this questionable effect would be tho
precisely your Honor will peceiye-they had asked
upon the stand Have you ever said that
your always maintained her innocence and he answered
Yes" That s Just result Of this evidence IL
change of circumstance; not altering the substance
the the legal eject Of the question Now mat
question had been thus put and thus answered by ths VII
might not ask him how she maintained her innoesnce'
ke sOn :
upon a matter Of form
Mr. Beach-N0, Sir
Mr. EvartsMy learned friend has suggested now, for tho
fret yme that the rules ofeydence different respect
party Who witnes and not party but netting moro
familiar introduction parties than that they ase TO
be Judged regard their capacity 70 give evidence precisely
upon the rules that apply to other Witnesses
Mr. Beach, have the rules Of examination
different Sir have maintained 10 such proposition
Mr. Eyarts-Why the distinction referred TOT
Mr. BeachThe distinction referred to because when you
get declaration from witness what he has said In
attempt impeach him by contradictory staements
no evidence the embodied the language which
have used bat when you get that declaration from
party Sir 1t il evidence against him. it proves the fact uness
il is overboine by other witnesses explained
M Evarts-We II don't efec. rule Of evidence
why il it referred %.
Mr Beach- affect the law Of evidence ba not the
! rales Of examination, a. the gentlemen said.
Mr. Eyas-Thes is some difference suppose c' else
| could lot be insist upon.
! Mr Beach-Yes should think there was.
Mr. Eyarts-We insisting that you say that there lie
difference and then understood to disclain IL Now
your Honor please nothing is than that when party
witness he stands upon the rules Of evidence for
his examination and cosexamn alton that attend the
animation Of every other witness and this nhoLy question
Of examination whether course Of crossex-
lets in certain line Of proof for reexamnaton
and that being question Of the production Of the evidence OF
party production Of the evidence Of any other wit
Of he
! ton leading TO right Of this that extent the
same FOR party for witness. Now, there are other
rules Of evidence dife ent in respect to party,
from what they witness that is 70 say to eontradcta
witness by counersiatements he has made out OF Court
may be necessary lay the foundation, by inquiries OF him.
but TO contradict party by statements that he has made ous
Of Court he witness not you do not need to
ay any such foundation. But that is aside from THIS
! nouirv Now my learned friend insists upon putting
it, that the subject matterIof my cross examination
has been what took place between Mrs. Tilton and
her and Mr. Tton two Of them There tho
complete mistake have asked single question concern
ing any such transaction have only asked him, Did on
certain OCCASION certain question, make GER
tain answer and then all that do
for that situation introduce any explanatory observations
that he made partso that conversation or within any
such range Of conversation the law shall tolerate forming
part OF Il but is all he stated In qualification, and Doi
any recurrence the facts Of the concerning which his
statement made.
Judge Nellson-Win you allow to look at the book Mr.
| Evars
Mr. Eyar,s-At the question and answer' The pamphlet
your Honor asks for the pamphlet
Judge Nelson Whatever you read from
Mr. Eyars ITO Mr. sheaEmahl- The yellow pamphlet
M Fullerton-We have got the yellow pamphlet
Mr. Eyarts-WeI we have got plenty Of them
Mr. Ful.erton-There is copy. Handing book 70 tho
Court L is marked Sir.
Mr. EvartsYour Honor will observe that the fact whether
the wife admitted denied her guilt cannot be evidence r
against either party.
Mr. Beach-That quite mistake Sir
Mr. Evarts-wel, his Honor has said 80.
Mr. Beach-Hs opinion be changed upon reference 70
the authorities then.
Mr. Evars-T understand Il 10 be that
Mr. Beach, understand it not to be that
Mr. Rvarts-We viii see
Mr. Beach-We shall see.
Mr. EyasThat ultimate fact is not matter introduced
Judge Nelson-Where do this question: Is it marked
Mr Fueron-It Is encircled 1t surrounded with red
adee Nelson-You e1torted from the plaintiff the admission
maintained to her mother n my presence that sas
hi. In prn before you. and what 1t Was
Mr. fulerton-AId read H. SIR
Mr. Eyarts-No doubt read H. ,,,
Mr. Pulerton-Not o1y saw IT, but read the whole OF IL
Judge Nelson-Did it adyisedy
Mr Fuleron-Yes, Sir.
Judge Nelson-It was no ground OF surprise No matter
whether was advisedy or not she maintained 70 her
quir kow did she thus maintain 10 her mothestns
Mr. Evarts-Yes Now, II had extracted from him. or er:
toued your Honor phrase k that fact that she maintained
her innocence mother had inquired concerning any
could gone into the conversation; but did not
Judge Nelson-The question whether you virtually and
substantially do do 20 here,
Mr. Evarts-Then comes to this your Honor please,
whether when AK man ne sad 50 ana So hat equiES
Mr. Fulerton-But the fact proved against him be
Nj BeachIt is proving by the declarations Of party
fact