New-York tribune., 1875-02-17

fendant III whom the law processes 10 seal irVm sPoOuo
the pursuit Of justice, confidential communica-
ton, betweeo husband and wife, there Is this
avenue open secondary and Irresponsible not favorable
searchab OF what happened by these
second hand narratives Now In regard to what has been
rated Mr. Beecher By this witness under the ruling OF your
Honor that Of came in view, not IS having oc
CURED between him and his wife, but as being narrative
that he haa conveyed Mr. Bcecher Now when testimony
cannot from this witness the questono what au
actually occur they seek 10 put In evidence form OF ACCUSE
presented before some tribunal ana tnhh
your Homer will that II 1t were Divorce Oour'
an eqsity suit, proceeding concerning divorce
between these parties that the introduction OF 'he
complainant would not be permitted under cover
Of refutation or qualification OF inconsistent answer
that had been made by witness Nw have before me tne
from the Con Of Appeals onf OF Downs o. Inc
Central r. Co.. In which the was excluded tho only
pretense OF introducing 1t being that it formed part
OF conversation that had been introduced on the other
side; and the Courts say:
"The question was objected to az leading, and that II
was mt to s & s dcsaons procd
by defendant hut tended 10 corroboraie testimony OF
the pantab by the fact that his statements had been consistent
This was not allowable The conversation not proved to
have been part Of the same gvon in evidence oy the de
fendant."
udce NelsonThat would have been fatal proof OF
Mr.. Evarts-[seadingl:
Had been the evidence would have been competent
The plaintiff could proved the whole Of congregation
nected, aud all related to the same subject
Judge Neilson-Tha, found every book have on
evidence for half q century
Mr. Observation-Disclosures Courts are used your Honor In
order to apply them to particular circumstances
Judge Neilson-Yes, Sir.
Mr. Rysrs-And it il not take IT, he impntcd to me as
ncondeate to ask the last consideration OF the
subject by the higher Courts of the State.
Judge Nciison-Oh, no.
Mr. Eyarts-Tn the OF Rouse .. Whlted:
1.-THE plaintiff showed that his property had been applied
the defendants paymeat of note made by the aei
ant endorsed by The plaintiff Proved that the & defendant
the pants Held hat defendant entitled to prove
his statement in the conyeraton th Tue ho'e was 'o
plaintiff debt and he was TO pay It,
And IL nut expressly upon the ground that the law rests
upon the rue vcs the plaintiff awards himself Of state
men admission OF the defendant to charge him. the dfend
ant may avail himself OF any other statement made p h a.
tho sao time tending destroy modify the use which the
plaintiff might otherwise make Of the admission or statement
frs, called out by him. but only whatever is such quan
cation and modification arising part OF that s'ae
mont Now whenever libel in a divorce suit, q
bill in equity, be pat in as evidence per @ III
Of the party who signs and makes IL 10 quay
men that he specifically made an examination wien
ever an authority to that be produced then perhaps
the present proposition Of learned friend which Is to INTRO
duce the bill OF accusation in qualification OF specific answer
may find some strength
Mr. Beach-Iet me correct that Mr. Evarts. This Is not
hu y, Indictment Sir or an equity bill 1t state
mep of facts of evidence submitted to this Examining Com
mee upon their call upon this witness as witness oeioo
them 1t was part OF his evidence submitted to hs oom-
mitee.
Judre Neilson- still think that cannot allow you to read
that paper twas paper previously prepared lt Is not
mart OF the conversation in respect to which they inquired
hut An ndeoendent deliberate act OF the witness preSena
on upon which inquiry and examination was TO be made anu
as has been proved made Think you cannot
| read that paper.
Mr. Beach-Nor any portion of 1t, Sr'
Judge Nclson-Be-hts think this Supposed discrepancy
, has been clearly explained. We have his theory
Mr. Beaoh-Tha may be- Sir. We shall want 10 one' l.
Judge Neilson-You have right i9 ohe' SPe'"'' PO :,
order point exception beng reasonable Ia that sc.
| course.
The Court here took recess until p.