New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-04-29

dence are you able to say whether paper read to
that night was, in whole In part the paper that Is
produced here whether the paper produced here in
whole part is the the paper that was read
TO your
Mr. Beach-Obected 10, Sir.
Mr. Evarts-That is objected 10.
Judge Neilson-I think he can answer that
Mr. Evarts-I should think so have had 1t sub
staRtiay from the other witnesses in that way.
Mr. Beach-Haven't had it at all from anybody in that
way. Isn't for him to relate what said, what was
read at the timei
Judge Neilson-Doubtess
BIZ Evarts-Of course il he can.
Mr. Beac-If he cannot do IT, that IL misfortune; his
recollection is at fault Is 1t proper 10 prove what
party read said by comparison through the recolec
ton OF the Witness with another paper not then present
not pretended 10 be then presentamere copy OF when
has been here producedi 1t that cannot be
permitted Sir. Again. Mr.. Tracy he cannot discrim
mate between the paper that read-that is the
uterances Of Mr. Ton giving the contents Of the
and his spontaneous commentaries or remarks upon 1t
he went along We shall get then not all that he said
by testimony OF the witness but the comparison OF II
with what is called the True Story which has been put
in evidence Now, the objection to this is that 1t is the
duty Of the Witness in relating that conversation TO give
his recollection OF az 1t occurred ana he cannot give
us the conversation as to which he Is examined by
ing that was, In substance, like publication In the
newspapers In book, or any other document; that
ID Dy not giving
OF the witness the actual at the inter
view. | submit that this mode of producing what was
said done, or read by Mr. Tlton at the time Of this
conversation s nadmissble. We only get IL by the
recollection from the witness OF the substance OF what
said according to his present recollection. He can
proceed and give the substance don't know but he
might be permitted to take this "True Story" which is
produced in evidence, as memorandum for the purpose
OF refreshing his recollection and saying that this and
that done but adopt this True Story in evidence
otherwise, by other which is mere copy OF the
supposed True Story" standard by which the wit
ness shall say what TtOn spoke that occasionin
accordance with this paper this standard, is unprec
dented, submit, II your Honor please
Judge NeisOn-When made the intimation had in
view the simple idea that IL there letter paper
the witness might be asked whether he had seenwhether
that letter or paper had been shown to him.
Mr.. Beach-Oh, yes
Judge Neison-In which case, of you hand the
paper TO the witness. But this is more complex.
Mr.. Evarts-I assumed-if your Honor will allow me
moment-I assumed that my learned friend would con-
slider Mr. Tracy's knowledge Of the True Story" as
produced in evidence sufficient, without producing the
exhibit itself Handing witness TRIBUNE copy OF the
"True Story."l
Judge Nelson-No doubt But the jury entitled TO
the recollection of this witness to what was said or
what passed
Mr. Beach-wel II the question applies to that it does
not remedy the difficulty
Mr.. Evarts-I know; the objection Is met.
Mr. Beach-Now, am perfectly willing that Mr.. Tracy
should refresh his recollection by looking at that pre-
tended "True story"-pretended copy Of the "True
story" But then, Sir when he looks at the memoran
DUN he must testify from his recollection as to what was
said by Mr. Tilton upon that question.
Judge NeilsOn-Yes thus refreshed or not refreshed
80 that you get his recollection; that is the point
Mr. Evarts-Your Honor will perceive that the question
which framed think Tor intended to- correctly, was
preliminary question asking him whether he was able to
state which Of he will according TO his
recollection whether he is II he is not able 10 state
then his imperfect recollection his complete recolec
ton as it may out will be the subject OF further
inquiry.
Judge Neison-Well 'yOu recognize this, OF course,
that they have right exact his recollection of what
was said.
Mr. Evarts-Oh, agree to that.
Judge Neilson-Because, as to all witnesses it is de-
sable 10 see how much the witness does rec0lec and
how much he does not.
Mr. Evarts-I take all know that H. for instance
an author inquired OF to his being the author OF
composition which published in one OF our reviews
or newspapers you cannS expect him to have commit
ted memory his draft and yet it is the most direct and
explicit evidence upon looking at the pubhcaton-Iha
is the paper that wrote"
Mr. Beach-It il quite different thing from asking
third party whether that the paper he wrote,
cording to his declaration, if made at the time.
Mr. Eyarts-wen, the third party has heard it read
from the draft.
Judge Neilson-Now the witness has the benefit OF see
ing this paper think you should inteTogac him as to
his recollection of what was and read there that
occasion.
Mr. Evarts-I think your Honor will perceive that my
question IL really las meant it to bel whether he can
state Then he can answer yes or no.
Mr.. Beach-Iet what the question is first.
Mr. Eyars-Mr. stenographer will you read the ques-
tioni
The Tribune stenographer-No, Sir; the gentleman
who Just left the court took my notes with him.
Mr. Evarts-I will the inquiry. To the witness
You have before you Exhibit No. WHAT A. I'D, ia"
O. d, ia, being a printed production Of the " True
Story" so far in evidence Upon looking at that are
you say whether the statement read TO you by
Mr. Tton on that night this statement you it
there or any parts that you recognize being in
this statement as read to you by Mr. TtOn A Parts of
IL, certainly
Mr. Beach-wait enc moment. That is not an answer
to the question.
Mr.. Eyarts-Are you able to statei
Mr.. Bcach-The question is whether you are able to
state
Mr. Evarts-Are you able to state whether that is the
same paper or parts OF iti A. | am.
O. Or whether parts OF it arei A. am, in qualified
sense, able to answer your question that am.
O. Well what parts OF this paper now before you do
you remember as having been read to you by Mr. TtOn
A. Well, cannot carry in my mind all this paper have
not read it through can only say from general recOl-
lection that remember documents that were in it
being embraced in this paper that Mr. nlton read, and
remember themes discussed; remember generally
the drift OF that statement but should have to
this item by item before could answer your question
accurately.
O. Well as to the commemorative you any recol-
lection on that subecti A. My recollection ia that the
statement that he read that day began substan
TALLY as this
Mr.. Beach-That object to.
Judge Neson-Oh, tell what your recollection il,
NJ TRACY NV recollection Ia that tement that