davidaulloa/AmericanStories huggingface dataset:
New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-05-01
Evarts, this witness created much amusement by

Evarts. this witness created much amusement by
drOll replies.
Mr.. Evarts asked him if he had ever been con-
connected with q newspaper as a reporter Not az
a reporter" replied the witness 81 published a
paper myself-got out three whole numbers" A roar
of laughter succeeded this reply while Judge Neil
son raped angrily with his gave, and the officers
looked around bewildered.
Into whose hands did the paper passr asked
Mr. Evarts.
:" Il passed into defunct" was the dry reply This
produced another burst of merriment, and the viii
ness covered his mouth with his hand and laughed
slyly at his own Joke. Then said Mr.. Eyarts. II
passed from the undertaken into the hands of the
undertaken The name Of the short-ved paper
was The International.
Mr. Evarts wanted to know at what points the
witness had seen Mr. TiltOn in the Rossel procession
" 1t would be quite impossible" replied the witness
'"for me to designate any particular point where
saw him-that is he added by pause,
think can't tell but peg away, perhaps | can"
Mr.. John SwintOn wasthe last witness called for the
plaintiff. He testified that he had marched arm in
arm with Mr.. Tilton from near the point where the
Rossel procession was formed to the place where 1t
disbanded and that Mr.. nlton had not walked with
Mrs. Woodruff or Miss Clahin. Mr.. swintOn proved
to be an amusing witness when cross-examined. He
had stated that he had allowed the procession 10 get
out of sight and had attempted to head it off by cut
ting through side streets, and that he had finally
reached il near the middle where he found Mr. Til
ton from that point he added that he could see
neither end of it.
WAS it on trot'" asked Mr.. Evarts. Well
replied the witness, Pm of an indolent habit and
perhaps as went along l was musing on the In
finite" "And you struck the infinite quickly re-
turned Mr. Evarts about the middle so that you
could see neither end of it,"
The Court adjourned half an hour before the usual
time by request of the plaintiffs lawyers, whose wit
nesses were not all at hand. On Monday they will
produce other testimony regard TO the Rossel pro-
cession, and will also introduce testimony con-
corning Mrs WOodhulls relations TO the case
New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-05-01
WHAT WAS NOT SAID BETWEEN GEN. TRACY
AND MRS. MOULTON.

Mr. Beach, am not going to say any more.
Iaughter.l ITO the witness. Did you have, IN SUD
stance this conversation with Mrs. Mouton at the time
referred TO:
Emma, you a brave woman You have saVeu L sne
old man to-day have just come from him. ana ne nis
his love you and says he relies upon you 20
hm;" Mrs. Mouton replying 81 don't know now wv, eau
him >; and you replying TO that : VIII ls yV n
Burn Franks long statement and burn all the papers NJ
has the subject 10 which Mrs Moulton SAID tia
the time has passed for the destruction OF papers 10
which you said, Won't you destroy the papers II Jere
miah Robinson advises 7" and Emma said, No Non
do that on any ones advice" 10 which You said
II Frank ever that statement and letters you WILL DC
ruined. socially financially, and in every way
A. You ask me had that conversation. IN substance
O. Yes. A. had conversation with her on the SUD
jects-
@ Answer me that. A. I will in Uoment-on the SUD-
jects alluded 90 there.
O. WHAT A. had a conversation with her
O. Did you a conversation in substance Ike tna'
A. No. Sir; not in substance like what you have read 10
O. Very well. II is easy to answer that
Mr. Evarts-He going TO state, not what the con
versation was that he had conversation WIN her
on the subject.
New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-05-01
THE PROCEEDLNGSVERBAITM.
GEN. TRACY's CROSS EXAMINATION CON
TINIJED.

GEN. TRACYS CROSS-EXAMINATION CON
TNUED.
The Court met at IL a. NJ, pursuant TO ad-
ournment.
Judge Neilson-we will proceed. gentlemen
Benjamin F. Tracy recalled, and his cross-exaIn-
nation resumed
Mr. Beach-Have you been consulting with MT EVarts
this morning IN regard 10 your testimony a MI
Evarts-
O. Have you been consulting with him in regard 70
your testimony A. cannot say that He said To me
that he should probably ask question, half minute
before took my scat here.
O. A half minutei A. Yes the last thing he did
O. How long were you in consultation with him A
Long enough for him say me, al shall probably ASK
yOu -
O. Wait moment! A. Excuse me. Long enough for
him 70 pronounce a sentence of half dozen words,
probably.
@. Ia that am A. That is all, Sir on the subject
O. That is the whole length of the conversation yon had
with himi A That is the whole length OF the CONVERSE
ton that had with MI Evarts this morning on the sub
ect Of my evidence talked with him in other respects
on another subject entirely.
@ Not on the subject Of the case Not on the SUD
feet Of the case, OF the evidence OF the case.
O. Or on any matter connected with the case A A
matter connected with it, in regard to me personally
yes, Sir
New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-05-01
THE DEFENSE DECLINE TO CALL MRS
TON

l1L1ON
Immediately after the closing of the case for the
defense Mr. Beach arose, and after remarking that
during the course of the trial many references had
been made to the fact that there were legal Obsta
cles in the way of Mrs. TiltOn's becoming witness
against her husband he announced that the prOsecu-
ton would make no objection whatever and would
waive entirely any legal objection, which they
might have the right to make, 10 Mrs. HltOns
being called as a witness by the defense. Mr..
Fyarts replied that the question whether
Mrs TiltOn could be witness in this had
never been an actual question. The law" said he,
prohibits it the policy of the law prohibits IT..
the general sense of the wisdom OF that law pro-
nibits IT." The defense he continued had no Opin-
ion and no view that their case needed any more
testimony than they had produced Ali questions
about their duty TO introduce such evidence were
hypothetical. and he should not have alluded 10
them in the least but for the proposition of the
plaintiffs counsel.
Mr. Beach replied that he thought Mr. Evarts was
mistaken ID his view of the policy of the law and
the question whether a wife should be allowed to
defend herself when placed in Mrs. TltOn's position.
Mr. Evarts finally said that he did not regard con-
stipulation between the parties in opposition
10 a law which excluded witness on the ground of
public policy as making him or her competent.
Judge Nelson remarked that the offer having been
made and the question presented, and the learned
counsel for the defense thinking it their duty to de-
chine TO accept the suggestion he felt grated that
the lady was not 10 be called. The vexed question
of Mrs. Titon's becoming q witness. which has led
TO 40 much rumor aud conjecture, was thus finally
satfled
New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-05-01
MR.. TlLTON's PLACE IN THE ROssEL PRO
CESSION.

The plaintiffs counsel began their evidence in re-
buttal by introducing witnesses TO prove that Mr..
Tilton did not ride with Mrs. Woodruff and Miss
Clafin in the Rossel procession in December 1871,
and that Gen. Ryan had been mistaken for Mr. Til
ton The first witness was Charles G. Stanley a
journeyman carpenter of Brooklyn, who had seen
the procession, and who testified that he had
seen Nj, TiltOn walking with a gentleman during
large part of the march of the procession. His evil
dence was followed up by that of George w. Maddox
a real estate broker of New-York, who had been in
the procession. He testified that be had seen Ar
Tlton walking in the procession, and not III company
With any Lady. On his Experimentation by Nh.
New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-05-01
Mr.. Beach-Certainly not, Sir; certainly not. Z

Mr.. Beacb-Certanly not, Sir; certainly mott
Mr. Evarts-T supposed that what said was said In
the camest manner and with the utmost good faith and
with the best Intentions and yet my learned friend has
chosen TO characterize what said al mnatory.
Mr. Beach-That is not Opprobrious
Mr. Evarts-I think IL is Whether il s as opprobrlous
az some epithets might be
Mr. FullertOn-It is BROOKLYN term Sir, not nsed IN
the ordinary Laughter
Mr.. Evarts-He says 1t is NIT. II was said IN tone
and with apparent feeling, II my remark implied some
discredit. had no such intention.
New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-05-01
THE rILTON-BEECHER TRIAL.
THE DEFENSE RESTS, DECLINING TO CALL
MRS TIITON.

THE DEFENSE RESTS, DECLlNiNU ~ NAbS
MRS. TILTON.
NJ rRACYs CONVERSATIONS WITH MRS MoULToN
INQUIRED INTo-oNR OF THIN DECLAkED Di
TIE WITNESS TO BE OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES
Az TO THE SUPPOSED POSSIBILITY OF IHE DE-
srRuCTIoS or THE SCANDAL DoCUMENIs-Mh'
rp.cy TIE LAST WITNESS FOR THE DEFENSE
PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL OFFER TO ALLOW MRS.
ruroN no TFsTIFY-MR. EvARTs DECLINES THE
pRopOsrrroy-oPENINa TESTIMONY FOR THE
PLAINTIFF IN REBUTTEI-CHARLEs c. STANLEY
oro w. MADDOX, AND JOHN swTNToN TESTIFY
ABOUT MR. THROWS PLACE IN TIE RossEL PRO-
CESsIoN.
The cross-examnation Of Gen. Tracy was finished
YESTERDAY and the defense then rested their case.
The plaintiffs counsel offered to consent to the call
ing of Mrs Tlton as a witness by the defense, but
the offer was not accepted. In the afternoon the
prosecution began to call their witnesses in rebetta
Charles c. Stanley, George W. Maddox, and John
swinton were called 10 testify in relation TO the Ros
pei procession in December, 1871. The Rev. S. NJ.
Rel. D. D. of New jersey, the Hon. b. Rice of Des
MONIES, Iowa, the Hon. A. Fl. Sawyer Of Jefferson
Co.. N T. the Hon. James Riley of New York, and
s. Y. southau of Virginia, sat on the bench. The
Rev. Dr. Fuller Of Baltimore, Md, occupied seat
Among the counsel
New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-05-01
MR. WOODRUFTs INFORMATION ABOUT
THE MONEY TRANSACTIONS.

O. Well, that answers it, Sir. Yesterday |
omitted you question in regard TO MI Woodruff
and the subject OF your having cOnversed with him in
regard TO money for Mr. Tton his family furnished
by Mr.. Beecher-after the conversations 10 which your
attention directed yesterday, did you not have an
interview, and shortly after llast Summer, though
think it was interview with Mr.. Woodruff, in which
reproached you for having revealed to Mr. Moulton
fact that he M Woodruff had told you in regard to
money! A. Yes, Sir; did.
Q And did you apologize to him for having revealed
its A. In q sense apOogzed.
@. Well do you still say that Mr. Woodruff tid not give
you any information in regard to money furnished by
Mr. Beechert A No say he did.
O. And when do you say that wasl A. say that that
was from-not less than three-in my Judgment from
three 10 ak months after interview Mr. Moultons
house on sunday / remember it very well.
O. And at what interview 1t that you conmun
Gated Moulton the fact that had obtained this
information from Mr. Woodruff A told you yesterday
that il was at interview that had with Mr.. Mou
ton between the 18th and 10th Of July 1874, think
New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-05-01

substance say to Mrs Moulton, Tho truth must not
come out in this case Mr. Beecher must not go down
think Of the effect upon the church, and s demorazng
effect upon young menu A. No. Str; never had any
such with Mrs. Moulton, except the last
phrase probably-the subject of the demorazing effect
OF this scandal has the suDject OF conversation be-
tween Mrs. Moulton and myself
New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-05-01
MR.. RICHARDS's APPEARANCE BEFORE TIKI
COMMITTEE.

COMMITTEE.
@. Did you see Mr.. Richards when he was
before the Committed A. did.
O. Did you have q conversation with him at the place
where the Committee met before he presented himself
TO the Committed A. did.
@ Did you ask him any questions 10 regard TO what he
knew A. did.
q. Did you ask him whether his sister had ever
fessed to him TO adultery with Mr. Beecheri A. did
did in substance, think.
q, In substancei A. No, did not; that is not the
form OF the question.
Q. Well, in substance that A. No asked him If his
q. One moment A. Excuse me.
q. do not ask what you asked him Did you not, in
substance inquire Of him whether his sister, Mrs Tt0n
had admitted him adultery with Mr.. Beecheri
A. don't think did, Sir.
q. Did not in answer 10 your question, Mr. Richards
say TO that be declined 70 answer IT, OF in substance
thati A Mr. Richards declined 10 answer
@ Oh don't ask what was-I ask you II he did not
say that, in substancei A. Well say don't remember
putting such question to Mr.. Richards.
@ Then you do not remember his declining TO answerf
A. On, yes, Sir; remember his declining 20 hold any
conversation with communicating to NE anything
Of what he knew in regard to this case.
O. What A. know that Mr. Richards said that he
would communicate nothing to me Of what he knew or
did not know in regard to that matter that was family
matter which he had refused TO be drawn and would
not be drawn.
A. Well did not ask you abOnt that, Sir my question
has altogether different significance. Did you not in
that interview put question to Mr.. Richards calling
upon him whether his sister, Mrs Tlton
had confessed admitted to him (Mr Rchardsl or to
Richards his wife, the fact Of Illicit connection,
adultery sexual intercourse, with Mr.. Beecheri A
No. slrnot specifically you put it, nor in substance
that
O. asked yOu whether yOn in substance, put any IN
qury OF that characeri A. answered YOU not in sub
stance
O. Very well Now, did not, in answer TO such an in
qnry upon your part, Mr. Richards decline 70 answer
any such nterrogatOry A. Mr. Richards declined to
any interrOgatOry and me notice that he
would any interrogatOry concerning his family
relations.
O. Well have got that befOrei A. We'll.
O. Now, such inquiry, in Substance, put
him. and did Mr. Richards then decline 70 answer II
and did you not III substance, repy THAT won't do (;
that in substance airms the truth Of iti" A No; can
tell you what did Tanspire, Mr. Beach, If You wish to
know exactly.
O. Well you have very often addressed that to me, and
you have found that your very kind offer has not been
accepted A. know it has not.
@ And won't he accepted in future 40 yam can keep
II back A. You frame question to call for particular
answer which cannot give
New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-05-01
THE sUMMOYING OF Mr.. TILTON BEFORE
THE COMMITTEE.

O. Yes. Were you present when Mr.. Tilton
was summoned before the Committee A. don't remem
Der If you will call my attention to the place where it
occurred I can refresh your Observation-Disclosures my
recollection
O. Well it was in the street. Sirthat is pretty ndef-
mite plaee-as get it, in front Of the Acad-
envy Of Musici A. Who present beside I don't
recollect.
@ Well don't state just A Well, don't
recOllect.
O. HOwi A. don't recollect.
O. Don't you recollect that You were present when he
summoned before the Committee and that you adj
vised him not to goi A. No, Sir; don't
Q. Will you swear you did mott A. No, will not
swear to that don't recollect the at all
GEN. BUFFERS WRITTEN OPINION.
Q. You stated yesterday, Mr.. Tracy, that the
New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-05-01

or prepared or sent forward TO you by and from Mr
Butler was returned to him. A. Yes, Str that H. STATE
as stated yesterday that 1t was found INDY young
man who was Overhauling my papers and regulating
them this Winter and directed him TO put IL IN an en-
yeope and return it Gen Butler. directed to Boston
O. DO Won know whether It was put in A. Idont
know sir assumed It was, and have never inquired
since.
O. Have you received two letters from Mr. Butter re
auesting the return Of that document A. No, Sir.
O. WHAT A. No, Sir; Mr.. Butler requested the return
OF II. . .
O. We'll don't A. never received any letters tna'
am aware OF, Sir, requesting It's return.
O. Mr. Tracy You have been very active In this matter
In all the departments OF this scandal on behalf OF MT
Beecher have you noti A. Well the scandal has 50 many
departments that can hardly say that
q. Well, you have got drawn into most OF them' nave
you mott A. No, have not some OF them have never
entered.
@ What one did you keep out ofi A. had nothing 70
do with the church proceedings for nstsnce-one depart
ment Of the scandal suppose.
@ Well, by the church proceedings you don't mean tne
Investigation Committed A. No; l mean the West
charges and the Council.
PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL REBUKED BY THE
JUDGE.
Mr.. Beach-No, no; Mr.. Beecher took charge
Of that
Mr. Evarts-Oh no. that is not part OF Mr. Tracys tes
timony nor of any inquiry that has been made.
Mr. Beaeh-No; that my remark sir, founded upon
the evidence.
Mr. Eyarts-well, we should get into great debate
whether IL was founded on the evidence the result OF
Imagination.
M Beach-we probably won't get into the debate mere
Mr. Evarts-No; but then 1t ought not to be begun.
Mr.. Beach-It is not begun.
Mr. Evarts-YOu began it, l think.
Mr. Beach-No don't think began any debate
Mr. Evarts-You made a statement. as you say now,
based upon the evidence concerning my client.
Mr.. Beach-Yes
MI. Eyarts-That ia matter to be debated TO the
jury.
Mr.. Beach--Certainy.
go, too
Mr. Beach, didn't say that IL could not be continued
II should say that it could not be continued shouu
state an untruth because the gentleman does con-
time It..
Judge Nelson-The real fact is that the observation
ought not TO have been made
Mr. Blackwell, don't know, Sir.
Iudgc Neilson-Nor should 1t be continued lt would
have been better not TO have made 1t, Of course.
Mr. Blackwell, perhaps it would have been better
not 10 have made It, because 1t has brought my lend
Mr.. Evarts TO his feet.
Mr. Eyarts-And you from yours
Mr. Beaeh-From my feeti Oh, no. no. 1t will be
long ,me before the gentleman shall succeed Sir, in
throwine me from my feet he had better not indulge in
any triumphant ancipations until the time arrives.
Mr. Evarts-Only this is not an anticipate on.
Mr. Beach-Speak up loud 80 that can hear you
Mr. shearman-Tt Is matter Of realization, not anci'
patton 80 far this question is concerned
New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-05-01
AN INTERVIEW BETWEEN GEN. TRACY AM
MISS TURNER.

Q. Certainly do; the substance OF partlcu-
lar answer call for. Did you have an interview with
Bessie Turner before she before the Commtteet A
did.
O. Where was IN A. At Mrs. Ovingtons think
O. When did you become acquainted with Miss Turner
A. The evening she went before the COMMITTEE
never her before.
O. And about what time ~ the day did you form her
acquaintance A. Well, / can't tell you definitely 1t
was in the afternoon, some time.
q WheTei A. At Mr. OvingtOns
O. And did you have conversation with her that after
noon upon the piazza Of Mr. oyington's house A |
should say not Sir.
O. Siri a. should say not
q Did YOU have with her in the back psrlorl A
In the parlor-I should it occurred in the back
parlor but | am not certain about that
O. You are right, thnki a. 1t occurred in the back
paror somewhere
O. Do YOU know Mr. A. B. Martini A. dc not think I
do.
o DID Won see a gentleman o. that name at the time
Of your conversation with Bessie Turner sitting upon the
piazza GIT in VI the back parlori A No, Sir
did not.
o. Didn't you see hint A. No, don't know that l
did; don't reculect any such thing.
O. Well. do you remember OF seeing gentleman thore
Mr. Martin stranger TO yOu at the tme-on the occa-
sion when you had interview with Bessie Turner A
/ don't remember any such thing, Sir
O. How long that interview A Wei, nave no
dennite recollection, except that II was short
O. Did you not have interview upon that occasion
with Bessie Turner in which you cOnyersed with her IN
regard to her knowledge OF this discussion, Of over an
houri A. should say not, Sir, over an hour.
@ Will you swear il mott A l won't swear
definitely as to the time; cannot do that.
O. VIII you swear that it not over two hours A.
Yes.
O. You wilt A. Yes
@ And that the only positive oath You will give az
Va11T an. lnaaEr
my best recollection
O. No wait, wait, wait A. Yes am going to an
swer Sir.
@ No don't think You were A. Well, thought SO
G. Is that the only positive statement You will make
in regard 10 the length OF the interview A. Well,
don't know what you call positive statement, MI
Beach.
O. Well mean statement, sworn TO positively, I'M
der oath A. can't say according to the best OF my
recollection, Sir
@ don't ask you that, according 10 your best reco
lection. A LContinuing.l II was not over an hour
@ Very we'll is that all you will say aboutf A. That
is positive will be; cannot be positive than
to give you my best recollection.
New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-05-01

O. You stated yesterday, Mr.. Tracy, that the
document Of which you spoke having been Dictated
New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-05-01

REDIRECT EXAMINATION OF UEN. IhACI'
Mr.. Evarts-Mr. Tracy, at this stage last
spoken Of did your efforts TO extngush the papers, -
separate destroying the papers, what had occurred
that made distinction between that stage and thst ms
and the previous time when you had desired TO eInsuish
the and destroy the papersi A The scandal mad
become public; the Bacon letter had been written ana
part Of the letters quotedtbe public documents quoted
40 that understood perfecty the extinction or de-
strucon OF the papers then would add fuel 10 the name
aud there was object exngushng the papers afteS
part OF them had been published-made public.
O. DO you remember its being feeling OF anxiety on
socitude your part lest these papers should Do a.
sroyedi A. do, Sir very well and Ae subject Of co.,
veTsation also.
The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1875-01-13
STATE NEWS.
ANnRoscoGeIN COUNTY.


The Supreme Court of the United States mas 1s
lately delivered an opinion in relation to the
construction OF a bill of lading, 10 the case OF
Evansville & Charlottesville Railroad Com'
pany. against the And roscoggn Mills OF Lewis
ton. There the railroad company had gwen q
bill of lading, agreeing to carry IVY Dales a
ton from Columbus, Miss, to Boston, Mass
The bill contained a provision that the com
pany would not be liable for nre from any
cause whatever This provision was constructs
by the United States Circuit Court Ior tne US
trict of Indiana, to apply only to loss on Tue
part of the route owed by the rat th;s boldi"o
ny. The Supreme Court reversed THIS noldlns
that the exemption applied to all the route
mentioned in the bill of lading. -..
CUMBERLAND COUNTY. us.
Snow two and half feet deep in the woods
at Naples, making it just right for logging, OF
which there is a good amount done IN tnat VI
cinty, mostly oak to be sawed into slaves.
More or less timber is being sawed out fol
spring building, etc. r ,8RfkiD
p "a AZ OXFORD COUNTY.
Mr.. VIM Chase of Paris Hill came near
loosing his life while cutting wood few days
ago His ak caught in clothesline, and de-
scended, edge first, upon the crown OF his head,
cutting through his cap, and infiicting scalp
wound nearly two inches in length.
~. .-.- pENoBscoT COUNTY.
Star Division, No. 10, S. of T.. of Kendus'
keag, has passed resolutions against the reen-
actment of the constabulary law. go ~
KNOX COUNTY. f..J -.sa
A Rocklaud dispatch says that Louis N.
Moves fell overheard from the schooner Frank
Jameson, last Saturday night, during the gale,
aud was in the water about three-quarters OF an
hour. He was rescued in an exhausted condi'
ton, and was badly frozen. -s
SOMERSET COUNTY.
People in this vicinity will miss the familiar
face Of David Lamb, who for several years past
has been actively engaged in searching out the
est resident of Somerset Mills, having. moved
there "a years ago. He was a genial man,
much respected by his townspeople, always
ready to give freely of his restricted means.
honorable and just in all his business relations.
some respects.-Fairfeld Chronicle. -