The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1875-01-23


Mr. Evarts-I cannot agree to any such substl.
dence whether that was charged IN That paper
1t not ne 'essary that we should produce II here.
Judge-Does tae learned counsel stand on the
| objection in regard TO the paper Just showns
Mr.. Eyarts-Yes. SIR You canEot do IT; you can
| not produce the paper. II You produce the paper
and Should certify 1t you cannot eliminate part OF
the evidence.
introduce the paper tomorrow.
Mr.. Evarts-I shall hold you to your promise;
Mr. Beach-wll you permit me to say, while tits
always very great delight. do not want 70 be
Mr. s a
this plaintiff and his counsel refuse produce
this witness evidence tnat relates To- the subject
Of the Woodruff scandal from beginning TO end.
abundansy in relation to that article declaration
OF Mr. Beecher's that Will ruin him, and where he
Ise e t' ec1 upoa Se
must be stricken out unless we produce the
judge conld not grant that motion without
selecting particular passages. The paper will be
the Court then took q recess until . quarter
after two.
THE RECESS.
At recess q part OF the audience dispersed
among the various chop houses ana 'qunch friends"
which abound IN the vicinity OF the Court House,
and have dinner ready daily for jury and lawyers
at one O'Clock. Although nobody can speak to the
jury on the subject OF the trial loud debates and
witticisms are used In their hearing unconscOusiy
Public opinion is perfectly chaotic on the issue,
and some OF the Brooklyn newspapers have at last
+ begun to take sides In argumentative and denun.
ciatOry editorials.
The principals in the cause returned smiling
IRON lunch, and Eyarts and Fullerton had pleas
ant chat the centre OF the hoor illustrating the
social disposition OF the Bar when OF duty.
AFTER RECESS.
Francis d. Moulton was recalled after recess and
his cross-ex animation was resumed by Mr.. Tracy.
II
It was mad my trst interview with Mr. Beecher
do not remember how long after 1t wus 1t was
not a month; mad an interview, think, preced-
ing that interview in which Tllton, Mr.. Beecher
| and myself were present; have spoken Of TINS
interview before; can't state precisely the date
when had the first visit; do not rene moer that
with Mr.. Beecher 1T was alter the puDllcauon or
should tell you, General SA Tracy, could recol.
lecr; should think 1t was within week; don't
remember the date the scandal appeared; the
time OF the interview to which nave referred In
my direct examination having occurred az my
house between Mr.: Beecher, MIR. Tllton, and myself
view besides that that MIR. Triton had a statements
written OF which he said III Nj; Beecner can
Mr.. Tracy then put this question to the witness.
Now, Mr.. Mouton, read from an extract OF what
Is known as the
ena meaning yoa as yo ooF mas
Mr.. Beach, object to this.
| Mr.. Evarts-Tne Court can take Judicial notice
| y.
MIR. tracy win read the passage, my friend
took pistol"
the genteman reaos from the woodruff scandal.
| Mr.. Tracy he paper Is now before the court.
The Judge-You can read 1t II you know 1t to be
MIR. fullerton-I think no one can say that
Mr.. Evarts-We read in woodruff Clqttn's
Weekly Of May IT, 1873, paper that Is q rep1blca-
ton OF the issue Of Saturday, November 3 1872.
The Judge There seems to be no doubt about
Mr.. shearman-I have the original article, al
though 1t is more convenient to read from the pa.
MIR. Evars~This purports to be republication
OF the whole article, and not a resume.
The Judge-Very well.
Mr.. Tiacy-I read from the extract:-W went to
him and stated the case fully that they were both
pistol ana went 10 Mr.. Beecher and demanded the
| letter OF Mrs. TltOn
! Did you do that?
WitnesS-Do what sir?
Q. What nave just read about demanding tho
MIR. Morrs-I object. Re has already answered
question I OF nat very KIND: :,on, mi. ...,
before. He has gone over this ground with great
Mr.. TracyNHe has said that he never had any
sucn transaction. Now, after reading from the
paper we ask him ifit is trueY
The Ju' 'ge-The witness stated the Ctrcum-
stances In detail, the conversation aud the cir
cumstances Of the pistol and how he recolects the
mir: Morris-And ne denied it every word
Mr.. Evarts-We do not propose to renew that
|
NJ. Beach-rhe popularity OF the proceeding on
the OF the counsel Is tnat they do not ask the
witness simply If the TACT is true but they at.
tempting to draw in this publication by assuming
Now, we 90 not wish our silence to he assumed as
proving that statement OF the counsel.
sarily hostile TO the witness lie should be treated
as every other witness sEoud be treated. That
question Is brstling with hostility to the witness.
TRACY REBUKED
nota fo1 hat
s.brlstles with hostility" Mr.. Tracy was rather
staggered, and sat down and listened to the re.
marks OF Mr.. Beach with apparent humility The
| hgnt against the introduction OF the Woodruff &
Claim story VISA again renewed by the counsel
| for the plaintiff, and Tor few minutes argu-
ments and counter-arguments were thrown to
and fro with lightning rapidlty.
Mr. Tracy said he did not exactly know that he
could Put 1t in any other form, except to read the
extract.
Mr.. Beach, object to the reading of the ex.
tract.
Mr.. Tracy ask you then, witness, If you did
| what is there stated
ne did; that Is statement We do not care any
thing about.
| Mr. Beacn-The counsel does not comply with
the instruction oil Your Honor IN putting the
question.
Mr. Fuerton-How does it appear that there is
Mr. Evarts-He has just stated It, He has fully
stated that the paper was before the Court, and
we had u right TO read 1t.
Mr.. Fullcrton-lt Is physically before the Court,
but 1t Is not IN evidence.
The Judge-rhe paper was drawn to the atten-
ton OF the Court and under the peculiar crcum-
stances 1t was read.
Mr. Fulerton-Can it he pretenued by the. other
side that they consider that publication In evl.
dence because 1t was shown in the direct exam
nation OF the wtness9 That being so, let US pro-
coed step lurther This part winch they now
pretend to read Is not enough under that ruling.
L anything IS enough 1t Is the charge against Mr..
Beecler and that aione. Now they 40 not propose
to read that charge against Mr.. Beecher, but they
propose to read something else, which something
else Is not enough because the latter paper Is
production IN evidence. hold they should read
that winch was within Your HOnors ruling and
nothing beyond IL, because there Is nothing
palmer tnan II single paragraph be read 1t does
not follow That the whole production should go IN.
The Judge-What constrained the Court To let
| I'M atiLn L.