The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1875-05-07

make that all right and l promised to GO
there next morning; after this we talked
about Tilton and some facts, and names
Of women were mentioned which were
strange to me; knew some OF the names
by reputation; was aware that there were
damaging reports about TiltOn in that re.
latiOn; only alluded TO them in general
way and told him something's | had heard;
l said had reasons which induced me to
sever his connections with the paper, and
said these stories told me by Beecher were
new to me and a surprise To me, coming
as they did after his removal; Beecher
gave me no opinion about what he should
do, "a already had decided to remove
Tilton; my mind was made up without
Beecher and he did not change II; Beech.
er urged me to come to his house and
hear tho contents OF these letters or pa
pers, and | believe that was all; | saw
Mrs. BeeCher next day and had about
hall an hours interview with her; don't
think saw Beecher; on New Years day
| made an ordinary call on him; / stated
to him that on the previous Saturday |
severed Mr.. Tilton's connection as cor
respondent Of the Independent and editor
OF the Union; do not think any other
parties heard this; was one Of the found
ers Of Plymouth Church and am connect.
ed with It still; tho sale Of peWs took
place on Tuesday following the Monday
on which l made my New Years call.
Redirect examination-l do not know
what became OF the draft Of the tripRr-
tile agreement which refused 10 sign; |
handed II 10 Claflin, but ! don't know
where it now Is; my recollection 10 that
the paper did not come to me till the
money was paid; | said that when my
self, filton and BeeCher had settled our
difficulties, saw no reason why l should
sign this paper, (Shown u paper marked
"D. ll3." | believe this to be the first
paper shown me.
The witness indicated what hc refused
to sign in the paper, Portions Of II were
marked aud others stricken out,
Mr.. Fullerton-I propose 10 read what
Is crossed out and what ia substituted In
In It's place. | will read what Is erased
first and then read the context, The
words stricken out are Us follows; II de-
clare that these charges, imputations and
innuendoes are without any foundation
in fact, to the best Of my knowledge and
beliefh What is substituted in place Of
this, in lead pencil, Is as follows; "l sin.
COrGly regret having nlade any imputa-
tiOns, charges or innuendocs unlavOrable
to the Christian character Of Mr.. Beech
Mr.. Fullerton to the witnCsS-Look at
the alteration at the head Of the page
upon this paper and say whether you In
tended to erase the word "disavOw"? A,
! did.
Q. What did you substitute in its place?
A, Withdraw.
Q. Withdraw all? A. Withdraw all,
Mr. lIeach-Still the word "disavow'
is retained in the paper which was Subse-
Quently executed,
Mr.. Shearman-Well, disavOw occur
red twice, and instead Of repeating It the
word withdraw was substituted for It the
second time.
Mr.. Fullerton-The original read "and
Iexpressly disavow the charges, imputa-
tions and inuendocs imputed as having
been made and uttered by me-" &c. The
word disnvow is erased. Bowen says II
was intended to be and the word with
drawal substituted in It's place. Look at
the original draft, Mr.. Bowen, and state
whether you struck out this after the
words II know nothing" Did you strike
out the words "derOgatory to his reputa'
tion rs n clergyman and as man"2 A.
did.
q. Did you insert in their place any
thing else? A. ! did.
QIfso. what2 A. Those words lin
dictated In the paperl
Q. Those words (reading) (which
should prevent me from extending to
him my most cordial friendship and conf
dence and christian fellowship."-At The
time OF the arbitration did you know
anything about the existence Of what has
been known as the apology, the letter oI
apology? A. did not that | remember
Witness continued-I think Mr.. TiltOr
called the attention Of the arbitration Il
section 0 Of the contract between tlS, and
also to section 3 with regard to hiS pay
ments or rs 10 the dissolution Of the con
tract.
@. | call your attention to the letter o
February 7, 1871, from BeeCher to Moul
ton, and nsk whether you knew Of its ex
istcnce either At the time Of arbitration
or Mt the time Of signing the tripartit'
nVrpnn,enL7 A, have no recollection o
Il, air, whatever.
@. now call your attention TO th'
letter Of the same date TO Mrs. Tilton, dit
YOU know Of that? A. | did not.
O. Did you know anything Of the ex
istence Of the letter commencing, 9TH
blessings Of God rest upon YOU" II ha
no date, believe? A. No, sir.
O. | cali your attention to the letter o
February 6, 1872, and ask YOU the sam,
question with regard to TINT, commencing
there lindicating)? A. docking at thl
letter.. have no recollection Of II what
ever. ....-
Mr.. lIeach-1s that the Morse letter?
Mr.. Fullerton-Yes, that Ia the one.
Q. Did you know anything at that tim
Ol lie Chafgc which Mrs. llllOn nhu llhu
against Beecher In writing; did you know
anything Of the existence Of any Charg
which Mrs. TiltOn had made agalns
IJeeCher at that time. A. ! did not.
@. Nor Of any tccAntatiOn Of the re
traction? A. Ibid not.
q, Now, Mr.. Bowen, | understand y0l
to say thnt yOu informed Beecher on tn
Monday following January lat that yOt
had then discharged Tilton2 A. did.
q. What time Of the day was that2 A
II was in the evening; II was after tou
o'clock I should Judge.
O. Was II before or after this letter wa
written to you which is markell "Exhibi
Az? A. II was after that letter was re
ceived.
o. You had received that letter bcfor
yoG told lIeecher2 A. Yes, sir ! re
ceivel II in The morning, and | told hin
in the evening.
O. Did you at any time state to Beech
cr any charges which implicated hi
moral character?
Evarts stopped the witness with an oil
lection, and an argument ensued:
Cohrt ruled out the question.
John n. Ionghi, man employed b.
the Delmonico, testified for the pluintiI
in reference to the room In which tn
colored witness (WoOdley) said Tito