The Wheeling daily register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1864-1878, 1875-02-03

was NlOHS, uc puUIlsicu VIC ''Hu'N"siO''
and justification of me in the independent
which was copied in the Christian Union
with comments attached.
Mr.. Fullerton then read the article as
published in the CHRISTIAN Union, with
comments attached, April II, 1872, and
it was offered in evidence.
remember Beecher dining at Moul-
tons house on February !, 1871; the only
feature on the occasion was this: Mr..
Beecher said to me that he was either
going to have or had had the anniversary
Of his silver wedding; he spoke TO ME
about his popularity and the strength Of
his friends; he asked me if | thought
there was any imminent danger in our
case; | told him that
This Was Good Time TO Resign,
and as he was writing the life OF
Christ, ne could go to the Holy Land to
study the subject more thoroughly. l
told him there were many prying eyes
that it was dangeroy ror him to remain
in the pulpit, and he promised to think
over it; this was all that occurred; was
in New Hampshire when the Woodruff
publication of the scandal was made, and
onmv return home | was tgd it had been
circulating a whole week during my alb
sence. was informed by either Moulton
or Beecher, that they had conference
when it came out, and thought it was bet
ter to treat the publication with silence,
as the best means of killing it; Bcechcr
said if any denial was made it would only
provoke Woodruff to produce it in an
other form, and so it would have to be
denied five or six times. There were
several writings about this in Moulton
study, and at one of them it was propos-
ed to publish card by me, which has
already been given in evidence; | said
that if any card WAS to be published, |
was not the person to do soi that it was the
duty of Beeehcr rs one ofthc parties more
intimately connected to publish it; |
told him he might deny il, and would
not contradict denial; said that if L
published card the public would say
Tiltons wife had been attacked, and he
merely published card vindicating his
conduct with the Woodhulls; | told him
| was angry, that he put on me the
responsibility of meeting the Woodruff
story, and that all the odium was left on
nv shoulders. The Court then took II
recess.
After recess the examination Of Tilton
was continued. He testified that after
the publication Of the Woodruff story,
there was an interview at Moulton'S ;
house, at which those present were Moul-
ton. Franklin B. Woodruff and Tracy;
it was on the first Sunday evening after
he returned from New Hampshire; he
was sent for to go to Moultons honse,
where he saw Frank Moulton.
Mr. Eyarts objected to the testimony
concerning the interview, us Beechcr was
not present
The Counsel told him to take an cxccp-
tion.
The witness said that on going into the
study he saw Tracy and Woodruff; he
told Tracy that the interview was against
his protest, and that Tracy had been
taken into consultation without his
knowledge or consent; he then said that
before going any farther, he wished Tracy
to give him II pledge that if he (the wit
ncss) and Beecher came into collision
Tracy would not act IL Bcechcrs coun-
sci.
Mr.. Tray replied that he gave that
pledge both ~ II lawyer and a, 1t gentle
man.
The witness said very well.
Mr.. Tracy was then handed Bccchcr'S
letter of contrition, which he read four or
five times and then exclaimed. "Grcat
God" and said that the man who could
express such heart break, had already
been punished enough. lie said that this
was case in which lying would be right,
He said to the witness that publicity
would not only ruin his wife and Bcccher,
but would ruin the witness, rs the world
would never forgive him for Condoning
his wifcs crime.
The witness then replied that
he knew that publicity would
ruin all the parties but that his great
anxiety was for his wife. At II subsc-
quent interview in Moulton's study
Bcccher showed some letters and said
that his sister Mrs. Hooker had threat
cned to invade his pulpit and read from
his desk confession of his IN connection
with Mrs. Tilton; the witness and Moul-
ton read letters which were from Mrs.
Hooker; Bcechcr asked what could bc
done and witness said that he would see
Mrs. Hooker and stop the mischief he
did see her at the residence of II female
friend of hers in New York as a matter
of delicacy he did not think in necessary
TO mention her name. The Court
said it was not necessary, and n
lively dispute took place between
Evarts and Fullerton in regard TO the
ground on which the name should he
withheld, although both said they did not
want it. Judge Nelson said the trouble
in Court in this case was that both Of
the counsel were right Laughter.
Mrs. Hooker ReIents.
Witness said he induced Mr.. Hooker
to relinduish her design when he saw
Beecher afterwards the latter expressed
his gratitude; Bcecher also made some
remarks concerning Mrs. Hooker which
witness did not deem it necessary to re-
peat.
Mr.. Evarts objected to the last remark
of witness as an inuendo, and there was
another frultlcss war of words between
the counsel.
Witncrs said that about fortnight
. nm n