Delaware tribune. [volume] (Wilmington, Del.) 1867-1877, 1875-02-25
NEW YORK.
QUA MIo.wEEk LETTER.

TER oRvAr IRIAL-"A SECTION OF TIE DAY OF
JUDGMENT "-rAcTIcs OF rHR OFFENCE PARAD-
lNa MRS. TI1roA-AOW RICHARDS CANE TO TEA.
riFY-AND soNx OTHER AATTERs.
Special Correspondence QftAs Commercial
Nxw YORK, Feb. %.
Yesterday being legal holiday, tho Court was
compelled to adjourn over until to-day. The
defence would have willingly gone on. There
was nothing to gain by three days recess in the
cross-examination Of Mrs. Monitor, which was
almost completed. But to the plaintiff counsel,
now near tue close OF their Case the leisure thus
afforded for perfecting 1t WAS III advantage which
could be read in the twinkle Of MIR. Fullerton's
eye.
The new epgram contributed by Mr. Beecher
through Mrs. Moulton. to the literature Of the
scandal. Calling that remarkable woman
"a SECTION OF THE DAY OF JUDGMENT"
found application in everybo 1ys mouth, to the
developments Of the last three days testimony
At no other part Of the trial has there been
| scene Of such brGsthiess interest ~ during the
| unlocked for testimony Of tho last four Witness
es. Mrs. Tilton's wetnurso and her brother ;
Mr.. Beecher's chief pillar and admrer, Mr.. Bell
aud his lady confident and conscience, Mrs.
Noulton.
Again an compelled to say that the tactics
the defence are damaging, and also to revise
my Judgement Of Mr. Evarts personally. His
generally urbane demeanor toward MIR. Tilton,
| whom everybody expected him to attack, witt,
their more or less cordial support misled me
into All encomium on the refinement Of his na-
ture which his aggression on the first lady ex-
posed tn his cross OK animation Mrs. Monlton)
and on the first gentleman in the same situation
whose painful circumstances appealed 10 the
special sympathies Of every person OF ordinary
humanity-Mr. Richarda-now requires me- to
retract with all possible emphasis. And the
policy Of these attacks was no less reprehensible
than their spirit They did for the plaintiff mort
than any dramatic skill OF his counsel could do
exciting strong sympathy for his witness and in
dgnation against their assailAnts
MR. RICHARDS POSITION
demands word from me, ~ I have had oppor
tunity to understand it Never was witness.
though when compelled to answer lie gave hi,
answer out and out, instead of sullenly waiting
to have it dragged out by syllables. But there
is no doubt Of the fact that lie had buried the
painful circumstance witnessed by him, Ia the
confidence Of his two nearest friehds-wife Ant
brother-who never betrayed it, and that the
eventual extraction Of it from him in court wa,
equally unexpected to himself, to the plaintiff
Tilton and to the counsel. 1llton never heart
OF it until he heard it from the witness stand
Counsel had no idea OF 1t whom they subpRnaet
him.
! THE SOLE CLUE
that drew him into the case was cautious hin
he bad let drop for his brother-in-law, long ago
prior to any discoveries, in the form OF Ill in
1uiry whether lie (rilton) was aware how FIRE
Iuently Mr.. Beecher was visiting his wife, All,
whether he was satisfied that his visits were al
together Of a pastoral character. This circum
stance recalled to mind, led to his summons +
, testify.
THE POLICY OF TIE DEFENCE,
i which is an assumption, not merely OF inno
cence, but Of unimpeached Innocence for MR.
r Tilton, required that lady on account OF he
/ brothers testimony to appear Oh the followin
a Sunday at his residence ut Mount Clair. She a
!? tended there the Congregational church, an
held almost Il Gpee after service.
cannot be mistaken in public opinion when
say that the case is already gone against NJ
y Beechor 1t would be premature with rospe,
+ to all fair and judicial minds, to say this at IL
n present stage, if the defence, among it's sever
Q errors had not committed the cardinal one
y giving itself to the public in advance of tria
il Otherwise, men would say to themselves al
N each other, "wait until You have heard him
s. As it is, they only say, 1--WE hare heard hin
o and 80 they make up their conclusion at one.
re confident from the nature of the case, that not
II ing of great importance can have been omit,
in the testimony on Mr.. Beecher's behalf befo
the Church Committee and the public, last SUI