New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-04-27
REDIRECT EXAMINATION OF MR.. PAR.
FRIDGE.

Mr.. Evarts-You are gentleman Of liberal
educatoni. A. lam a graduate
Q. OF Amherstf A. Yes Sir.
O. And have been educated to the profession Of the
awl A. Yes, Sir.
O. Now as to Mr. Albert Woodruff who was he A.
He the senior partner of the firm OF A. Woodruff ~
Robinson think he went out OF the firm not far from
the year 1856 but will not say positively when.
O. He was older member Of the firm than the Messis.
Robinson who still remain A. Yes, Sir.
O. Is he the father OF Mr. Franklin Woodruff A. No,
Sir he is distant cOnnection-a cousin.
O. You have said that YOU think Mr.. Franklin Wood.
ruff not present at the conversation between Mr.
Moulton and yourself, which YOU have giyeni A. think
he not.
Q. Do you remember an occasion in which you had
conversation with Mr.. Franklin Woodruff A. Shortly
before had this conversation with Mr.. MoutoB, Mr..
Woodruff told nc
Mr.. Beach-Never mind.
The Wtness-Ie told me
Mr. Beach-Wil you stop, Sir! You know; you are =
lawyer.
The witness-I ought not to have that brought up
against me- Laughter
Mr. Evarts-YOu had conversation. Now, In that
conversation with Mr. Franklin Woodruff, which you
now recall, the subject Of Mr. Tlton writing this
Life or the subject of the comparative number of Spirit
uasts and 9tionasts in the country spoken OFFS
A. He said
O. No matter what he said Please TO answer yes or
no was one of these the subject Of conversational A.
One OF them
O. Which thati A. The comparative number OF
sprituausts aEi U0ngregationalsts.
g. What did Mr. Woodruff say on that suDJeeti
Mr. Beach, desire TO object.
Mr. Eyarts-I this Is objected to, suppose we are nos
entitled TO show that.
Mr. shearman-It was partly called out their
ination.
Mr. Beach-No, Sir; you are not correct.
Inn hat they hayQ y0d
part Of that conversation.
Judge Neson-No, they have not.
Mr. Evarts-The witness got far as TO say that he
told him something.
Mr. shesrman-If the stenographer will read the exam
nation your Honor will find that Mr.. Partridge gave
part OF that conversation.
Judge Neis0n-I he did so, 10 was without the consent
OF counsel who persistently objected
Mr. shearman-If your Honor please, IL was just tho
same as when Mr.. Tlton and Mr. Moulton were on the
stand they made certain statements To which Mr. Evarts
objected but as did not move to have them stricken
from record the statements were held TO be evidence
In the case.
Judge Neson-I do not any necessity for explain
ing any former ruling clear that the counsel was
very persistent In trying ~ stop this witness.
Mr. shearman-It precisely the same experience
with Mr.. Evarts when examining Mr.. Tlton he try
ing to stop HIM. and yet certain statements made,
which were allowed to remain because there was 10 mo-
ton TO strike them out at the time.
Judge Nelson--I do not think that these remarks
| called for.
Mr.. Beach-If your Honor please, It is an entire mis-
statement, unconsciousy made, have doubt by tho
counsel; but IL Ia misrepresentation.
Judge Neson-The observations unealled for refer
ring to any former ruling, which has application here
Mr. Beach was unusually eager in stopping this witness
who, doubtless without any intention. continually
| wandering from the question.
Mr.. Eyarts-I would not Like, II your Honor please, ~