, 1875-01-27

.essora. cu.,nstI appeared Determined TO gct s's
letter III, and as otlcu as the Jadss r'.el tat u
had nut boe" rnec'nntly idsnss'oamnl ssqa IN ,u i"
nttack with Question Or two, and Nf, lsats rI
tently abandoning, tho hopo nt aeeNfshg ~
admission, Mr. Tracy R, neRan a , rene: :: t',a m
many declarations contained in Mr. ClaEka IT.
Ter, 10 that in tho end tho Jury heard ths
whole letter read Mr. Tracy took pains 70 do
thlA
Al orExsY AZ POSSIBLE,
viii, M effort to cnnroal frn'n tho onpoelnS
counsel tin fact that lo al literally ieaIhE ti!o
letter. THO rane tactics had Icon o!nploSeu ~
tim counsel OF Mr. Tiltol', aud or: Irasy WIZ, IT.
u,,gnoae Of tho questions thus cited waB betrayc'
ty Witness, who declined to remember af'y-
thing it containeff. II be had answered n a,n-
rio instance tint l,s lad spoken to W. neeenot
of my Of tho circumstances mentioned. tue
wl,ole latter would have been hithtHaanld; nut
h1r. Moultnn'a memory sigua!ly fa'ed hin IN this
important instance. ...-
rnE suAnrEsr ARD HOST AMUSING PAbsAoA W
AnMs
that occurred among tho lawseIa Tes:ortiay waa
between Mr. EvartA ard Mr.. Fullerton. and 1t
illustrates farly tie anicknoHs OF Thought sono-
t,nea displayed in courtroom. 5nas neiofo
pauBo ite iength wearing out at last tho patience
OF III. Fullerton. 1Io aeked tile Court II t!!oro
WAS no way to make tho other side go On "llow
Lettcr can We 70 ekSh sar';ad ": T.. va'es E"11ar
ton. :" Perhaps you would 80 on II you wcEe
on our a,dc," said tho defendants counsel
mo" Significantly roloined Mr. Fullerton. II
wero OH your side would !, not 60 on.
It was announced ny Mr.. Fullerton at o'clock
that tho witness desircd 10 10 array a. aoon ~
possible. but would probably DO soady to go on
"s'N'A' '' lJo tEs Associated I4sn.l
RtIBlt Fon SEATS.
Nr,v YonE Jan 2G,-tk being uldsfBt0od that
this woud bo the last day Of tho cross-cx-
animation Of Francis D. Moulton, the chief wit.
for the e Gt r1es
| crowd struggled for admission to the brooklyn
| CITY Court room to-day. Ex-Judge Porter OF
| counsel for the defense, was present, also ar ar.
md Mrs. Beechcr and their two sons. Mra: r., ~
ton aud party Wcre still AbBont. but b1f. lAton
! was on hand in tho usual good time.
! MouLroA's cRoss-ExAHfNATi0N
| AToulton resumed his place on the wieneas-
! stand and was croes.oxanined bY Ten. Tracy,
| assintcd by Mr.. Porter.
Witness WAS handed letter dated Fob. 10,
| 1871. and eald Raw this letter before It vas
brought by Boocher to my houao in Clinton
| street. II wa tho a,lbjcct OF couvoraation be-
| tween Deecher and myself, hut 10 not LINK
TINT Eilton was then present.
THO lotter was introduced In evidence and read
| bv Aheartnan. 1t wRB from ]. 3, porkinA nephow
OF Boecl,er, to Mr. Beccaer, telling linn ho did
| not think Titon could bo SO base Us to mako
tl,cso charges, brt III doing 80 Tilton had dlsaa
| into tho stb-csl1ar Of backhouGe intanly.
Another lsttnr was shown to witness. which be
identified ri the answer sent by Beecher 20 tut
above implying that Triton and himself wcrt
| both victims ot slandors, but that they vero nov
| both Eood friends.
| SAD EVENT.
| At this roipt message WE brought to M0ul
ton, and lie naked permission to leaYe the court
room fow moments, which WAs accordod. VI
his return he stated that ho had just teeerot
intelligence Of tie death Of his mothor. Tho de
fense md prosecution wishing to finish with hin
to-day mud allow him to go, Moulton again tool
his Htand nnI raEutued.
DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE.
He snid bo did not know how T!lton set 4 cop.
of 13eccher's lettor Of Feb. +. 1879: He cou't
not Aavo taken q copy Ia shorthand in my pres
lave let him tuke cue. Do not know how he 50
a copy of Deccho-'s letter Of Juno !, nor Feb
7, I371. think Deecher gavo N!ton copy @
| MrB. Hooler'a letter Of NOV. l., 1872.
WitnoBs' attention wna called to an interriov
with Bcscher OF or prior to Jan. 10, 1871, when
| conversation was had in reference to Bowen
charges, mud ho was asked il he bad stated al
| that occurred at that intcrviow. THO witness ro
Piled that 10 had told all TINT ha now romeu'
bera.
HuLED CUT.
Tho witness WAS shown a letter, and aaid
waH tho only lettor Ire had road OF Mr. Clark
Did not temetnber having destroyed any iette
TINT he received from Clask, and could not lel
whothor ho showed this one to Beccher or not
Cinrk vaa the aseietant editor of the Golde
Age and employed by Iiton.
| to by T,}tona counsel, Counsel for tAo dofeus
argued Tint evidence had been hdduced du1in
tho trial tending to chow tbas this was the ietto
shoyn to Uocchor. and that was tho reason tho
ofYorol it in EVIDENCE, The witness lad ale
stated TINT this letter vas the subject OF q COZ
yersotiou between him nnj Bcccher. lis sui
mittcd Tint it would sLow tho condition Of affair
in tho GolGen dos ottloe communicated b
CLARK. and The Bubicet OF tic talk betuee
Mculton una Boecber.
, Mr. Fu,larton aru,,na that Nfou1kon Ind n
ceivntl several letters fran CLARK. aome Of which
tho Witness stated. Ind been deatroved. this on
being sho ouly lottor found md that counsel O
TIC uthor siue therefore Inferred THAT this va
tho Latter which lad formal the eub[nct Of cor
yersasion Oh that occaaion.
Judge Nelson soid thax counsel for tho de
fonso would have to connect this iettar MOI
dstini.ely viii that interyiow.
r | Counsel On both eidsa read an nbetraok fror
tho nrayio,,a oxnn;nation ~ thia witness.
!. TIC Court rulol out tho iettor, and oxooptio
una taken tv Tia defenaa,