The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1875-04-07
Further Explanations of the Interviews
with the Mutual Friend.

lery. Inc uOOrS were thrown open 10 Llcket
holders at a. M, and when the first corners
had filled the seats little short of overcrowd-
ing, no more were admitted. Additional po-
lice were stationed among the audience to
prevent demonstrations. The audience was
very quiet to- day and most admirable order
was preserved. At 11.20 a. m, the direct
examination of Beecher by Evarts began.
He was asked whether, when Mrs. Tllton
reported to him for advice as to separation
from her husband, he not only introduced his
wife into the matter, but also a gentleman,
member of his congregation. He answered !:
consulted George A. Bell, a near neigh
bor and intimate friend, one of my chief
counsellors and superintendent of the Bethel.
I stated the facts and inquired what had bet
ter be done in regard to Mrs. Tilton, and
suggested that it was case for the deacon
nesses of the church. He said emphatically
he differed from me, but thought it was case
for silence, and case to be let alone.
Among the earliest counsellings between me
and Moulton was as to how standing should
be got for Tilton, so that he could be at ease
as to his household. Moulton said there was
a mortgage on Tiltons house, and if that was
removed Tilton could be persuaded to make
over his house to his wife. l said when any
thing of that kind was done to count me IN.
l understood the amount OF the mortgage
was 81 900. He spoke to me on the SUBJECT
often, and 1 asked him, think, whether any
thing had been done.
7 Remember the first payment for Bessie
Turner's education. 1t was in the summer
of 1872, Moulton said Tilton had been paying
out many bills, and here was one which
would help him CTilton) to be relieved Of
1t was statement of account, in which a
definite sum was mentioned. There was no
formality about it. I paid the bills and said
l would be glad to help the family any way
could. l did not know where Bessie was
gone until this came up, and had taken nc
part whatever in providing her location. AS
to future payments on this account there was
no arrangement, but from time to time Moul-
ton would say or write,-"I wish you would
pay so much.' l made no enquiry about it.
/ kept no memorandum of any money evel
had in the world.
believe nothing was said by Moulton and
me about Tilton going to Europe. The sub
iect was talked OF, among other things, but
made no impression on my mind. At Later
period do know what he said during my
visit to Tilton's house, the 9TH or Sth Of
February, about which testified before adj
iournment yesterday. cannot say l did moi
express regret. I did not cry. l made no
record of my tears, and do not remember
any occasion for tears, either at the beginning
or close. Why, sir; the last thing done be-
tween Mr.. and Mrs. Tlton and me was to
kiss each other all around, and I did not
burst into tears for that Qaughter).
Judge-I wish here to instruct the witness
TO answer "yes" or mo- This will be better
for the audience.
Mr.. Evarts explained the directions of the
court to Beecher, who nodded his assent.
Witness continued,-I had an another in
terview with Mrs. Tilton at her house, when
as believe from what happened she sent for
me.
Mr.. Beach objected that this was an inter-
view not inquired into by the pro secution.
Mr.. Evarts said he proposed to offer in evil
dence every interview and note between the
parties, and as a subsequent intercourse
was made ground of accusation, it would
look like suppression of evidence to exclude
it.
Judge-You have the right to account for
every interview and every letter, and do
that without conversation. think the plain
tiff has been quite liberal in this respect so
far.
Mr.. Evarts assented Fullerton said the
other interview was permitted in evidence be-
cause anterior to the charge made against the
defendant by Tilton Dec. Both, 1870, and it
would be novelty if the interview between
these parties when the charge rested on them
could Bio admitted. 1t is said to be an interview
of the defendant in the fall of 1871. Counsel
never heard of it before aud Tilton ought not to
be held responsible for what took place between
the parties after the charge was made, when 1T
would be easy for the accused parties to manu-
facture state of things favorable to them and
injurious to the plaintiff The law does not
favor such state of things.
Evarts replied that the law does not protect
the plaintiffs rights by suppression of evidence
N doubt the situation of the accusation and
suspicion was marked by Dec. 1870, and this
interview was later and if ia the opening of
the case and in bringing forward evidence the
plaintiff had limited himself to evidence up to
that period, the defendant might limit himself
to that period; but the plaintiffs counsel had
gone further and charged renewal OF CORE
spondence and found in letters of this date
some disastrous expressions, and that kind of
evidence should be met by explanations and
evidence by defendant as to any documents al
luded to. This was the only interview of the
pai ties after the accusation, and was not offer
ed in evidence for the purpose of giving the
conversation, but was offered in its Innocence
and solemnity, and the law allows it.
Beach-Tbe proposition is to prove not only
the declar atoms and acts of Mrs rlton in the
absence of her husband, but also of the adverse
party and in Tiltou's absence. These acts
can't be evidence unless connecte1 with expla-
Will your honor decide that the acts of Beech
er 10 the absence of Tilton are admissible
against him? Certain declaration, ScOmpl ants
of brutality or Neglect are allowed as indul-
gence on the part of the wife, but where is the
law or principle allowing Beecher, after the
accusations against him, to fabricate, as L am
emitted to suppose, acts and declarations
against his antagonist. 1t is said we are not
satisfied wi tn the original accusation located in
December, 1870. 1t is true we rely on letters
afterwards written as confrmatory of our orig
inal charge. The gentleman says he is at lib
erty to explain them. l grant it, but not by
his declarations or those of Mr.. Beecher, but
by facts and conditions surrounding the event.
But has your honor ever heard that parties
accused in conference not cognizant to the OPP
posite party produces evidence 10 defence? 1t
is abhorrent to our sense of justice that the in.
culpated parties should give their own possibly
fabricated evidence in their own exculpatiOn.
We have been liberal as to other interviews,
but when 1t came to this one after the accusa-
ton, when we were not there and have no
means of answering. and which was never re-
vealed to US, we must dissent, for as it is made
it stands without any possibility of our answer
ing it, ..
The judge said he thought the acts of the
parties at the interview were admissible with
out the conversation.
Beach said for his part he was not strongly
inclined to object to acts and conduct of parties
without conversation.
The Judge said IN the early stage both sides
were at liberty to give proofs of harmony or the
reverse in the plaintiff household with view
of showing how much damage if any was sus-
tanned, but as to events and conversations sub
sequent to the alleged offence the law is eau
tious about admitting them for obvious rea-
sons. Still he thought general statement as
to what did or did not occur might be made,
but not conversation.
Witness Il do not remember what time of
day this visit was suggested to me, not by me.
gested to you?
Mr.. Beach-That comes within the ruling.
Evarts-If we are entitled to give it all we
are entitled to give il accurately. l purpose to
sho " it was not a renewal of confidential, so.
cal or atfectionate relations at fall. WeIhave
evidence that L. desired tie visits to be renew
ed as before. Yet we will show this was in no
way an encroachmeut on the situation raised
between the parties and was wholly resort for
moral and religious advise in her troubles. In
this way we propose to show both what did
take place and what did not take place.
The Judge said he thought there might be
inquiry as to any act of affection or of question:
able moral character.
Beach said hls Honor's suggestion was emf.
nently practical and embodied very consdera.
biection? A gentleman is now called to char
acterize that interested party, thus giving a
10 what was said, which would be
more odous and Objectionable than giving what
was really said. The prosecution charge pre-
vious improper connection confessed by both
parties and standing in writing, which cannot
be forgotten and which the prosecution hold
cannot be explained. Now year after they
have a moral and pious interview OF which the