The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1875-04-02


q. Did you VISIT her when you cine 70 town or
AID you come 10 town ON purD>dBe A Partly
0n some 0tner grounds, put Came mainly TO see
q. What did you md hef condition OF healthp
"A. ! louhd her up sairs IN the second story
room-the receiving room OF the nouse-on the
SOFA, looking very pale and SICK she seemed TO be
very respondent and sue made some statements
70 me-n0 IL was not tnat tlme-I DON'T recall
any particular conversation we had then, except
tnat she SAID sne was very much aenressea IN
spirit ana she seemed TO me Ike one that wanted
20 talk and didn't.
Ar. Beach, must object 10 any such remarks
as that move 70 strike that out.
Judge Neiison-Yes, think tnat last remark
mast be stricken out.
MT. Eyar's-Dld she confer with You A. she
concerned with me, but not at any very consider
able length, and ! then prayed with her and
z. And eit2 A. And lett
4. DID you call again : A. I called next day.
O. Well, old you then see herr A. No. sir.
q WHAT occurred In respect to itY A. l sent
my name up, and the glri brought down little
bic OF paper scrap, which said something ike
this, 1t was best she should not me to-day,
but that she believed IN The inture, or that all
w0ulc be right, or something IN tue Iuture.n
q. Aud that slip oil paper you did not keep A..
q Now during that summer and fan, prior to
December. mad you any-dIa you make any visits
or have any interviews with Mrs Iilton- prior 10
December l670Y A. Prior to Deeember-no, sir.
q. What time did you return to the city your
sel,-sne usual tuner A. suppose so.
o You have spoken OF your going back after
yoar hay lever IN October; did you recover en-
themselves again until alter they have had very
hard most, but could say that could preach the
hast OF September, but WAS 80 much invallded
that always refused TO lecture In october.
q Did the nature or oppression u the disease
oouia possibly 90 40 was to 90 through my Sunday
o. During the month or October? A. Yes, though
again felt lille better during the week; alter
November always felt myself again.
q. Now In december, at or about or before the
middle oil December, 1870. dld you have inter-
view with MIS-. Iiton, and. II so, where and under
n n Ii /
nay return; have an impression that sne was out
went TO see her was somewhere about the middle
OF December and IN consequence Of the request OF
q. What message and BY what messenger were
You advised OF her wishing 10 see your A Bessie
Turner came to my house.
q. Did you learn where Mrs. Tilton then was?
A dld, that she was at ner motners
Q. Dld you know 1t before? A. Gid not.
q. HAD you before that heard or known OF any
disposition or purpose OF hers 10 separate from
ner h Mse A. never aad: -,
was the intnation or Information on tie subject
that you hadf
A. 1T WAS 4 REVELATION TO ME-;
never dreamed OF II before that know or
q. NOW. what did Miss Turner say to you on that
mr.. Beach after consultation)-we object TO
ehs, str.
JGegss Neiison-HOw Is that evidence, Mr..
M. Eyarts-My learned friends were in cOnsid-
cradle DOUBT whether they could object
Mr.. Fullerton-Tnere was no doubt about the
validity o. the objection.
r.
the evidence that you have not admitted. TO the
Oourt-Your Honor holds that this evidence is not
admissible
Judge Neilson-Yes.
Mr.. Evarts-l suppose that II Is admissible to
sne extent ss 70 the consequence Of what was
SAID 10 him by MISS Turner wnIcn made blm visit
hrs. Tltonf
Mr.. Evarts-well, AIR. Beecher, the details OF
that conversation not being allowed, was the re-
gnlt the consequence Of IT. that you visited MRS.
q. Did you before going confer with any one else
on me subject, or taEeenS one with your a. Not
that Tecollect, Sir; DON'T think that 1 spoke to
any one oft, and know did not take any one
Y. Then You went to Mrs. Tlton'sf A. went
TO Mrs. Molse's and saw Mrs. Tilton.
Y: Did you see them to2esner A. Bottom the
nrst visit, tnlDk, saw them together
z. And not airs. 1llton alOneS A. That Is my
impression, SIR.
In the interval or a consultation between the
plaintiffs counsel Mr.. Beecher amused himself
arranging very small bouquet OF flowers which
he held IN his hand. The consulting counsel OBJ
Jected to the question as 10 what occurred be-
tween the witness and Mrs. Titon on the occa sion
when he was called 20 see her after she left her
husband Beach contended that Mrs. 11lton's
declarations at that time were not competent
evidence. While Beach argued Beecher reclined
In his chair and Redeemed slightly In the face as
Beach quietly Dut sententiousy argued, ''tne
aduterer cannot be permitted to tell what nap
pened between him and his accompllce in adultery
IN order TO exonerate htmseILn
o. Now what was the Interview between. Mrs
nlton and yourself on that occasIonS
Mr.. Beaca-Une moment, Sir. We object to this
evidence.
Mr.. Evarts-Thls interview, or course, between
the defendant and Mrs. Triton is the very subject
matter IN THIS case which any witness VINO saw
them together could testify OF. and ey the same
necessity Mr.. Beecner, being witness OF what
tween Mr.. Beecher ana Mrs. Tilton during the
period OF their acquaintance, or before the period
OF thls accusation, 10 the end OF December and
afterwards, / suppose also certainly before then
this rs a direct matter OF proof
Judge Netson-EVen 10 the extent or the con-
Mr. Evarts-Yes sir; the witness has heard e.
ana, OF course, can testify about IL.
dispute.
Mr.. Evarts-Tnere Is no relation, a. We under
stand H. TO the question OF hearssy evidence. IL
does not prove that anything Mrs. Tilton said Is
defendant, accused OF improper relations 10 the
hoy herself, and we have the right TO prove every
Gngle act and word thai passed between them.
Judge NeIlsOn-You have the right to prove
every act; and you can therefore prove that TINS
wi.sess was called there and saw Mira Tlton there
separation or any other. rhat Is the extent TO
wGicn you can interro2ate.
ne matter TO when Your Honor 10 referring as
substantially material Is not hrs Tllton's stare
ment 20 this witness any more than to any otner
witness against ner husband but to the TACT, 10
the nature o. tue acts thar occurred between MRS.
Tllton and this defendant ~ direct Affirmative
proof between them, and tolls interview may be
poI trayed.
dhdkt NeASOH-A ~ CauuOt W uODe WITHOUT kOcW
conversation, can II be done Dy the Conversations
MI bvarts-Ihe conversation Is the action Of
these TWO parties with each other.
Mr.. Beach, understand the gentleman TO con-
cede that tue declarations made bY Mrs. Tilton at
that time would not De competent evidence TO the
truth oI tp lects alleged. II not upon what
principle isht that the declarations are TeceivaDlef
Why does the gentleman say that all the Inter-
course between tnese Two parties. by the nature
OF TINS litigation, becomes competent evidence,
unless that evidence VI such intercourse proves
tne facts which II covers Now l deny, SIR, the
proposition that the nature OF thus act or any
rnle OF evidence authorizes a defendant 10
give proof OF his intercourse, conversation
or acts as connected with Mrs. Tiiton. We may
give that evidence; IL ~ admissible on our part:
~ 10 portion OF our accusation; but they can
give us no part OF that Intercourse, especially OF
the conversation That occurred between these
parties In the absence OF Mr.. Hilton. Unless the
gentlemen can lurnLsn us with some authority 80
present to Your Honor or some principle upon