The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1875-05-11
THE SCANDAL.
Witnesses who will Probably Iestiiy'

IL Al OOEAANDAAA4e
Witnesses who will Probably Testify.
Npw York, May 10.-The Sun says that
stanben Pearl An irews called on Mr.. Tilton
Saturday evening, and said hat ne had recelv-
ed from Gen. Tracy proposition to remuner.
&c MIS- woodruff handsomely if she could
ooi,ect anv scraps of writing, notes or other pa
ners in Mr. Tilton's handwriting, which would
he testimony az ainst him, or in any way con-
meet him with the accusations OF conspiracy
and blackmail in the coming rebuttal by the
defence. Mr.. Andrews had learned that mrs.
Woodhull would be called to the stand today,
and he expected that his information would be
of use to the plaintiff Tilton asked INN
whether Mrs. Woodruff had accepted the otter,
and Andrews replied that she indignantly re-
fused it, Tilton then told Andrews tnat IL was
be called. His lawyers were OF Inc 9 9p;.od
that the scope of her testimony was SO li, 4al
it would be scarcely profitable to add to the tes-
timony already in. Col. Blood had also peen
placed alongside of Mrs. Woodhuh VI 'no
doubtful list. E.o,,.
Morris on Saturday sent subpoena to EfaE-
cis d. Moulton and Mrs. Moulton. Mr.. Triton
is also to testify, and in the account OF lthG ar
filtration he aud Moulton will corrooorate DOW
en-. Mrs. Moulton is to testify IN reDuital 10
Cen. Tracy, and she will also reatfirm that her
interview with Beecher in which he threatened
to commit suicide, was on the morning OF the
I'd of June. 1873
Henry A. Bowen, nephew of Henry Y.
Bowen, is under a subpoena. but he VIII only
he called to fill in a niche of the case.
Proceedings in Court.
BROOKLYN, May 1O.-In the Tilton-Beecher
ease TODAY, Geo. A. Bell was recalled in rebuff
tai and examined by Mr.. Fullerton. lie de-
tailed at length the particulars OF an interview
with Mr.. Beecher held at the latters request,
in December, 1870 in regard to troubles IN the
otof tod hi infQnfl0n
was to turn matters over to Mrs. Beecher, ana
the question was what advice Mrs. beeches
should give as to separation, and ne ASKED
what witness thought. Witness replied potn,
ing else but separation, on the 1acts prSsen'Su
to him. Then Beecher asked Whetner ne
thought some of the ladies ct the church shoun
be called in, and witness was opposed 10 tnls
as most harmful, and thought the matter couIu
be better managed by few. some weeks aso
Reecber's note calling for that very interview
was found at home--not that he keeps papers,
but his son is collector of autographs, and
preserved that note, and he will hand it over to
the defence.
Witness was not cross-examined.
Louis G. jayne testified that he was married
june I'd, 1869, On the I'd of June. 1873, about
9.15 a. M, he saw Beecher go in the direction
of Moulton's house. June I'd is pleasant an
niversary to him, and he started from nome
earlier than usual, to get to New YORK ana
make half holiday, and meeting neecngr,
he might recognize him (witness), but he notic,
ed Beecher's countenance was troubled ana cld
not notice him.
Cross examined by Mr.. Eyarts1Jayne SAID aid
Beecher had gloomy look: HE, he h is r.a ms
warm day. Beecher wore dark suit and sack
coat. Could not remember the kind OF hat he
wore 1t was an unusual thing to see Beecher
that honr of the morning. They were ap-
preaching nearly at right angles, ana beecneI
in frou IF him Rnachpr did not
turn around. 1t was not like meeting face to
face but a semi profile view. Beecher's eyes
were cast toward the ground. and the express
sion of his face was sober.
Witness continued-Beecher did not make
any concealment of it. Beecter's course was
towards Remsen street, which is next to Mon.
taeue street. His recollection is that he did
not get home that day from his office until i've
O'clock, and eaiued but one hour of half holt
day. For some days previous TO June "a there
was something exceptional in his movements
from home to his office, and for week from
Nav 29th there was no difference as to his
hours of leaving for his Office. He has no
doubt he did see somebody else on the street
| June I'd, but cannot remember :,
Jeremiah p. Robinson was recalled and testl-
| fied-Knows Emma r Moulton; sac IS his
| niece: he had conversation with her about
Beecher at different times in June, 1873:
O-Do YOU recolect conversation with her
that month, in which she related converse
Mr.. Evarts argued that the conversation OF
two strangers was nothing to Beecher.
Mr. Fullerton said the conversation would
fix date, and he proposed to show how Mrs.
Moulton related to witness conversation Win
Beecher June I'd.
The Judge said he would hear counsel.
Gen. Pryor said they contended that where
tue testimony of a witness is lmpugned as a
recent fabrication it is competent to prove tna1
witness made a statement long before the date
A.. oaJ faI ION nd of allQOnd inter-
ests arising for which the fabrcationwas made
On this point counsel held there was no doubt
as to the law of this state and the practice OF
the courts, and cited many authorities.
Counsel challenged the other side to br,ng
forw ard single dogma or decision to impugn
the principle laid down by these authors, ana
was proceeding with great animation, as his
won't when he suddenly turned white, placed
his hand to his forehead and breathlessy ex
claimed. 81 have an attack of vertigo, your
honor" and sat down. The Judge ordered the
windows to be opened, and in a few minutes
the counsel stood up and stated that he found
it impossible to go on with his argument, but
he Thought he had said enough on the point
Judge Nelson kindly offered to adjourn, Dut
Pryor thankfully declined, and making an ct,
fort continued to say that the proposition laid
down being unassailable, the only question was
whether Mrs. Moultons evidence had been i'm,
.pugned as fabrication. AS to this he referred
to Tracy's opening 81 feel keenly the over
whelming nature of the temptation before
which she has fallen and reserve my indigna-
ton for those who have put her forward TO
sustain their statements. LII she testlneS SO as
to save Beecher she ruins her home and leaves
her only child to blight etc. Counsei also
cited from Beechers evidence in relation TO
Mrs. Moulton's testimony about this very IN
terview of June I'd. "No, sir, she did not o.,
say any such thing to me of her own ACCORD
and Beecher's subsequent testimony on MS
cross-examination that he believed Moulton
had influenced his wife to tell that story. Inc
prosecution now offered to prove that whiie
Mouton was in friendship with beecher ana
laboring to suppress the scandal and lmme.
1iately after the interview with beec9eI h y,
husband, she went to this witness and reia nta
to him that conversation with Beecher IN 1910,
Just as she had under oath, -,
At this point Mr.. Pryor again informed the
court that he was unable to continue anu he
hastily walked out of court.
Mr. Fullerton-We are content to leave the
opening argument as it is for the present. =,
Mr.. Evarts then took up the cudgel on the
other side and argued that the rule admitting
heresay evidence would be unreasonable anu
| the courts have severally condemned the lntro-
| duction Of such evidence. There are alleged 10
be certain exceptions, but no court IN TINS State
| had relaxed the rule 10 favor of extra Judiciai
| evidence No evidence has been given that
Mrs. Moulton made contrary statements out
| of court and that state of facts excluded the
present testimony. The imputution that she
| testified under another will than her Own was
that she testified under her husbands will, and
he was her husband all along, and 1t was
question of her husbands influence from hrst
to last The defence gave Moulton no certih-
cate of credit as to what he was doing all the
time before 1874. Beecher and the Other, SIDE
quarrelled. They opposed each other and now
| the offer was to exc out testimony by showing
| that the parties said something some time to
| their neighbors before the period OF hostility.
| 1t never was contended that you might brlng
| iu confederation sentiments of this character
| out of CO 1T unless witness was contradicted by
| other statements of different character out OF
court, which was not the situation in this case.
| Counsel cited Taylor on this point. MI. Evarts
was quoting from the language OF judge in
another Sc, and in passing remarked that the
case was subsequently over-ruled.
Mr.. Beach here made a remark in low
| voice.
Mr. Evarts-I am willing to submit to any
| extent IF personal criticism you desire at any
stage of the case. am not going to say how
| far the case weighs which has been overruled
Mr. Fullerton-It was not over ruled on that
| point.
Mr. Evarts-It is time enough for you to say
that when you come to reply.
MIR. Fullerton-Well, L will say it over