New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-03-31
GENERAL DISCUSSION.

Judge NeilSOn-I understood from the testl-'
mony Of witness that it was part OF his business 20
carry from the office in Broad street up to the printing
establishment tho slips and prOofsheets OF various
papers and he speaks there OF carrying up to be
printed the next day But did not understand from his
| evidence that the Woodruff scandal, as 1t has been
called or the "True Story" or tho publication about Mr.
Beecher or the 'Beechor business called. was
there in print understood those to be proofps hay'
ing to do with the current business OF tho newspaper,
and that he carried them to and from tho office, IS
| usual
Mr.. shearman-That was the latter examination, your
Honor to show his familiarity with proofs and printed
| slips.
| Judge Nelson COntinuingl-And he says that he did
not road them and did know tho contents of any ot
them.
Mr.. Sherman Speaking generally.
Mr.. Hill understood the evidence OF W0Odley tG
point directly TO this mater-that they were spoak'
| ing of 1t. Why Sir, let me remind YOU
Judge Neilson-They speaking OF It, OF course.
Mr. HiI-wsll, they had these printed slips in their
hands and they were speaking about Mr. Beecher and
this scandal and their publication Of it, and Col Blood
had gone away.
| Mr.. Tracy-Had gone away and taken the slips with
| hint
Mr. Hil-Had gone away believe and taken the sipS
with him. that there this discussion. and unless
fail TO remember Woodley's testimony, there was .
statement that Plymouth Church rch and all that
| sort OF thing.
Judge Neilson-Oh yes; that it could pay 100000.
Mr. H-Now that related only this Beecher matter.
| Judge Nelson-They were discussing this subject,
| but, for aught know 1t might have been dis
| cussed in the way If there had been no slips
| there whatever; and, for aught We know, the slips
that there the time OF this dscsson for tho
current use OF paper-matter entirely different from
the Beecher matter. do not see the connection myself
MI Hil-Let suggest another thought in this con-
nection, your Honor. II show that they had proof.
slips before them, and IL show that they talking
then about the Beecher matter the Beecher article
WOOIey called it, and then II we show by three witnesses
that prOofslps relating to this matter beyond question
then and prior TO that time in existence seems TO
me that the plaintiff will then be called upon at least 70
| explain.
OF the slips that the witness Woodley speaks
about They the current slips OF the newspaper,
which he says he usually carried and fro between the
office printers and he expressly says he did NOT
| know the contents Of any Of them.
Mr.. Shearman-AllOw Inc one moment, your Honor.
Mr. Hill read the examination OF Woodley up to certain
point but on the examination this IL brought out
very clearly On Mr.. FullerOn's crossexamnaton is
appears they having this conversation in
the downtown Office in 1872, when had been shown
on the direct examination they held these proof slips IN
their hands they discussed the Beecher matter and tho
| Z" Beechcr article" will read:
O. The Beecher matter, lit A. Yes, Sir, " thu
| Beecher article" they called IT,
That wac the phrase they used while those papers were
in Mr. Tltons hands. And there is good deal more on
the crosse Examination showing that that was tho very
subject that was under dscusson the Bccchor article
while Mr. Tilton and Miss Cann divided the copy or
the proofs between them; they looked upon these slips
and talked tho Beecher article" and discussed
| with Col. Blood the proprety Of publishingit 1t.