New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-05-11
should sd,ournl-I is not worth an adjournment your

Mr. Pryor-Oh, no. Sir; will endeavor to proceed It
appears, your Honor, by the authorities which have
produced and BY the train Of argument which have
been unable to develop, that where the testimony OF
invention
Judge Neilson-Take your scat, Mr. Pryor. can hear
you converse, II 1t will be easier for YOU
Mr. Pryor-Oh never mind, Sir; can 80 on 1t ap-
pears 1 say, that where the testimony OF witness Ia
impugned by the imputation that 1t Is recent INVENTION
or fabrication the OCCASION or the product OF some
special interest influence that them In either OF these
contingencies s competent for the party to maintain
the credbity Of his witness by dsproving the inrm
tive and dscredng fact adduced against him. This
being say. noontr0vertibo proposition OF law the
oueton arises whether the defendant has attacked
tho testimony Of Mrs. Moulton by evidence or allegation
OF such infrmve dscrediting fact; for we cOncede
may it please your Honor, that IL her testimony were
barely contradicted the evidence offered would not be
open Now Sir by reference to the address OF the
learned counsel who opened for the Defense and espe
ciay by reference to the testimony OF the deehoah
himself will be found that ample foundation was iad
and ample provocaon given for tho introduction q the
testimony we offer. Gen. Tracy. on page 81 OF the
pamphlet edition Of his address, uses this language
We now gentlemen approach one OF the most decadc c
subjects which my duty calls upon me TO discuss reer
to the Connection Of Mrs Moulton with this case
OF this lady Otherwise than in terms Of respect feel
most deeply her extraordinary position tne terrlpie
Of the temptation before which has fallen
The truth of this makes 1t impossible 1or me 20 az
testimony but do so with for her. reserving all
my Indignation for those who have force9 ner upon .e
witness stand to confirm the accusations winch they nave
invented.
Again, on page SO, he says:
What is the relation Of MoutOn TO this easel This
lady the wife Of the only man who has anything to lose
Tor Francis d. Moulton has Peried all on the
r,arsou tn IN on
jealousy, but such be made for his friend
the plaintiffs failure in this suit as every man see,
involves Mr. MQuon In utter and hopeless rum aet
from her allegiance make him the less the father
Of her only child What terrible alternative for her.
ruins her husband destroys her home and leaves
her only child to blight.
And so through columns of vehement and exag-
gerated declaration.
Now the defendant on his direct examination uses this
language in reply to question by Mr.. Evarts;
Mr. Morris-what pagei
Mr.. Pryor-Page S65.
80. Did Mrs. MoultOn ever address you in that way
3D. d she d hsf long
accord"
This is apropos Of the interview OF June Now then
further upon his examination, in development and
application and explanation Of the ideas here asserted,
Il not expressed, the defendant spoke az follows:
60 In the course Of the examination Of Mrs Moulton
you asked by your counsel whether she said GER
tn ag t. you S6d depy S waf Sir
made mistake In designation you say in the eX-
animation of Mrs. Moulton, and think you have made
Q. Perhaps have; in the examination Of yourself,
Q. You were asked to whether Mrs. Mouton did not
say certain thing to you, and you said, in substance,
do you recollect the circumstance A; do, Sir
Q. What did you mean by the words not OF her own
accordF A. Perhaps meant what ought not TO nave
Never mind that Continuing But this What
made w 70 make Rat t by fh non
O. And when do you think he did it'll A. All! don't
know; after we broke probably W., Cir,
Now. If your Honor please, here is the positive and ex
pct declaration of the learned counsel for the defend
ant Here the positive and explicit testimony OF the
defendant himself that the story told by Mrs Moulton
upon the wtnessstand was not the effect OF her own
mind and will but was uterance wrung from her by
the sovereign and remorseess influence Of her husband
That fiction fabricated for the occasions and 1t was
tissue Of fasehoods conceived and delivered to meet
exigencies this particular litigation and to uphold
husband in his present controversy with the defend
ant Now Sir to rebut this fact and to repel this mpu
taton we offer to prove-and this is oer-tha i'm
mediatey aftcr the interview with Mr. Beecher and OF
her own volition, and without tho privity Of
her husband, and before any controversy be-
tween her husband and Mr.. Beocher had arisen,
Or apprehended; nay. when Mr.. Beecher and MI
Mouton were in aectonate cOnfederacy OF cooperation
for purpose namely to suppress this scandal
and to shield the defendants oharacter-we offer to
prove that at that tme and under those circumstances,
Mrs MouOn told the story precisely she told it under
the sanction Of oath and in the presence of the Court
and the Jury Now If your Honor please II this evidence
be rejected then is presented this cannot go on.
Judge NeilsOn-Take your time.
Mr. Pryor. have done, your Honor please. 1t is i'm
pOssibe for me to 20
Mr.. FullertOn-We content to leave the opening
argument as it is and to let the Other side reply to it,
Mr. Beach-we make proposition, and we have heard
nothing of the objection Of the other side.
Mr.. Evarts-I have the close
Judge Neilson-If counsel argue this question at all,
you have right to reply whether he takes the close
not
Mr. Evarts-I have the close.
Judge Neilson-YOu may have the close at the end;
only it is possible if you make argument at all, it
may may want help about in order to see tho
other view.
Mr. Beach 1t is very fair should learn from the
other side what their views before the argument
closes
Judge Internationally "'