New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-06-12
THE PROCEEDINGS-VERBATTM

| Mr. Beach-very much time and very large degree OF
indignation expended upon the theory that Mr. Moul'
had been guilty Of dishOnorable and fahless conduct
in his failure to burn the papers relating to this scandal
| as 1t was assumed that that one OF the condi-
tons OF the award made the arbitrator to which Mr.
Tlton and Mr. Moulton assented But the foundations
Of the especial comments and rcprehcnsbe upon
the part Of Mr. Evars, the testimony OF MI storrs
relating conversation some ten days subsequent 10 tue
arbitration and award. 1t Is my duty, gentlemen, TO
draw your attention to that topic Mr. storrs says that
Mr.. MoultOn IN the conversation Of which he spoke
Said that Sam wilkeson, he called him, had either
seen him written to him. and requested MN mn parnen
and Mr. MoultOn said Oh. yes have burned the pa
and asees aa he sam
| Theodore do IN case OF trOublep
| Mr.. Evarts-" With his trouble" think it IT,
Mr.. Beach, believe can read Sir, with the print be-
| fore me.
Mr.. Evarts-I beg your pardon.
| Mr.. Beach-Ie says again, eross-examination:
Well, this was the conversation, as said 1t com,
remember had n6t any talk With him before an and /!
then Mr. Mouton during this conversation Mr. Mouton
that "nSn S had Ss1 er MN ss
had seen him or be w nre n burn 1na M ne
Beechers apology and ali the papers, and Mr.. Mouton
says "Of course says he. have burned all the pa;
have y and then he says, -" il Sam wikeson thinks
have burned al papers he is mistaken. What would
| Theodore do with his trouble ="
then handed to Mr.. the letter OF Mr. WilkesOn
He as you perceive representing that Moulton stated
that this request TO bnrn the papers had come from Mr.
Sam WikesOn and there is intmatiOn in this CONVEX
saon the part of Mr. Moulton Mr. stOrrs that tho
duty of burning the papers, that the request to burn
the papers connected with, or arose in any degree
out of the arbitration and award Mr. StOrrs does not
here pretend the conversation had any connection
with arbitration and award but that arose out
Trpartite Agreement, with which, you remem-
Der, Mr.. Samuel Wkeson was intimately connected, he
having connection whatever with the arbitration and
and Mr. Wilkeson after the Trpartte Agreement
had been executed, and that act Of composure and
| friendness had been completed between the par
ties then addresses this letter to Mr.. MOutOn, which
| read you
MY DEAR MoULroN Now for the closing act Of jus
Let Theodore pass your hands the written apology
which he holds for the Improper advances and do you
pass into the flames OF the friendly fire III your room VI
Then let Theodore talk to Oliver Johnson.
hear that he and Carpenter, the artist, have made
| Sincerely yours, SAMUEL WILKEsON.
Now two things result from that etter-frst that it
did not originate from the arbitration and the award and
second that there request demand, intma
nation that it the duty of Mr. MoultOn to burn all
the papers 1t was confined to the Letter Of Apology"
the so-called Letter Of Contrition" Well, when /
handed that letter Mr. storrs and when he repeated
quest to burn the papers to the letter Of Mr. WlkesOn
arising out Of the Trpare Covenant he was of course
somewhat COMPOUNDED And it is perfectly evident, gen.
temen that Mr. StOrrs in the relation OF this converse
tion was wholly mistaken in the kallusion which was
made by Mr.. MoultOn to the papers
You will remember the lessons which our learned
friends given to in regard to the fable nature
Of evidence conversations confessions My learned
FRIEND Mr. Porter read very able instructive, and
truthful essay upon that subject in every word OF which
concur. 1t is Of the most difficult efforts Of the
human memory to recall and repeat conversation and
it admit aazardOus species Of evidence, to be scru-
tinted and criticised and taken with proper degrees OF
allowance and am quite content that that rule Of law
should be applied to the evidence the part OF the
plaintiff but insist that the application should be
made of 1t to the evidence upon the part OF the defense
Another thing s obvious from this letter. that there
assertion upon the part Of Mr.. WilkesOn-there
has been pretense so far as this evidence is con-
cerned OF any demand suggestion to Mr. TltOn OF Mr.
MoutOn that the papers, or any paper connected with
this transaction, was to be burned founded upon any
idea either Of express agreement TO do or OF any OBJ
legation arising out OF any proceedings before arbitatOrs
or otherwise. Mr. Wikeson had just completed that act
Of amnesty and Cancellation, the Trpartite Covenant
and then he appeals to MouOn, or to Tton through
MoutOn act Of cemency and Of duty under the cir
cumstances TO burn the apology and nothing else What
IL there had been gentlemen, such promise upon the
part Of Mr. Moulton9 Suppose in the exuberance Of
friendly feeling which controlled and followed the Tri
pare Covenant" Tton and Moulton had said that they
would burn all the papers connected with this scandal
that after reflection, considering the possibilities OF
the future, there being no imperative obligation
assumed, there being duty by any authority imposed
upon these parties TO burn the papers, there hav
ing from Mr.. Beecher single request or intims
tiOn that he desired any papers TO be burned, what il
they had changed their purpose and determined to pre-
these documents to meet any possible exigency
that might arise in the uturei do not any par
ticular dishonOr in 1t. do not see why Mr. MOuon
should be excoriaed aithess and treacherous man,
either to his word to his duty and obligation
the part OF Mr. MoultOn acting as the friend OF both
these parties the custodian Of the papers belonging
each and the representative Of the interests of EACH
obligation upon the part of Mr. Moulton to fol-
low the requests pursue the line of duty or OF
obligation suggested by Mr. Samuel wilkeson, and
without any concurrence upon the part of
Mr.. Beecher, without any request upon the part
OF Mr.. Tt0n Or OF Mr.. Beecher to burn papers which
were to his custody and confidence What has
. to do with this case gentemeni We have spent days
IN the consideration this question. How does II throw
any light upon the real intrinsic issue OF this case The
papers here. They are unchanged; they are unmu
tated they speak for themselves in the same language
of truth this agreement df there were any agree
ment) did not exist The fact that Mr.. Mouton or Mr..
Titon may have pledged themselves to their destruction
does reflect any light upon the construction OF these
papers or change syllable the significance Of single
word And what has all this denunciation and all this
waste Of time and ingenuity over this question OF pro-
| nrety or Ihonor to do with the examination
| or decision OF this easel And in this way,
| throughout the whole Of this trial, upon the
part of the defense have been led into side and col
lateral issues the only effect of which has been to en-
baYrs our minds and consideration OF this case and
10 cover up the question which to be presented
for YOUR deliberations and decision Well, my friends say
it reflects upon integrity Of Mr. Molton 1t destroys
his credibity as witness party to proceeding, dis