New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-04-24

ward either OF these parties upon the part of this wit
ness. II 10 not declaration made out Of court incon
sstent with any portion OF his testimony given In court
and It is only upon those two principles aud
with those two objects that declarations out
Of court can be given, so far as this question Is
concerned And submit TO your Honor that 10 is wholly
immateral, and would be doing injustice to the plaintiff
in this case. to permit Mr. Mouon II he made any suoh
declarations Of this kind to mpute motives to MI Tfton
to affect the interests OF Mr. Tilion In this ltiga
ton however friendly Mr. Moulton may 10 supposed TO
be toward the interests Of that gentleman And these
the reasons Sir which Influenced your Honor the
other day, understand In the rejection OF that evil
dence, in connection with tho proposition that Mr. Mo-
toms attention had not been drawn TO 1t.
Mr. EvartsNo doubt, offered the other day to give
this evidence without having laid the foundation for it,
ia the nature Of collateral impeachment and argued that
1t admissible independently OF that ground and my
learned frieRd argued against that and used arguments
not only valuable In themselves hut which proved
sufficient to satisfy your Honor that The
only point ruled by your Honor in this statement:
[Readingl
have already intimated that II is very clear to me that
the examination Of this witness must be confined 10 coi
tadictOns Of any statements which 1t appears that Mr.
MOulton made when under examination That IL the
Moulton has stated hing you ut liberty to
tradict IL by this witness.
You heard the Offer Sir, and overrued II. and overred
IL as admissible until the foundation Of collateral in
parchment laid am seeking today the founda
ed then upon the principles that belong to collateral i'm
peachment. il il all Mr. Moulton ~ suppose so iden-
tilted himself with Mr. TltOn from the proceedings DE-
ginning In the last week OF December until tho COM
mencernent OF this suit II you please. In such way ~
that the statements OF either OF Them OF MOuton as well
a. of TltOn bearing upon any Of the proceedings that
broug them into connection and association with Mr.
Beecher according TO their showing. anything OF
| tho action. Of the writing, Of the influences, OF
| the declared end imputed justification OF theit
| conduct as under the motives OF interest and
concert in SURPRISING this scandal are matters OF
direct evidence their part on the issue OF whether MI
Beecher has been guilty OF the wrong imputed TO hin-to
wit by the violence against him Of that wrong OF mpeo
in the action and in tho council ana III the
motives that these proceedings had been insgaed nhd
controlled by Now my learned friends seek 10 disse'e1
the writing OF the woodruff "Ife" from the process VI
influence upon Mrs Woodruff in respect TO when MI
Mouton Ia responsible, IN the allegation that was
| counseled by Mr.. Beecher and in his interest
| and in his motive. because II In said '"a.
he has disclosed u disapproval of the Judgment anu
of tho WISDOM and OF tho worth value OF This particular
act and read to Honor the other day the statement
that he thought IL mis'ake-tGld Mr Beacher 80
| but tbe comment | think was, "Wel. II II was a mis-
take we must make the best OF it," Now, certainly Tue
fact that particular step IN concerted movement tha
IA to be charged TO NJ Bcechers responsibility was Dj
dcious and was not approved by Mr.. Moulion, has mol
any bearing upon the question Of whether the act was
done under the motive OF assisting this purpose aud ill.,
tcrcst OF Mr. Beecher. which IL the only material con-
sideration I'm which any OF the acts are brought into evil
dence here don't bear upon II nj all That 1t was mis-
abatement a mistake, miscacuation don't make any
difference in the quality Of the evidence rs bearing
against Mr. Beechcr Mr. Triton indeed gives us general
confession think in his testimony, that everything had
gone wrong: he had acted very fooshy In the matter;
| all OF It came to nothing That don't bear upon the
question Of whether Mr. Beecher f. TO have Influences
ttao, Tho
being responsible for this course of action Now mere If
ono OF the prIncipal things dOne-he wiring OF the
| Life" OF woodhuli which Mr. Ttou has assigned to
this motive. and to this aonc lRcadins.l
When I wrote that biography. believed good pcr,
ton OF it, made extrayagant statement OF H. Win
! view to cOnduce to the purpose. CT, -. D.. ,,oio
9 For rhetorical effect A. No; 81 no d "r t, ME-
MOuton, Mr. Beechcr and were set on the enterprise OF
c"nsGer sna Sesre0. during my early months Of
Qlainsnce with her. that sie was much traluc.d. a.
| himself and Mr. Becoher aud MI. Moulnn had agreed
upon line of conduct with reference to this woman -
| And In masking the explanation he was interrupted
| Now Mr.. MOutou has not said that TINS WAS not one OF
the steps: but that lie did not think u was Iudicons
STEP and the most must he made OF IT, as 1t had been
taken This also tends to contradict the idea conveyed
| (of regarding it unimportant idea IA bearing
upon any this easel. as crcd''abe TO MT Moui-
tons Judgment that lie disapproved OF the wrnS otthis
"Iife" because have him. in an imputed CONVERSE
|
ton wrote il under this personal idea, and he Ger
family EXPRESSED no dsapprov8l OF that at the time.
So that your Honor please, " seems 10 me perfectly
clear that this Is direct contradiction BY an extrajudi-
cia statement which propose to Offer and for which
we the fOundatOna direct contradiction OF The
testimony OF Mr. MOuon in regard W this course OF deal
ing with the Woodhus In which this writing and publish
ing of The Life" certainly principal act, most lin
portant n all its influences most disastrous and most
Injurious to Mr. TltOn, 1t seems to have turned out,
and made here sacrifice on his part to tho END or the
conceaent of the scandal and the protection OF his
| wife and OF DIR. Beecher Now, Mr Moul.on gives us
Mr. Ttons motive for writing that Life" the object
OF personal advantage and personal ambition; that II
would put him at tho head OF the Spruasis, who were
| more numerous than the Congregatonaliss.
Mr. Beach-The argument Of the counsel 1scloses the
radical mischief Of this proposition, aud NJ the same time
the principles upon which the objection 10
its admission rests. He insists upon considering Mr.
MOut0n, Mr. Bcecher and Mr.. Titon as united In TINS
nartcar norton of tho effort OF Mr Ton to influence.
conciate and control Mrs Woodruff He therefore, Sir,
recognizes the truth Of proposition That the decaf
lions OF Mr. MoutOn cannot be admissible, either az
against Mr. Beeoher Mr. Tton until this league not
only for the general purpose OF influencing TINS woman
hut of influencing her by this particular mode or step In
the process-to w.t. the publication Of her
have been established This is declaration Of Mr. MOul-
ton offered in regard TO the general purpose or object Of
this undertaking the part Of these three persons This
declaration Is offered for the purpose OF contra
| dieting the testimony Of Mr.. MoutOn. to the fact
| that there such a design. concurred in by Mr..
| Beecher, entered upon by Mr.. MOuton and Mr..
| Tlton. beg your Honor 70 remark that fact.
This declaration not for the purpose Of cOntradictng
Mr.. Moulton in his testimony concerning the general
combination and cooperation between these three per
sons In relation to general influence which should be
exerted over the mind and the action Of Mrs Woodruff
Now Mr. TltOn commits certain act the publication OF
th. "IAfe He says he did II for the purpose OF cono