New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-01-20
RUPTURE OF BEECHER's AND MOULToN's FRIEND
SHIP.


The Court met at 2 p. m, pursuant to adjourn.
ment Francis Moulton recalled, and examination re-
sumed by Mr.. Porter.
@ You mentioned that your letter OF August 9Th the
in which Gen Butler did assist and in which Mr.
Tlton did Where that letter wttenr A. In my study
home, Sir.
O. whent A. August the 5h, think; the date Of IT, Is
that the datef A. don't remember
@ The date August 5h but you remember in reply
to Mr. Beechers OF August the 9TH A. That is the letter The
letter in reply Mr. Beechers letter prepared at my house
whether IL bears date August 5th not-in my study.
O. At the time prepared anyone present except you
and Mr. Ton A. do remember that there was any body
present
O. Who did the writing A. Theodore Tilton.
O. And did you engross 1T A. don't remember whether
did or not Sir.
O. You do not remember whether 1t In his handwriting
or yours A. do not remember whether il was or not
| think II was in Mr.. Eddy's handwriting
O. How Ia that A. think In my accountants hand.
writing.
@ An yes cOpyf A. don't remember whether 1t wa. in
| my handwriting or In his.
O. That in reply to Mr. Beechers letter Of the previous
day. A. Yes, Sir
Mr. Evars-Is that the letter Handing witness letter. A.
| Yes, Sir; this Is the letter.
Mr. Eyars-we offer this letter in evidence u your
Honor please with the letter to which answer which
| have asked them to hand me.
Mr. EvarsYes Sir Your Honor then thought that those
admissible unnecessarythat clearly
was the point Of your Hono,s mlingbecause the
already given showed that the friendly between Mr.
Monitor and Mr. Beecher had then been terminated by the let
les Of the 18th of July but really II you look those
Il will be found those letters do not show the termination
but Is these letters show the termination But Il s not
in that view that
judge Neilson-The witness stated L..
Mr. Evarswe he said that they were terminated but the
and and precise way In which they
was nothing hostile in them, but the evidence now
shows that letter OF Mr. Beecher TO Mr. Mouon became
subject Of consultation and conference between Mr. Moul
and Mr. Tton and that they then prepared this answer
which Mr. Tton drafted and Mr. houlton signed and they
forth Is therefore, act In which this plaintiff par
pated and Is part OF the transaction and relations
the two parties in reference 10 ths investigation. or
the suppression Of investigation, the case NAV be-
concerning this controversy between them which have formed
your Honor know the staple OF much OF the evidence
that been introduced The letters formerly stood in
Honos appreciation OF them, merely letters between the
witness and Mr. Beeche bearing question OF whether
they broke Of their relations your Hsnor did not
consider them important useful farther prove that fact
az understand Now your Honor will zee by these letter.
when this to be the act Of Mr. Ton withhold
ing from Mr. Beecher these papers Immediate
and direct significance OF the dealing by Mr. Tlon and M
Beecher in regard to this conference.
Judge Neilson-Mr Beach, what do you think OF this,
BeachYour Honor will reoolect that there letter
introduced addressed by Mr. Beecher 10 Mr. Mouon bearing
date July a. 1874 making request for the letters and papers
In the hands Of Mr. Mouon relating to this controversy and
that the letter Of Mr. Moulton, without objection In
| answer to that bearing date August 4th read In
evidence 1 believe slso that the letter OF July %
III gym NJ. Hseess v NJ A0al!9p, wa use