The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1875-02-09

the pulplt, ana n6 promised 70 think over
it. This was all that occurred. / was in
New Hampshire when the Woodruff pub
LEGATION OF the scandal was made, and on my
return home I was told that it had been cir
culsting whole week during my absence. /
was informed by either Moulton or Bsecher
that they had conference when it was made
clear, but thought it was better to treat the
publication with silence as the best means
of killing it. Beecher said that if any de-
NAL was made, 1t would only provoke Wood
hull to produce IL in another form, and so il
would have 10 be denied three or four times.
There were several meetings about this in
Moulton's study, and at one of them It was
proposed to publish the card by me which
has already been given in evidence. 1 said
that II any card was to be
son to do 50, that it was the duty of
Beecher, as one OF the parties more intimately
connected, to publish the card told
him be might deny it and would not con-
tradict his denial. L said that II L published
the card the public would say that Tilton's
wife bad been attacked, and he merely pub
lished card indicating his conduct with
the Woodhulls. told him was angry that
he dld not put on the responsibility
of meeting the Wood lull story, and
that all the odium was put upon my
shoulders. The court here took a recess.
After the recess tho examination OF Tilton
was continued. He testified that after the
VI Tue w OOQQUll btOFY tDerc
was an interview az Moulton's at which
those present were Moulton, Franklin B.
woodruff and Tracy. It was on the first
Sunday eveningafter he returned from New
Hampshire. He was sent for 20 go to Moul-
toms house, where he saw first Moulton.
Evarts objected to testimony concerning the
interview, inasmuch as Beecber was not
present. The court told him to take an
exception. The witness said that on going
into the study, he saw Tracy and
Woodruff. Be told Tracy that the inter
view was against his protest, and that Tracy
out his knowledge or consent. He then said
that before going any further he wished
Tracy to give him a pledge that 1T the wit
ness and Beecher ever came into collision
Tracy would not act in any way as Beecher's
counsel. Tracy replied that
HE GAVE THAT PLEDGE
both as lawyer and as gentleman. The
witness said "very WE'LL" Tracy was then
handed Beecher's letter of contrition which
he read four or five times. Tracy then ex-
claimed ''Great Godv' and said that the man
who could express such heart-bresk, had
already been punished enough. He said
that this was case in which lying
would be right. He said to
the witness that the publicity
would not only ruin his wife and Beecher, but
would ruin the witness, as the world would
never forgive him for condoning his wife's
crime. The witness replied that he we'll knew
that publicity would ruin all parties, but
that his great anxiety was for his vile.
At a subsequent interview in Moulton's
study, Beecher showed some letters and said
that his sister, Mrs. Hooker, had threat
ened to invade his pulpit aud read from his
desk confession of his connection with
Mrs. Tilton. The witness and Moulton
read the letters which were from Mrs
Hooker. Beecher asked what could be
done, and the witness said that he would
see Mrs. Hooker and stop the mischief.
He did see her at the resi-
mis- inaNew York. AS matter of delicacy.
be did not think it necessary TO mention her
name. The court said that it was not neces-
sary. A lively dispute took place between
Evarts and Fulle rtOn in regard TO the ground
on which the name could ba withheld, al
though both said that they did not want it.
Judge Nelson said that the trouble with the
court in this case was that both of the
counsel were right. (Laughter.) The
| witness said that he induced Mrs.
Hooker to rslinquish her design; when be
saw Beecher afterward, the latter expressed
his gratitude. Beecner also made some re-
marks concerning Mrs. Hooker which the
witness did not deem IL necessary to repeat.
| Evarts objected to the last remark an in
| unendo, and there was another fruitless war
Of words between The counsels. The witness
said that about fortnight after this,
Beecher, at an interview in MoultOn's study,
said that be could no longer believe in
the policy of silence in regard to the
Woodruff scandal; he said that
the public would believe that where there
was so much smoke there was some fire, and
suggested that to satisfy the public, some
journal, such as the n. Y. Tribune, should
be induced to publish a severe editorial arti-
: Gle, not signed by any one, to the effect that
! 9e Woodruff story grew out of stories re-
peated by Bowen, which Bowen has since
denied. Tilton said that he objected to this
as q fatal policy for the reason that
Bowen had signed the tripartite agree
| mGnt only at the solicitation OF Clafiin, and
had repeatedly said since that coach and
| four could be driven through that agree
ment, and said to Beecher that if he drove
Bowen to the wall the latter would fight,
and. if he had any evidence in his possession
he would be a dangerous antagonist. Beecher
said that he thought
BOWEN HAD NO PROOF
in his possession. at q subsequent inter-
view Tilton said that he told Beecher that
he had asked DR.. Storrs what, in his opin-
ion, public opinion in Brooklyn required
him 1.-THE witness) to do, and that the other
advised the witness to show to him the doc
umeuts in the case, and that Mrs. Tilton, in
consequence, wrote the letter beginning
prompted by my conscience and my duty
to my husband !" which was already in evil
dence. Bsecher expressed his great regret
that the witness had gone to DIR. Storrs and
said that he could never face the latter again.
subsequently, the witness told Beecher that
his wife had urged the policy of complete
denial, and said that the mistake in tie first
place was in not denying the whole.
The witness told her that she
could do what she choose upon her own re-
sponsipility, and she wrote card for pubIi-
cation. The witness showed this to Beecher
with a statement that Mrs. Tilton wished
him to also write a card denying the charges.
Mr.. Beecber said that il would be useless for
him to do that unless the witness promised
that he would not make the denial of no
effect. The witness told him that he had
nothing TO fear, unless he was the aggressor,
in which case he 1.-THE witness, would defend
himself at all hazards. Beecher then sat