New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-02-19
Q. Anat Mr. and Mr.. Triton had denied 1t no one in the

church would have attached any Importance to nt
Mr. Falerton-Thst We object TO.
Judce Ncison-That is mere opinion.
Mr. Fulerton-It is less than a opinion.
Mr. Shcarmsn-Tnis Is all matter Of opinion
Judge NesonI thought proper the examination snouo
be very free but objected think this question %
general esmste which is not in keeping win 'ne u
nary OF evidence don't think the question is pop
Mr. Beach, do not understand upon what principle Tue sen
tment the Church declarations OF members OF ne
Church. particular period Of progress OF tns 0"u"' w
comes admissible in evidence as against US
Mr. Shearmsn-YOu introduced them
Mr. Beach-Nn Sir we did not introduce them We intro
6uced the ocs action Of Church. but the lay understand
inc and the understanding the congregation have not been al
all referred TO examination STILL the subject hss been
opened by your Honor and have submitted to the ruling
Int 10 call rom this gentleman for an opinion or Judgment In
reference to particular stated case, to simple supposi
ton OF Observation-Disclosures to Is entirely nsdmis
stable although his intelligence upon the stand don't
know make any objection perfectly willing to
take &C.
Judge NeilscnI thought II was well to learn the general
sentiment far gone but don't think that
witness upon the members and the Church
have certain frame Of mind in regard to It, don't
think he can answer that
Mr. Evars-If your Honor please ia only in the nature OF
examination that proposition seeking TO prove by
him. which may be true or untrue
Judge Nel.on-How gentleman what impression
people would have in certain EVENT.
Mr. Shesrnsn-we change Of the question, and
whether the objection will be made TO itthen IL IS nOth
regard other going to suggest whether
objection be made ITO the wtness ask you then Mr. Bell
place OF question do not understand you TO say that
importance attached to this by the members OF the
Church only because failure Of Mr. and Mrs Triton 10
out and deny IT,
Mr. Beach-He answered that question several times
Judge Nelson-Let him answer IT,
The Wtness-Imporance attached TO the paper ct the
arst on its publication We had waited from day to day for
the expected dcnss Mr. and Mrs Tion After sui
.ien length time in opinion had gone by for these
1en that feeling began to change The Importance OF
he paper still not taken away.
O Mr. Bell were you present at meeting Of prominent
members and Of the Church the Tuesday evening
before this Woodruff scandal became public when the subject
brought up notice. and some consideration was had "a
% what action should be aen A. Before was publlshedt
Q Yes Sir A. What do you mean by before didnt
suow It going TO be published.
Before paper actually placed on seH The first
{ knew OF 1t was-I don't know whether 1t was
On Tuesday, the day which gentleman called
my house and ssked me to meet others at the
Church evening in regard to this publication attended
meeting that is the meeting you alluded to- thought
I was Thursday night but II IL was Tuesday
O. Mr. Beecher was present at that meeting, was he
No. Sir.
@ VAST not uniformly agreed at that meeting that the true
oocy the Church meeting and out Of It, not TO aude
this scandal at ALL and that it would beconsdered dega
tson on our part do don't know about the dega
dson. speak about the policy II considered the
policy Of the Church to take notice whatever Of it,
@ put upon the ground that the source from
which such to make unworthy OF attention.
That part of the ground There was another reason
however.
O. only method that seriously proposed so far
you know the Church. Of meeting this scandal when 1t
was proposed met by modo Of calling Mr. Tlton
to account was ii not or Mr. Tton and Mr. Bowen' A.
cannot speak regard official action, because was not
member Of the Examining Committee.
O. But in these talks which held between officers and
members Of the Church. between Mr. Hawkins your
self and myself A. Well Sir soon after that seemed
TO fail on, OF the channels Of communication
@ am asking what happened when you were in the chan
nelst A. Well but got Of it very after that time so
really cannot tell regard to what took place
after the first Of January
o. was not talking that: talking in reference
10 is particular when YOU not present. that is
IA November am talking specially with reference to this
supposed deacons meeting in November 1872 which did not
place and going TO take place but was supposed
place Now a. that time my question Is
was not all the proposition for action that was on foot
proposition Tioni A. know Of no PROPOSE
ton for action whatever at that time.
O. Then we ddnt makeany You know OF no proposition
or acon-thst We could made our partf A.
We called upon OF DesOns TO bring the matter into
the Board so that action should be taken upon it.
O. That would be A You speak of after that time
@ No speak OF this very time. A understood you to
mean after thai time.
@ mean at this time A. cay that after that time
seemed 70 slide on
O. don't care about that time Mr. Bell whether you
Aid out don't know about A would not call that
proposition for action. Mr. shoaman II was telling the
Chairman Of the Board the feeling in the Church
the demand in the Church for action and trying
TO give him backbone bring into the Board Of Deacons
and to give them backbone 20 carry II through
O None had any idea that anything would be done
otherwise than By making attack upon Mr. Tton had WEI
cannot say In regard that not clear in my own
mind how Il could be done.
O. Now did you understand Mr. BeecheF in dssuading
the holding meeting, simply to oppose
measure Of attack on Tton! A. No Sir; don't think he
indicated that in the conversation and didn't understand
from any other source.
O. The point whether there anything foot in the
church at that which Beeoher could have dssuaded
you or others from doing except something that wOud have
beon hostile TOn' A. suppose action whatever
wond have been considered hostile to Mr.. Thton.
O. Precisely. A. Any action.
@ Precisely! A. Even against Mr.. Beecher personally
O Well Won nut 10 those words against Mr. Beecher per
sonsy obes to ask you once again whether 1t is
NOT fact that AZ that Of the church. so far
knew dreamed action against Mt Beeehe personally
A do not think they did. Sir.
Mr.. BEECHER's COUNsEIS BEFORE ADVISING
SEPARATION.
O Now Mr. Bell ! want TO ask you whether you
had an interview win Beecher In November December
1870, A. had frequent interviews with Mr. Beecher Mr.
shesrman.
O. Did you interview In which the subject Of Mr.
TNton's family was brought up,
Mr.. BELLS COUNSEL WITH MR.. BEECHBR Oh.
JECTED TO.
Mr.. FullertOn-I object to that, Sir.
Judge Neilson-Is that has been inquired into'
Mr. Fulteuon-oh, no, Sir
ARGUMENT OF Mr. SHEARMAN
Mr. Shesrman-May it please your Honor, offer