New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-03-17
ARGUMENT OF Mr.. EvARTs.


mt she'll and your IIonors ruling seems 10 me as phy %
as docs 70 nv learned opponent monstrousy wrong Inc
plaintiff first introduced evidence TO affect MI beeener as VIC
defendant in this towards Mt T'on' ue pain' W
making his conduct in question on the principal issue
| determinabe in some degree by his conduct during
the series of years following the alleged fsult
or crime and the inquiry brought into Court
And rs a part of that conduct OF the defendant there
comes be line Of proceeding which, IT SAID inulca'eS
consciousness Of guilt because Of continued efforts OF suppress
sion and that il natural and subtle and moral that
this religious society, through its appropriate chan
pels should Initiate and prosecute and deveope in
quiries and that think my learned friend and his
gone intimate that is presumabe that they
and the suppression must be charged to The pas
tor who said be the master OF their conscences and
conduct Something of that kind little rednndent, no
doubt.
Mr. Beach-who do Won attribute that TO.
Mr. Evarts-Wel attribute that to the plaintiffs counsel
Mr. Beach-We Sir ii is not attributable to me, and DO
not think TO any Of the other counsel
Mr. Eyars-I think can find It in the record Now II your
Honor please we have then selection Of certain step
of the action the church and society or Its fnbord
| nate committees which, think, carries that lm-s
preston. and they give properly, we may suppose Ior
thai present suggestion the occurrences that surround
the West charges which in the Summer first and then the
Fall OF 1873 And all Of that lad its per,inence and
It's efficacy such they might be from the relation to
the disclosure Of the Woodruff scandal TO tina public. and
to the treatment or treatment Of II in way that
would be with the innocence of Mr. Beecher and
| as they allege, only compatible with HE guilt,
Now we take up not step necessarily that they produce but
take up earlier eceden and immediate action OF the
Church having down "a the initial and the spontaneous and
as the action proposition Of the Church Itself,
by Mr. Bccches authority Unaffected by his influence
uninspired by his suggestions and we introduce that
a. the action M body prOnouncing against and suppress
ing inquiry unnecessary in the yndcation of their pastor
Now our learned friends when they introduce remote line
OF INQUIRY which they think bcara their side Of the case
must quarrel either with the limit or of the range oil the
opposite inquiry by which establish that all this thai they
think chareabe TO the PASTORS not chargeabc 10 bm our
is the action Of others Now that is the proposition Of law
concerning understand your Honor 10 have ruled tina
We are entitled that line position OF evidence
Mr. Beach-Your Honor hes not rllcd that IL is 'eryeay,
Sir logcan by assuming Lis premises TO reach desired
conclusion The counsel have adopted what
he calls line of inquiry for the purpose Of sustaining the
mu.tion which we make Mr.. Beechc has pesstcnuy
and continually struggled for the suppression OF all
| investigation Of this alleged scandal What does be
mean Sir by "a line Of inquiry and what the lime OF
inqury" which have adopted? When that is discovered
Sir the gentleman will not Directing TO answer or
to any range or extension line Of nqa But when he
assumes by pur-upg psricr'u Inc OF inquiry that an
thorize him incompetent and mmateria evidence
in consequence which have given he must permit
me to dispute that proposition Now, Sir we have given no
proof of The action Of Plymouth Church any single particu
| lar.
Judge Except the reception Of the West charges
Mr. Beach-Not any single particular have We given syl
liable proof regard the action of Plymouth Church We
proved West charges presented We traced them TO the
presence of Mr. Beecer traced his action and his dcclara
tios regard charges and the other side who
brought in action Of the Church and the Church
records the purpose of correcting the recollection OF
Mr. Vest upon "a dental inquiry which made. The
mere fact which proved that Mr. West presented those
charges TO the Examining Committee without pursuing that in
Guy further in degree with the action Of
! Plymouth Church, upon those specific charges
Iut suppose il otherwise Sir Suppose had the
presentation charges and the action Of the Examining
Committee upon them. Does that allow themand your
Honor will for the purpose Of correcting state
ment that permitted TO prove nothing which took
place before the Examining Committee unless MI Beecher
presenthat they stopped us with an objection ar the
records will and that driven from proof upon
| that subject under that objection But suppose We
had nrovcn the action which the Commtcethe Examining
Committee Board Of Deacon whatever tue authority
may have beeDupon the West chac does that authorize
them go different character OF proof and different
action officers oha church for the purpose OF showing
that they acted independently OF Mr. Bcecherf Cur object
not 10 prove and did attempt prove that the
action Of the official body Of that church was con-
trolled at all by Mr.. Bcechet We proved his action
declaration individual members Of that congregation. II
was not upon through official bottles that he operated
in their official character II by his private and conf
dcna influence exerted upon them individuals through
which endeavoed his object and propose and
purpose motive, and it the only in which did
do So sir We did comp cdte ourselves 10y any evidence
with the action Of the jupcanor- Of the church Now,
Sir without pursuing this will your Honor please find in de-
Gliding this que s1ion rule principle OF evidence which
will allow give in testimony against Mr.. Iion the
action Of the Official bodies OF Plymouth Church upon the
general subject scandal that action in sub
ordination 10 the influence OF Mr. Beecher, whether
1t was irrespective of any suggestions upon HE
part And when your Honor has ruled that II is not
proper upon part the deense cOuncract the force Of
evidence which give Of specific declarations and Of
ent significance different eject upon their actions when
we were not present how it is il Mr.. Beechers in
absence declarations may be proven the acoas Of his
church can bea
THE RECORDS OF PLYMOUTH CHURCH ADMITTED.
Judge Neilson-My own view is this, that the de-
PENDANTS counsel liberty to bring in tomorrow morning
the official records the Church. and TO put in evidence any
record he may have touching this subject either considering
and fyoring an investigation the Woodruff scandal
determining not TO investigate the WOodhu scandal proposing
silence making that and policy Of the Church But
it cannot by informal conversations with might occur
one evening and forgotten Mr. Sherman has such
records; he will bring them IN tomorrow morning.
The Jury will morning, please at eleven
O'Clock.
Mr. Beach-w your Honor please read page 80 Of the
| record; aud what follows.
Mr.. Pearsal-Pagc $50, also.
The Court then adjourned o'clock this morning
/