New-York tribune., 1875-01-28
TIE ACCUSED NEVER DENIED HIS GUILT

TIE ACCUSED NEVER DENIED HIS GUILT.
Francis d. Moulton was recalled and the redirect
examination continued
Judge NesOnl wish 10 the counsel each de be
fore We proceed this morning that looking report
the proceedings have been perhaps they have been little
eurpred TO see how much time s spen:
really unimporan points and think might economic.
Time and It will suit better the counsel would spe
chcay IN clean cut terms any objection they wish 10
and II s that understand and desire decide once
be content with an exception. H. the other hand IL 10
point that the counsel think Is worth discussion they will ind
cate that and ther viii be my wish hear discussion the
subject think might economic time in that way gentle
Mr. Evarts-B your Honor please observe In one Of the
morning papers sOme observations in regard the painful poa
on in which the witness placed by the great
acon which overlook him yesterday and which made the
occasion of some observations rejecting upon counsel
they had not appreciated that situation and had notwth-
standing it, insisted upon proOngng the examination Of the
witness Now your Honor understands the Court and the
counsel on both sides once pleed the matter wholly the
choice Of the witness.
Judge Neison-Tbat s certainly
Mr. Evarts-And with in that statement;
nor was there any basis for any such imputation
Judge Nelson-None whatever. ] very sorry it was
Inade.
Mr. Fuer,On-And for FOR which It Is necessary
10 state here the thought advisable that he should
not occupy too much time
Jadge Nesonlt question properly addressed 10 the
witness and he felt the burensome and that he ought
70 shake of his hands it question addressed TO him
Mr. Fuleton-Yes Sir wa pleased with the aacrity with
which the counsel the other side consented take just such
course as the witness desired Shall proceed sHi
Judge Nelson-Yes Sir
Nj FuertonAt the close Of the sitting yesterday, hr
Mouon calling your attention the article published
The Goaea Age embodying the letter Of Mr.. Ton to M
Bowen Of Jan l. 1911 YOu stated upon your
ton that the copy which appended the pars agree
exactly like the which you had hand
yOu paper and ask you whether that is the copy which
lhanding witness paper a. Yes Sir; this is the
copy that saw.
@ In respect does II differ from attached to the
trparite agreement A indicated what these differences
and specially also Sir that there some differences
the print; and then think the last clause here in writing
by Oliver johnson the copy that attached 10 the
tripartite covenant. Is that the answer
g That t. IundeEand you 70 say then these words al
the bottom o1 this proof namely, that being case, as
publication which necessary my defense do him
injury the printed slip A That my reco
lection, Sir from the other day when was looking AT it,
@ These words in the handwriting Of Oliver johnson,
understand you 10 sayi A. Yes Sir
The paper shown 10 the witness marked Exhibit No g.
q You have been asked upon the crosxamnaon in refer
ence to publication Of the letter TO Mr. Bowen connection
with the payment Of the 5000 by Nj Beecher wish 70 ask
YOU whether MI OttCler SuO P+YN"''NN ~f
letter in connection with the payment of the s5c in
necton with whatever said prior the payment Of the
8 0O0f A Never, Sir
q That not alluded by him. as understand you A.
No.
@ Where did you get which produced and
read il evidence yesterday and the twoees accompanying
them? A From M Theodore TilOn.
q They in your possession were they A No,
Sir.
O You have asked with respect 20 Theodore Ttons
yaedictorv and a. 70 when you first IT, what
vaedictory did you The yaectory Of Theodore
Tton in The LQepsdet-he yaledctoTy editor Of TIE
Asdepedent
O. When ceased be editor and became the chief CORE
spoDdent was itf A. Contributor.
O. II not vaefictory after his connection wrh the two
papers ceased at all was 1T 4. No, sir.
@ call your attention for moment 10 the letter OF Dec 20
1870 and you this question whether you knew Of the ex
sence Of that letter until after had been sen2 a No Sir
q Your answer then, that you disapproyec OF that letter.
had reference knowledge that you derived from Nj I'll
ton OF Us contents after had been sen' A Yes Sir
o. you dsapproyed sending o ii. A After 1t had been
written; yes, Sir.
O. And your sapproya was founded the fact that Bowen
did not father hs charges by signing the paper A
thought he ought have signed the Sir that was my
objection 70 it.
O. There but other question Mr houiion, and
hs In any the conversations which your attention mas
been called upon your The other side with
Mr. Beecher or which your directed upon the
direct examination did Mr. Beecher deny you his sexual
intercourse with Mrs Tnton? a Never.
Nj Fulerton-Tha is ali.