New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-04-22


Mr.. Eyarts-wen. there b no trouble about It.
Judge Netlson-This Question how Is 1t msteriai
Mr.. Evarts-No trouble about IT, Tho sams ray OF
light win come through both papers and through the foul
holes.
Judge NeilsonThe question now objected to 10 "what
did Mr.. Mouton ssyr
Mr. Evarts-Yes SIR haven't asked the question yet
ITO the witnessl Did Mr.. MOulton say snythns you
the subject Of Mr.. Titon's object and motives IN
writing that Life ~ A. He did
Mr. Morfs-Objected 10.
Judge Neilson-we will take that
Mr.. Evarts-ITake the answer, "He did" What did he
sayi
Mr.. Morris-Objected to.
Judge Neilson-we will take that. GO on, Sir.
The witness-He said that he wrote
Mr.. Morris-what Moulton said in Mr. Tutons alb
sencef
Judge Neilson-Yes; we have the theory 10y Mr.. Tton
and Mr. Moulton both-a certain theory why M Titon
wrote. or rewrote rather. the woodruff biography.
Mr.. Beach-But surely, yonr Honor, before they can
show the declarations Of Mr.. Moulton upon that
Judge Neilson-It Is not with q view 10 impeach.
Mr.. Beaeh--sirf
Judge Neilson-It don't come In matter Of impeach
ment
Mr.. Beach--As matter Of impeachment II cannot
come in evidence At athe declarations OF Mr. MOul-
ton against Mr. Tilton beg your Honor to consider.
Judge Neilson-well, 500 1t.
of Mr. Mouon to the alleged conversation with this wit
ness, IL Is not competent
Judge Neilson-wen, that is the objection, is tt
Mr.. Beach-Yes, Sir. .......
Judge Neilson-That would seem TO bo good.
Mr.. Evarts--It Is not collateral.
Judge Neilson-Oh, Of course not.
Mr. Evarts-wen If your Honor please, have bit
proof here the subject of the intercourse established
by these two concert Mr. Tlton and Mr. Moulton
alle he sOle
by both of them, the "Lfe Of Mrs- Woodruff" by Mr.
Tlton sprang and offer tn prove by Mr. Partridge
what Mr. Mouton said him Mr. Partrdge at the time
when the publication fresh and was the subject OF
conversation between them-what Mr.. TIton's
motive waste w.t. smove In reference To
Mr. Beecher the scandal in his interest or for his
objects but for certain other objects Of his own II the
testimony is believed 1t certainly will be when 1t Is
free from any question OF the nfrmity of memory II
strikes at the foundation of all the prctenses OF these two
eoncurrng witnesses that the object Of that publication
was the covering OF this scandal and the humoring OF
this woman.
Judge Neilson-well the point suggested by counsel
remains to he answered-O wit that IL Is collateral
Mr. Evarts-Wen, II Is not collateral.
Judge Neson-It is collateral; that have decided
Mr. EvartsA part Of the issue against Mr. Beeeher In
this prove his guilt his guilt In the nature OF
tacit confession, confession by action; thai
those men dealt with the Wooodhuis under
this motive and for this object and that
alone and that Mr. Beecher authorized, approved
and applauded Now propose to prove what one OF
these says OF the other mans object and motive In
writing that Life" and that had connection with Mr.
Beecher and no connection with humoring this woman
but for objects of his r TtOn's) own, and am unable
nd the force Of my learned friends
that this is collateral fact. 1t may be subordinate 1t
NAV not be the head and front OF the evidence to prove
Mr. Beecher guilty its sole place here introduced
b1th haCh pp 70 a
huepce from which guilt is be imputed TO Mr.. Beecher
on the principal fact by this conduct OF his authorizing
ratfying their conduct Therefore 1t seems to me that
the objection of collateral has place and of course we
cannot discuss the question OF the absolute or compare
tive weight Of items testimon bear on the main
issue 1t bears on ISSUE 1t bears nowhere
MI Beach-Win yOur Honor permit me TO answer a
word OF the arguments Admitting Sir, for the moment
that Mr. Titon and Mr.. MoultOn have agreed in the
declaration OF the purpose for which their intimacy WIN
Mrs Woodruff instituted and prosecuted then sub
nit TO your Honor that the declarations OF Mr. Mouon
being party TO this action or in any degree IN
terested in result, except collateray as witness
his declarations against the interested party, MT I'll
ton are not receivable upon principle of law or logic
or Justice. II is an invariable and general rule
OF evidence that the declarations OF thhu
marty cannot he received against party the suit
less they given the purpose of Impeachment and
then only when his attention been directed to those
them But the principal assumption of the counsel
upon The other side arise from this evidencei Where
does he learn in this that Mr.. MOutOn ever coun
seed the writing OF the Life Of Mrs. woodruff by Mt
TtOn privy 10 in degree and least OF all al
vsed or concurred in any such proceeding Tor the pn
pose of conciating and placang that ladyl Why, the
evidence in this case is Sir that Mr. Moulton had no
connection with or knowledge of that " Life, ;
except when it written and nearly completed and
then condemned and disapprOved it, entered his protest
against IT, advised MI Tilton not to write II and not 10
publish H. And yet Sir when he thus discountenanced
II and dsclamed the counsel offers prove his declara
tions as party TO this transaction as he was
party TO this action whose rights were to be adudged
bv the verdict OF this Jury and the Judgment OF your
Honor and he asks do this against MI Iton being
pain from the evidence that Mr. Tton and Mr. Moulton
were not in accord with reference TO this very transac
ton about which he asks the declaration OF stranger 10
the action But again, Sir the counsel says that thls
theory Of the plaintiff in regard to the motive OF the
action the combined action, as between MI Tton and
Mr. Moulton is 10 throw dsciedit and TO attach crime
to Mr.. Beecher.
Mr.. Eyarts-To prove the principal issue. said.
Mr. Beach-No Sir you said to impute crime or wrong
10 Mr. Beecber To prove the principal issue, Sir! How
and in what degree?
MI Evarts-As confession tacty, and by action.
Mr. Beaeh-And how came this, Sir TO be introduced,
and why colaterai Did on the part of the
plaintiff produce evidence in regard to the connection
between Mr. Tilton and Mrs WoOdhulli
MI Evarts-Oh yes, Sir.
Mr. Beseh-So. Sir. beg your pardon. May 10 please
the counsel objected TO that ISSUE Sir endeavor
to rule the intercourse between Mr. Tlton and Mrs
woodruff and it was upon their proposition that that
issue opened and the evidence in that trans
action primarily introduced.
Mr.. Evarts-Turn 70 page Alb.
Mr. Beach, may be mistaken. Page what, siri
M. Evsrts-413, examination Of Mr.. Tilron.
Mr.. Beach-That in regard to keeping down the
threated publication. / admit that SIR but what has
thai