OCR Text |
Show TELEGRAPHIC THE lUOKCIIER TRIAL. New York, 12. At the opening o the court to-d;iy, Kvarta asked for s short delay, ns he was espectiug som( jmpprri aLout which ho wished to asli 'filton eoiiio questions, and did noi want lo put another witness on tht bt;ind until ho disposed of liiiu. Seated on the liench with judge Neilson, was ttuhert Mackenzie, of Dundee, Scotland. Scot-land. In the interval of waiting the arrival of the papers, the time wat spent by the lawyers in consultation and examining the testimony of different dif-ferent witnesses. Shearman escorted Mrs. Woodhull into the court room shout halt pusi eleven o'clock, and after hiking his place said that Mrs. "YVocdhiill hud refused to produce certain letters of Til ton's unless under instruction: from the court. Fullerton said ho hoped the court won! J not eo instruct her, and Judge Neiison declined to give witness any instruction. Evarts said the subpoena called for the production of the papers in court. Fullerton argued that Mrs. Wood-hull Wood-hull was summoned as a witness, not as an expressman, and read the sub-pa'na sub-pa'na commanding her to appear in court in person. Judge Neilson repeated that he give no directions. Fullerton argued that according to tho clause of the auupujna Mrs. Wood-hull Wood-hull was not compelled to deliver these papers to the counsel on the other side. Judge Neilson said, "You have no interest in it, Mr. Fullerton," to which tho latter replied, "But if Ev-arlB Ev-arlB places her on the Btnnci ns a witness wit-ness I will have an interest in it." After some further quotations from legal authorities, Judge Neilson said the papers might be given up if witness wit-ness had no personal objection. Shearman then called Mrs. Wood-hull Wood-hull and had a brief conversation with her, alter which she addressed the court and stated that the letters in her possession were in no way discreditable discredita-ble to her, or the party who wrote them. Stie had been in prison spveral times for publishing this scandal, and while there her ollice had bean ran-saeked ran-saeked and papers taken, some of which were in the hands of the defense, de-fense, and others with tho prosecution. prosecu-tion. With this explanation she said she was content io deliver up the papers, which she did, and they were : closely examined by counsel While the lawyers were examining the correspondence, cor-respondence, Mrs. Woodhull eat right in front of Mrs. Beecher. Evarts, after a brief delay, said they would not cross-examine Tilton for a short time yet. FuNertun argued that Tilton should be called now, as the prosecution would be placed at a great disadvantage disadvan-tage by Tilton being called at a future period, as they might then want Mrs. Woodhull as a witness, and she might then be beyond the jurisdiction of nis court. Judge Neilson then decided that when the oilier side called Tilton they should also have Mrs. Woodhull in attendance. Francis D. Moultou was then recalled, re-called, and testified that in his interview inter-view with Beecher on December 30th, 1S70, in reference to the delivery of the retraction letter he (witness) never said to him that lie should take a gen- all parties concerned. In the interview inter-view of Jan. 14th, 1871, ho never said to Beecher that Elizabeth loved his little finger belter than Tilton's whole body. Alter witness wrote the letter of contrition he gathered up the papers so that Beecher might read ihem. The letter was r ad belore it was signed. He never said lo Beecher that alter using the letter he would burn it. Do not remember having stopped Beecher in his dictation to ask it I hbd taken it down correctly. I'he letter let-ter was finished before it was read. Never hud Beecher's portrait at my house in Clinton street. Never said to Beecher in January, 1871, what a grand thing it would be if Tilton and he could join forces on the Christian t'iiuii. Never said that he had wealth and friends at his back and Tilton was being crushed down, and had no friends. Did not treat him with coldness cold-ness and severity on tnat day and don't think tie ever had such au interview inter-view as Beecher described. I was ill at my house at that time. Through the letter of February 5th, 1872, 1 t learned that Beecher met Tilton in the cars. Didn't ask Beecher to appoint ap-point an arbitration commilte for the settlement of diedithcultics. Talked of the settlement of difficulties 1x4 ween Tilton and Bowen, not between Tilton and Beecher. Did not suggest to Bowen on the night of June 1st, 1S73, that Kinsella should be sent for, and at the interview May 31st, IS 3, Beether did not denounce Tilton. On the night of December 3Jth, 1S0, and at the interview between Tilton and Beecher, the latter expressed a desire that Bowen should sigu the dralt of the tripartite agreement. At that meeting (Jlallin said he did not eare what was in Bowen's soul, he must sign the agreement. Not a word was said between the arbitrators other than about the business difficulties between Tilton and Bowen. The court here took a reccrs. |