Indiana State Sentinel, Volume 24, Number 26, Indianapolis, Marion County, 9 February 1875 — Page 2

THE INDIANA STATE SENTINEL TUESDAY. FEBRUARY 9 1875.

THE BROOKLYN LAOCOON.

TILTON ON THE STAND. JVDfiE KKIUOS'8 DBCI-ION HB PERMITS TILTON TO TESTIFY THE PLAINTIFF BEOIN3 OrVISO EVIDENCE COMPOSURE AMOMJ THE 1NTERE3TEDPARTIR3 THE OLD BTOET RETAILED AT LENOIII. . New York, Feb. l.-The Brooklyn City Court room was again crowded to-day at the beginning of another week of the great scandal trial. Mrs. Tilton, Mrs. Field, Mrs. Sbearman.and two other ladies, Mr. Beecher, with his wife and sons, occupied their ac customed places. After thb court had been called to order Judge Neilson cave hia opin ion as to the right to testify oi Tilton, in the following words: "In determining the mention raised bv this obiection, the court holde, first, that the plaintiff ia comrwtent to be sworn, and to testify In hia own behalf; second, that as to the principal question at issue, he is not romneteDt to testify as to any confidential communication. It is considered that this qualified direction respects the present state or the law 01 evidence, ana aiso reppm-is whatever may remain of the rnle which Im roses silence or restraint by reason cl man ial relations, and on the ground of public Interest or policy." Thecdore Tilton then took the stand and was sworn, the defense enterlmr exceptions. In answer to questions by ex-Judge Fullerton, Mr. Tilton said: I ana ) years of ago. I was inarried on the 2d of October, 1855, by Mr. Beecher. My wife's age is about 31. I have four children. I bore bben engaged in a literary profession. I became connected with the Independent in the aorinz of 18ÖC. I remained tbera unc'er Beecher. and. on bis retiring, in lSltf or 18G-I I became his successor. I held tho position of director under Beecher. In December, 1S70. 1 owned the house In which I lived. With tho library. I valued it about J25.000. I owned a share in tho New York Tribune, tmall itrm in the West, valued at 11.600. piece of land in Prospect Park, valued at 1,000. There was mortgage of $7,600 on my house. When left the Independent, my property was alned at about ffcW.OOO. I bad money out t interest, deposited with Woodruff fc Robinson after January 1, 1871. Seven thousand dollars were obtained from Mr. Bo wen; $0,000 from my lecturing tour; f 1,000 from my books; 50,000 from Monitor, and about $ö,000 from subscribers to the G!den Aga. X bad no debts other man nenson MY PROP KBIT. I did not know tho source from which the money came which was given to me by Moniton. I did not know that it came from Beecher. On the 50th of December, 1870, had an interview with Beecher. Mr. Evarts objected to the witness giving evidence in relation to any statement made to the witness by bis wife. Judze Neilson ruled that the witness could say what passed between himself and Beecher. but not what his wife had told him. The witness continued: Moul ton brought Beecher and retired. I did not salute Beecher, nor he me. I crowed the room and locked the door, went back and ast onnosite Beecher. I began In this way, " think I said: "I presume you received from "Bowen a letter demanding your retirement from your pulpit and Brooklyn." He said I Bid, sir." I told him he need not fear that letter. He thanked me. I said be need notdoso, Elizabeth deserved hia thanks and not me. lie said he understood the object of this interview only in general terms and asked me to tell him what Bowen had said. I told him it would be better to go to Bowen him . sell. 1 told him Bawen had said that Beecher was Intimate with the members of his congregation for the past 25 years, that he was not safe man and naa ruiuea rami lies and households, that he was a wolf in the fold and should be exterminated, and that Bowen had said that he had it in his rower to drive Beecher out of Brooklyn in twelve hours. I told him that after I bad this interview with Bowen, I told my wife abort it and she was distress and reminded roe of what I aid in the previous summer. I would not recall my promise not to hurt Beecher, for if lie was driven from Brooklyn it would be her shame and that ot her children. Beecher asked me what I meant by her shame and read to him ELXZABKTH'S LETTER OF CONFESSION'. This confession was destroyed on this even Jng. The witness was going on to relate the contents of this letter of confession, but it was objected to by Evarts, and a long argument ensued over this point. The judge decided that tbe contents of the lelter should be left out for the present. -Tilton then testified that Beecher attempted to speak, but the witness said : "Walt, hear me through and then speak." Tbe witness said to Beecher that Mrs. Tilton had come unexpectedly and said to her husband that she -wanted to communicate a beeret that had long been on her mind, and that she wanted to throw it eff, that she had been at the point several times, and once particularly when she was on a ick bed. Before telling the secret she extorted a promise from her husband not to tell any one, and not to Injure the person concerned. She said it was a secret between herself and her pastor. She said that for a long time a friendship had ex'.sted between them, and more than friendship. It bad been sexual intercourso. It began after tbe death of her son, Paul. She went to her pastor's bouse, and on the 10th of October, 1863, she surrendered her body to him im sexual embrace. On the Saturday following she repeated the act at tho bouse of her husband, and on several ether occasions at hie house and at several other places. It had occurred all through tbe fall. In (he month of July, 1870, she had written a letter to the witness, telling the witness ct these laets. She had been greatly distressed, owing to the rumors of the conditiou of Beecher's moral character. She win ted to demonstrate the honor and dignity of her sex, until he told her that her love was innocent. She said' to Tilton that for a longtimo Beociier'a Dome had not been a happy one, that his wile bad not b'en a satisfactory one, and that he wanted Elizabeth to be a wife to Lim, but she always refused. Beecher's solicitations to her were oftentimes violent. She had gone away from the witness in the sprintr, and the witness wrote her a letter savins; that until she made a full coniession he would nsverlook upon her. He said that she had come down from the country on purpose to make tbe confession. In making the coniession the witness said that he wished it understood that tbe conversation was not glvn word for word, but as accurately as be could. Ha furthermore told Beecher ou that occasion that Mrs. Tilton naa become a broken hearted woman, and that instead of taking her usual summer vacation she went to tbe far West. He also told him in recard to the statement that she bad asked Tilton to end to Beecber that they might bo'd an interview and she could hear it, and that THB LETTER ABOUT WITHDRAWIKO from fbe pulpit and Brooklyn sheuld be withdrawn. lis also told Bseetier that be had relused to acquiesce, and that she bad appeared to him jour or five times, sud then she ak9ii th witness t: ca.-ry a letter, and the witness refused to do it. She then implored him to bold an Interview wifa livelier which sbosld not jar hU pride. Mrs. Tilton wrote a letter to Moulton for the purpose of holding an Interview. In conclnfion the witness reminded lteet0T that hfl bad revoked 1

ibo decani te mads üpeu Mm, and prera-feed

sed Be?cher that he would not assist Bowen

in his efforts to prosecute Beecher. , At the closed the narrative tho witness waited a moment, and noticed that Batcher's race and neck were blood red. Tilton went to the door, unlocked it and Vald: "You are free to go." Beecher appeared not to hear him 4nd sat as If in a dream. Tilton repeated it, and Beecher arose and walked to the door, but came back and asked: "May I go for the list time and see Elizabeth." Tilton said no. and then yes, and said to Beecber: "Do not chido her. It you smite her with a word I will smite you In a tenfold degree. I did not smite you when I bad the power, for my wife's sake, but if you chide her with word. 1 win smite your name neiore me world." Beecher put both hands to his bead and said: "It is all out: it is all out." Beecher went aown stairs wim his hands to his head, and Moulton was at tha foot, and he asked Moulton If be had seen Elizabeth's confession, and Moulton answered yes. Bsecher said: "This will kill me. Monlton." and he thereupon went into the parlor. A recess was here taken During the relation or this narration Mrs. Beecher smiled frequently, and Mr. Beecher occasionally, lut no other signs or manifestations produced bv the testimony - were observant in their featurts. T.ltoa cave h!s evidence lna calm, cool way. After th,; recess Mr. and Mrs. Belcher were surrou?', by their friends, and after a few mom, spent in conzratalaUons. they left tue ' irt room. Alter the recess niton resumed aua contin ued his testimony. He was asked by-ex Judge Fullerton to state tho contents of the letter read to Bacher st tho Interview. This was objected to bv Evarts, eh the letter Lad been drstrojecl. it was accordingly KCtEDOCmr THE COURT. Beach argued that this paper had been pre pared and it was agreed that it should bo submitted to Bsc cher's counsel. Counsel quoted from l"gal authorities to show that communication between husband and wife shown to a third party could be proved. Judge Neilson said that it would be difücult to decide in the face of a case like this and he would like to hear Evartsontbe subiect. Evarts argued that the conoaence Ol me wue in uer nusuumi was that it was to be used in the interview to suppress any controversy that might arise on the part of the wife. lie had not heard any yiews to entitle tbe witness to take a part of that paper and relate its contents. He held that tbe whole narrative was inadmissable, as being out of tbe confidence of the wife, and the letter and copy had been destroyed. After some further argument Judge Neilson said be would still rule out tbe paper. Evarts then moved to strike out this evidence on the ground that it would disparage the wife, as giving proof of the adultery of the wife, not being competent according to law. Judge Neilson refused this, and an exception was taken. The witness then said : On the 3d of January I went to Moulton's and, shortly after, Beecher entered the room. Moulton said that I should not refuse to p peak to him in his house. I asked how could I do so, knowing that be had ruined my wife. Moulton said: "How could you act so to a man who humbled himself before you as betöre his God." I then said. "Good morning." Mr. Beecher said. "I do not put In any plea for myself. If you wish me to retire from the pulpit, only say the word and I will leave. There wiil be no sellin e of pews, and I will go out of public life. I will cither go out or lifo by suicide, orjby a journey to some other part of the world." I told him that my wife said that Beecher ought never to know this, for, in addition to becoming my enemy.he would also become her's. He,aid that the relation between himself and Elizabeth was not always marked by sexual intercourse, and he could not offer any excuse lor himself. He asked me to believe that he had never sought her for SELFIäH PURPOSES, and that the intercourse was from motives of love, and not lust ; that she was tbe only woman be had ever loved. lie a3ked me if I could reinstate her in my love and esteem, and drew a picture of a man sitting on a brink, and said that he was on tbe edge of hell. I remember that Beecher sid some thing which led him into a violent burst of grief. During the conversation with Moulton, which the witness did not bear, Beecher appeared overcome with grief. Moulton requested the witness to leave them together and be did so. Beecber was present.. Tbe letter which I had written to Bowen dated vbe 1st of January, was under discussion. I bad been sent for twice in reference to the same consultation about this matter. Moulton read it aloud and told Beecher I had written it, thinking that I must make some explanation to the public about the termination of my services with Mr. Bowen. I told him that it was announced in the papers by Bowen that I was to be the editor of the Brooklyn Union and a contributor to ttelndependent, and that these appointments had for some independent reason been cancelled by B3wen,andthat tbe public must be informed of the reason of these charges. Beecber said that so far as the charges of Bjwea were concerned he did not care about any that he (Bowen) could make. Beecher also said that there was a peculiar malignity in tbe charges marie by Bowen against him, and that he nerer committed any violence on any woman. The interview ended by Moulton' asking me to retire. He usually bad some talk with Beecber after these interviews. I remember shortly alter this Moulton was Hl. I went to see him. Boecher Wiis there. He said: "Frank i3 very sick. Heb at the grave's edge. I am afraid he will die .nud what will then bocomoof our case, - .Frank has saved me." So saying he kissed ine on the forehead and ' retired. I bad another int-erviow with him either at the close of that month or the beginning of the next. I was sent for to Moulton', who had then recovered, and it took place In his house. Beecher was then present. Moulton held in his hand a letter which Beecher had received from Mrs. Morse. Beecher had received tbe letter, and It was in relation to some statements contained in tbe letter that I had been sent for. Here was sbown a copy of the letter, which the wit ness identified. The letter charged me with TELLING TWELVE PERSONS about Beecher's criminal relations; I denied this. The letter also said that I had not enough money to buy my family food. I turned to Moulton and said; "You know that this Is false." Beecher asked me if I had told twel7e persons ot tbe charges, and I replied that I had not. I told him that Mrs. Morse was saying among our relations that Theodore was making auch and such charges against Elizabeth, and that these charges were propagated by Mrs. Morse. FURTHER EVIDENCE OF THE PLAINTIFF. LITTLE RALPH': PATERNITY THH FRIEND SHIP OF WOODHULL INTERVIEWS WITH B3KCHEB PUBLICATION OK CARDS A BLOW FOR TRACT MAS. HOOKER A SEW DOCC at EST. New York, Feb. 2. The wcond day of the fifth week ct the Beecher-Tiltou trial opened this morning with na crowded a court room as ever. Mrs. Tilton and her f? male frionds were early In attendance , After the formal opening ct court, Mr. 7 9a took the witness chaif and resumej-ils evidence. He said: 'j he nxt interview with Beechfr 00ourred Bborllv .rfr. I thr k it was tha, sec TYe-;k la Fcivnwy, at xnj bouse, at ray '

request given to Mr. ivioniion. 1 wm du

when he came, trat l wauwa 10 krow 11 uo cruM tell reo with rerjice to tba lit tl a bny Italr h. ni he said that tbe date fixed bx Mrs. Tilton wai tho correct one. rir. Beecher ssked me the date. I told r.im Eiixibelh bad told me that date at which time their criminal Intimacy bad begun was on the 10:h ot October, 1SÖS, and ha Faid that be bad no evidence oi it, but he tboujrni ne was rUat. some expn&slcs of prief and misery fell from him, and that wm the end nt th interview. He went 10 ir. w'JUi" ton's Louse. This interview lasted 11 or minutes. I recoliect the time of the publication r.t Mr. Woodhull'a card. I had an intarvia t Monlton'n houHe w ith Becher t thnttms of that publication. I told him ,h. .m tn ma a.t. tha CiOlden JlgeOLUCS MDU put a card in my hand, which she wished me to read. A portion oi it said that a pub11 tcu'hor in one city was living with tUicifdnf snrthor miblic teacher in the oma -itv. she aid she referred to the Rev. II. w. richer and mv wife. She related other particulars, which were gathered in her mm ot November 2. 1872. Her other trawii.thit I had discovered her intimv. and had used personal vio hr taken the woddinz ring off her i'no-or und prou n l it in the earth with mv iw.f.1 ' T told Beecher tbat Moulton. aud went to Mrs. Woodbull's house about the matter, and had an interview with her. She had rp lorrtd only sliehtly to the scandal, and Mr. Moulton admonished her that hhe should not soeak ill of her. Mr. Moulton told me afterwards, whoa coinlnc away thRt ho thoncfht thU woman was not in her right miuii, and it was from tbat time that Moulton, Beecber aud Tn-Kftlf worn in cocfcu'talion to atön tho circulation of ths woman's f-tories IIee'.ber creativ excisea. auu raoumm 1 l-sa 14 tolil h'.m that thers was no cause for alarm as they culd 6ssily keep htr quiet. Kindness must be used wl h her and she must be pot under some obligation to us. Beecher coiECiJtl in thia view and we agreed to become personally acquainted wltn her and to treat her as göntleinen should treat a lady. We resolved to make her acquainted with Mrs. Tilton and Mr?. Moulton, but Mr. Beecber said that Mrs. Beecher wculd not become acquainted with her. Beecher said tbat be hoped tne ladies would exercise a good iufluenco over Mrs. Wood bull. In nursuance of that arrangement I published än article in the Golden Age about the EFRAXCHISEMEST OF WOMAN, in which I allnded to Mrs. Woodhull. I drew up an article claiming the rlht for women to vote, on tbe ground of their being citizens of the United State, and bad it published in the form of a tract, and addressed to Charles Samcer. This was one favor I did for her. She then 'brought me a biographical sketch of. herself, written by her husband, which she aked me to revise. I did so, and completed the manuscript, after which I published it. Six or seven weeks after this Mr. Mculton told me that he had a letter written to Mr. Beecber by Mrs. Woodhull, with reference to presiding at tho Stsinway Hall meeting. Beecher bad been ssked to preside at her meeting. Brecher was present. I told bim I i I bad presided at a .ineetiog of hers in the Cooper Institute when she lectured on finance. Beecber said he would not like to preside, bnt if he rhanged bU mind he would let me know. Moulton and I went to the ball.wbica was crowded, and I introduced her with a few words. I left town in a few days after on inv lecturing tour, and w'th Moulton made a friendly call upon her. It was on account of the publication of her pamphlet "Tit for Tat" that I relinquished Mrs. Woodhull. I say here, that Henry Ward Beecher is responsible for my intimacy with Mrs. Woodhull. On the evening of tha lecture in Steinway Hall, I had not contemplated going there, and was under no promise to do so. The article, "Tit for Tat" was brought to my cilice by some person and shown to me. I ihlnk it was a lady from California who showed it to me. In the first or second week of December, 1871, Beecher came into Moulton's study when I was present. He asked me if Moulton bad conferred with me on my formally retiring from the church and I said he had done sobut I thought there was no reason why I should resign. Beecher said it was reported among the church members that I was a spiritualist and had foresaken the church. Jle said he understood my situation and how I was placed, but be asked me to write a formal letter to the courcb asking for my dismissal. Bat I said no; that be knew the reasons of mv being identlfled with Mrs. Woodhull. I said if it -wss dangerous to have my name on the churr roll to strike it out, or get a new one palnu ' ' and I told him that if he treated the matt-, boldly he would soon get rjd ot the diffic; ties by which he was surrounded. I ea C it was a false thing to require that I shonÄ j retire from his church on account of my LIDERAL VIEWS in religion. I peremptorily declined to ak for a letter of dismission from the church On another occasion I met Beecher in the cars while traveling. I was writing, and he came up and said: "I hope this Is not another poem like 'Sir Marmaduke.' " ' I said no, tbat it was an essay. He said be thnught there was no peace any more on earth for him, and be saw nothing but trouble for him-jelf- I told him that if he met the matter boldly there could be no danger. He thought my paper was inimical to him, and advised kbtit soma person in the ofQce should be made a friend of his. I tcld him to go to his work and not ba downcast, and relieve his mind of all apprehension of me. The tears then came into his eyes and he left me. That is tbe substance of that Interview with Beecher. When I was lecturing West, I was asked about my sudden removal from tbe Independent. On my return I told my friends this, and also Mr. Moulton giving him the true reasons, which I desired to punish in the Golden Atte. Moulton advised me not to do so. This paper (produced! has an article prepared br Mr. Johnson and myself for publication. The stories toli in the West were horrible and Injurious to my reputation. I believed I was entitled rightly to the 17,000 from Bowen. I wrote a letter to Pastor Ualliday at a later period dissolving my connection with the church. I had several conversations with Mr. Beecher rith regard to having some person on the Christian Union who could deal more fairly by me on the subject ef tbe scandal one who knew the facts and I suggested Oliver Johnson.' After Bowen paid me ?7,000 Moulton asked, as coming from Mr. Claflin, it Bowen took back his charges against Beecher I would withdraw mine. The paper was then drawn up, which I signed. Bowen, when giving me the $7,000, said that be had no ill feeling toward me, and that If I supposed be bul I was wrong, lie published the vindication and Justification ot me Iv the Independent, which was copied Into the Christian Union with comments attaobed. Mr. Fullerton then read the article, as published in the Christian Union with the comments attached, of the uate ot April 17. 1872. and it was otfered in evidence. I remember Beecher's dicing at BiuuiwD'g nousj in uetooer, 1 ne only ie&ture ou ine occasion is mis. jir. uecber said to me that be wai either going to have or bad the Aiiiiivsmary 0 . JIM KILVER WEDDING. He spoke to me bont his popularity and the strength of bis friends. He asked me if Iihought there was Imminent danger In our case. Itoldfciin 'hat tbawasa pood tftne to rwijjo, and a ' he was writing the life of Christ he could to tbe Holy lam? to study tho subject ! rb thoroughly. I

told him there were so many nryinjc eyes

that It was dangerous lor bim to remun in he pulpit, and he , auu uö uiuujincu IUIU& u n I it. This was all that occurred. I was in New Hampshire when the Woodhull pub lication of the scandal was made, and on my return home 1 was lol l mat it had been cir culating a whole week during my absence. I was iciormed Dy eituer aioniton or Baecaer that they had a conference when it was made clear, but thought it was better to treat the publication with silence as the best means of killini it. Beecher said that if any de nial was made, it would only provoke Woodhull to produce it In another form, and so it wouiu nave to De aeniea three or lour times. There were several meetings about this In Moulton s study, and at one of them it was propoead to publiah the card by me which has already been given In evidence. I said that if any card was to be published I was not tbe person to do so, that it wa the duty of Beecher, as one of the parties more intimately connected, to publish the card. I told bim he might deny it and I wonld not contradict his denial. I said that if I published the card the public would say that Tilton's wife bad been attacked, and he merely published a card vindicating his conduct with the Wocdhulls. I told him I was aogry that he did not put on the responsibility of meeting the Wdaull story, and that all tbe odium was put upon my shoulders. The court here took a recess. After the recoss tho examination of Tilton was continued. He testilied that after the publication of the Woodhull story there was aa interview at Moulton's at which those present were Moulton, Franklin B. Woodruff and Tracy. It was on the first Sunday eveningaher he returned from New Haiup.ihlro. He was sent for to go to Moul ton's nouse, where he saw first Moulton. Evarts objected to testimony concerning the iutarview, inasmuch as Beecber was rot presoot. The court told hm to take an exception. The witness eaid that on going into tbe study, he saw Tracy and Woodruff. He told Tracy that the interview was against hU protest, and tbat Tracy had been taken Into the consulration without his knowledge or consent. He then said tbat belove going any further he wished Tracy to give bim a pledge that it th witness and Beecher ever came into collision JTracy would not net in any way as BtcoLtr'a counsel. Tracy replied that EE OAVK THAT FLEDQK both as a lawyer and as a gentleman. The witness said "very well.' Tracy was then handed Beecher's letter of contrition which be read four or five times. Tracy then exclaimed Great God!" and said that the man who could express such a heart-break, had already been punished enough. He said that this was a case in which lying would be right. He said to the witness tbat the publicity would notonly ruin his wife and B?echer,but would ruin tbe witness, as the world would never forgive hina for condoning his wife's crime. Tbe witness replied that he well knew tbat publicity would ruin all partios, but that his great anxiety was for his wile. At a subsequent interview In Moulton's study, Beecher showed Rome letters andnaid that bis sister, Mrs. Hooker, had threatened to Invade his pulpit aud read from his dek a confession of his connection with Mrs. Tilton. Tbe witness and Moulton read the letters which wero from Mrs. Hooker. Beecher asked what could be done, and the witness BRid that he would see Mr. Hooker and stop the mischief. He did see her at tho residence of a iemale friend of his In JNew York. As a matter of delicacy, ho did not think it necessary to mention her name. Tbe court said that it was not necessary. A lively dispute took p!ar:e between Evarts and Full rton in regard to the ground on which the name could lw withheld, although both said that they did not want it. Judge Neilson said that ths trouble with the court in this case was that both of the counsel ' were right. (Laughter.) The witness said that he induced Mrs Hooker to relinquish her design : when be saw Beecher afterward, the latter expressed bis gratitude, üeeeber also made some re marks concerning Mrs. Hooker which the witness did not deem it necessary to repeat, Evarts objected to the last remark as an In unendo, and there was another fruitless war ct words between the counsels. The witness said tbat about a fortnight after this Beecher, at an interview in Moulton's study, said that be could no longer believe in the policy of silence in regard to the Woodhull scandal; be said that the public would believe that where there was so much smoke there was some fire, and suggested that to satisfy tbe public, some journal, such 8S the IS. Y. Tribune, should ' be induced to publish a severe editorial arti--,sle, not signed by any one, to tne enect that ; fie Woodhull story grew out oi stories re rwated by Bowen. which Bowen has since denied. Tilton said that he objected to this as a fatal policy for the reason that Bowen had signed the tripartite agreement only at tbe colicitation ot Claflin, and had repeatedly said since that a coach and tour could be driven through that agreement, and said to Beecber that if be drove Bowen to the wall the latter would fight, and.lt be bad any evidence in his possession be wonld be a dangerous antagonist. IVeecher said that he thought BOWKS HAD NO PKOOF In his possession. At a subsequent inter view Tilton said that he told Eeecher that he had asked Dr. 'Storrs what, in his opin ion, publio opinion in Brooklyn required him (the witness) to do, and that the other advised the witnes3 to show to him the documents in the case, and that Mrs. Tilton, in consequence, wrote tho letter beginning ".Prompted by my CDUPCIeuce and my duty to my busband," which was already in evi dence. Baecher expressed his great regret that tug witness had gone to Dr. Storrs and said that he could never face the latter again. Subsequently the witness told Beecher that his wife had urged the policy of a complete denial, and said that the mistake in tLe first place was in not denying the whole. The witness told her that she could do what she choose upon her own re sponsibility, and she wrote a card for Dubli cation. The witness showed this toBc3her with a statement tbat Mrs. Tilton wished him to also write a card denvinzthecbarees. Mr. Beecher said that it would be uselessfor him to do that unless the witness promised tbat he would not make the denial of no efiect. . The witness told him that he had nothing to fear, nnless he was the aggressor, in which case he (the witness,) would defend himself at all hazzards. Beecher then sat down and wrote a card, of which the witness had a photographic copy, Fullerton then called upon the counsel for the defense to produce the original in Beecher's hand writing, bhearman said that he did not know what paper was meaht. Morris taid tbat Shearman could not help knowinsr. Shoarman then producsd several papers, one of which the witness identified as the paper in question. Evarts said that this was a paper which be had offered in evidence, but which had not been sufNiciently identified for bim to cet in. Fullerrton men react ine paper as follows: BiiooKLTN. December 29. 1872. I solemnly deny the scandalous oharire made against me and Mrs. Tilton, and I deny that there has been any criminal relations between us, or any color or reason for the eharge. My acquaintance with Mrs. Tilton has ever been that ot the frreatest repct. I bera deelre to state in addition that Mr. Tilton, during the whole of this shameful scandal, has invariably spoken in the highest terms of his wife, and shown to me the Ligheat prooü at friendship. II. W. Beechhr.

The wanes resumed : Moulton wan present at the early part of the interview. He had to leave. Beecher wrote a prefix to the card.Jn shape of a nota to Moulton, explaining the purport of the card. After he wrote it, he asked me if I thought it would be satisfactory. I asked Carpenter, who had came in, to go around to my houso and bring Mr?. Tilton. He did so, and sho expressed herself &3 SATISFIED WITH THE CARD. Nothing ever came of the card. Beecher said

there was danger, in the case of a disagreement, . that his card wonld put put him at a disadvantage before the public, the letter to a complaining friend was published either the 26th, 27tb or 2Sthot December. Beecher said to me that he thought the publishing of it was very injurious, that it would excite comment which we desired to restrain. During the month of December, 1872, the public pressure put upon me to do something in rezard to Mrs. Wood hull's story, was utterly beyond the power of any language to describe. Every newspaper throughout tbe land was demanding thnt some explanation should be made.demanding that Beecher should make it, demanding that Bowen should make it, demanding that we all should make It, and there was the pressure of Brooklyn, and there was tbe pressure of the church and everywhere the very air seemed to press on us. I have mentioned that about a fortnight before the interview I have just given, Beecher desired, as a plan of meeting it, that we should cut the tripartite covenant in two and takeout Bowen's part and charge bim with ail the slander and make him bear tbe burden of retractingit. This letter to a complaining friend succeeded tbat about 10 or 15 days, and arose out of tha same emergency. I will also say, that in the month of December, I prepared ANOTHER STATEMENT, the long document which has become technically styled, I don't know why, "Tue True Story," for it was not a true story. It was a false one. As Beecber said he cculd not bear the publication of tbat, that it would kill him, and as the card to a complaining friend, as be expressed it, only caused the very compaent which I sought to quell, I prepared another statement, a brief letter to a friend out West. It has been read In evidence. It bore the date of, I believe, tbe very next day, perhaps the very last day of the year. At all events it was written with a view to herald in the new year season. There were a dozen different devices, some by Moulton, some by Beecher, and some by me, in that month. The tripartite agreement was published May 30, 1S73; and bad an interview with Beecher the next morning at Moulton's house. J told Beecher that the comment which that publication had excited in one day made it necessary that there should be a prompt and emphatic disclaimor either by him or by me, I didn't care which, of any such intimation as that I bad committed a crime against him, when he knew that it was he who had committed against me a crima. I told him I would not permit tho public press to put me in the position of having been pardoned by i iiu for some atrocity, which was all the creator in the public imagination because it was not named and that be mast correct orI would, the impression which that publication produced. I told him that I had in consultation with menus on the previous evening resoivea on my method of prevent ing it. If my method was to be adopted, would publish, in A BRIEF CARD, Betchers' letter, now known as the letter of contrition, with a comment appended that tbe pub.ic wqpld see from the above card whether I had committed crimo against Baecher, or Beecber had committed a crimo against me. I said that he bad better correct it himself.that he could do it in a milder way. without lnvolv ing such a cost to his feeli nis. The next incident in the matter occured during the eve ot that day. I went around to Moulton's house on Saturday evening. That would be May 1st, 1873. I "Was going up into the etudy. Mr. .Moul ton told me not to ge up, for Beecher was there, and ' he did not wish us to meet. I remained down stairs. Pretty soon Moulton came down to me and said that Beecber was in threat despondency and had proposed as his method of settling the case to resign bis ministry. Moulton dictated to me from memory a copy or a letter of r sanation which he said Beecher had that night brought Moulton said to me: ''What do you think of that as my expedi ent?" I said: "You may tell Beecher if he resigns his ministry in this crisis, flinging back that shadow on my family, I will shoot him upon the street. Whether he communicated tbat to Beecher or not. I don't know. After Beecher, on Saturday evening, had prepared his letter ot resignation and I had sent him tbat message ' through Moulton, that he must rind some other way, I went early the next morning to Moulton's house to see what had been the re suit of Mr. Beecher's late consultations with Moulton. Moulton showed me a letter to the editor of the Eagle Drenared bv Beecber in relation to the publication of tne tripartite agreement. CL03E OF HIS DIKECT TESTIMONY DR. BACON'S LETTER LAST INTERVIEWS WITH BEECHER THE SEPARATION BETWEEN MAN AND WIFE BE83IK TURNER A DISPUTE AMONG THB COUNSEL THB LOVK LETTERS EETANNINO OF THE CROSS-EXAMINATION, iSEw 10BK, net), a. A heavy rain storm to-day did not prevent the usua crowd from attending the Brooklyn City Court, where the Tilton-Beecher trial ia in progress. Mrs. Tilton. Mrs. Field, Mrs. Tubus and Mrs. Shearman were present promptly. At the appointed hour the court was lormally opened, and Mr. Tilton continued his story. He said: I first heard of the promised council ol the church, I think, in the early part of Novem ber, 1873, from Mr. Beecher, in Mr. Moul ton's house. He told me trouble had arisen out of my speech in the church and the pubIlshingof the card by Halliday in a newspaper. ne una me certain papers naa been sent him in relation to the church council. He said tbat councils were dapeeroua things and no pereon could tell where thev wonld end. He also said to me: "Theo, this will all end well, if you will not eive any Information to Dr. Storrs or act against me." W e had a conversation subsequent to this, n the fetreet one night. Beecber made a speech in Plymouth Church, relating to Dr. - m . 1 a aiorrs. air. .ueecner metaiouiton and me and said that his church was going to stand alone and not unite with the other two churches in tha council. The FWon letter was published in J une, 1S74, but I p.?H ?f ver met Mr. Beecber binca the pubii&i$a of the iaoon letter. 1 had a coaveratien with Beecher in Moulton's library in Anrib 1?74 about the Bacon charges, in which I was called a knave and a dog. I told Bsecher be must reply to these cnareres. He mads no reply to this whatever. Mr. Shearman was there present, and made an apology for baving in salted Mrs. Tilton in public. When Beecber left. Shearman remained hehind B9ecuer was summoned by telegraph to Moulton'a house. This wa3 the last inier-1

view I bad with Beecher, to tbs best of my recollection. A letter was produced. Thia was written bv iu and pent t Beecher, May 2, 1S74. The lptter was read sr 1 placed la evidence. It related to bis r f jsal to accept a cum of inouey from Brecher to pr.,c?ed w ith bis family to Europe and xttuaio there for a rumberof years. Aletterdaled May 4, lt3.

was also read by ex-Judge Fullerton, adMr. Halliday -and Mr. i 71 irmta informing them of a statement made by Dr. Bacon after the adionrrmpnt of th rhnreh nineil. and asking that be, Tilton, should be summoned betöre the examining comtritteeto answer the charges of slandering tbe pastor. TILTO B OFFER TO BK TRIED. Brookltw, May 4," To the Itev. Henry Ward Baecber, Pastor of FlraoutU Church, th Kev. . Ii. HuilidftT, Assistant TfiAtor, and Mr. Tfcos. U. Kbcarman, Clerk: Gentlemen I address through yon to the church of which you areofScers the following statement, which you are at liberty to communicate to the church through tbeexamlnlng In any other mode, private or publis. Hi Kev. Leonard Bacon, D. D., LL. D., the Cicdcrittor of tbe recent Congregational council, h& seen fit, since the adjournment of that body, to proclaim, publish and rriterat with signal emphasis, and with the weight of something like cfncial authority, a grave declaration which I here quote,"camely: "It was lor Plymouth Churcn," he say , 'to vindicate its pastor agaiost adamajing imputation from one of its members. With great alacrity, tbe pastor himsf-lf cono-.itirg, it threw away the opportunity cf 'vindication. That act," he continued." "in which Plymouth Church threw away tbe opportunity of vindicating its pastor, vpj whiit gave occasion for the remonsiranc s :rom the neighboring churches." "There are many he 'says, 'also not only in Brookivn. but elsewhere, who felt thai the church "had not fairly met the question, and by evading the issae had thrown away the opportuLity of vindicating its paj-.tor." The moderator's declaration is thus made three times over the Plymouth Church, in dalinsr with my, case threw away its opportunity of vindicating its pastor. Thia declaration, so emphatically repeated by the chief mouthpiece of the counsel, and put forth by kin apparently as an exposition of the couusel's views, compels me, as the third patty to the controversy, to choose between two alternatives. One of these Is to remain in tbe dishonorable position of a man who denies to his former pastor an opportunity for VINDICATION of that pastor's character, an offense the more heinous because an unsullied character and reputation are requisites to his sacred ofiice. Tbe other alternative is fjrtno to restore to his church their loRt opportunity for bis vindication by presenting myself voluntarily for the same trial, to which the church would have the power to summon me if I wre a member, a sugestion which, judging from my i&st experience, will subject ma afrefeh to tb unjust imputation of revising a scandal lor tbe suppression of wbicn I made moe sacrifices than all the other persons. Between the-e two alternatives which are all that the moderator leaves to me, and which are both equally repugnant to my feelings, duty requires ma to chooso ths second. I therefore give you notico that if the pastor or the examining commit tee, or the church, as a body wishes to repossess the opportunity which the moderator laments that you have'thrown away, I hereby restore to you this opportunity as freely as If you had never parted with it. I authorize you, if such be your pleasure, to cite me at any time within thirty days to appear at the bar of Plymouth Church for trial on the charge heretofore made against me, viz: tbat of circulating and promoting scandal's derogatory to the Christian integrity of the pastor and injurious to the reputation of the church. My only stipulation concerning tbe trial istbat it shall not be held with closed doors ncr in the absence of the pastor. I regret that the moderator has imposed on me tbe necessity for making this communication, for nothing but necessity would extort it. The Eraoitcal good which I seek to achieve v this proposition in that, whether ac cepted or declined, It will, in either case, effectually put an end to the moderator's grave charge that Plymouth IChurch has been deprived through me of an oppcrtunit t to vindicate it pastor, or that its rhetor has been, by any act tffßiine. deprived of an odportunity to vindicate himself. Truly Yours, Tk eqdore tilton. The witness continued: In the ?arly part of J uly, 1873, 1 first heard of THZ APPOINTMENT OF A COMMITTEE to wait upon me with regard to the scandal. Fullerton here read the correspondence, calling for an investigation of the charges by tbe church committee. The witness resumed: I first saw the letter calling for a committee on the night before it was published, in the hands of Mrs. Cleveland. My wife was then with me, but she left the bouse after the publication of this letter, I think on tbe inorning of July 11. She did not leaveagainst my will. She had a will of ber own and acted upon it. At the same time I did not re-strain her. There wero tbree cr forrr reports prepOed for the committee, and I preparftl two of them. The preparation ot the short report happened as follows: Mrs. Tilton lnlormed me on the 8th of July tbat she had been down before a committee of the church in relation to what passed between me and Dr. Bacon. A long argument here ensued on the right of the witness to question what wis told' him by his wife, as to wuat occurred before the committee. Mr. Evarts objected to the question, and the objection vraa sustained by the court. The witness then continued: I do not remember tbat the tripartite agree-' ment was ever the subject 9 conversation between . Beecher and me. l3esid Tursr was a girl who came to our house under the name ot Lizzie McDermott, about IS years ago. She came to my house through the meansa of an old Sunday school teacher, either of mine or of Mrs. Tilton. I do not know whether &he resided continually In the house until after my return from the West In 1867. Mrs. Tilton and Mr. Moulton made arraagesents for sending her to, school some time in January, I871 Mr. Beecher. from the first to the las:. denied his criminal intercourse with .Mrsk Tilton. "Whenever he spoke of, he alwayssaid she was not tbe person to blame. 1." sis Turner's age, I think, was about 15 or 16 when she left us in 1871. There ia . word of truth in the statement tbat X carried her from her bed to mine. No 1 conduct was ever exhibited by me toward ber. The wltneaa showed a paper, and said: I think I showed this report and another to Oen. Tracy I put both of them in the hands of Mrs. Moulton. I prepared this one at the suiraeatinn n Tracy. At the time I prepared this report I heard Mrs. Tlltoa had b en before the committee, and Gen. Tracy told m ftf tva.i dence given before tfcem. Geni Tracy told me I had nothing to fear from MRS. TILTON'S TESTIMONY. that when she appeared before Ihe oomaittee she denied everything, or that there was any foundation for it, and Gen. Tracv. whiin making this narration, wept, and told me If co-cperaieain this, it would ba a an- t told him to explain the method of m. dure before the committee. He said that tb?T would summon whom tbey pleaied, aid ?K

pleased, and on it

-1 w.u,u K'r0 weal information the-r

tho commute would