Indiana State Sentinel, Volume 24, Number 32, Indianapolis, Marion County, 1 April 1875 — Page 1

rV vi II KA ; INDIANAPOLIS, THURSDAY APRIL 1 1375. VOL. XXIV-KQ 32. WHOLE NUMBER 1,793

THE TRIPARTITE COVENANT. IT IS BEING INVESTIGATED.

OTHER SIDE SHOWS IN ORDER. CHRISTMAS IS COMING) QUITE AS RAPIDLY AS THE CONCLUSION OF THE STATION AI SCANDAL CASE. New York, March 29.-Tbe crowd around the Brooklyn city court room to-day la m indication that the Interest In the great scandal trial is on the Increase. Mr Beecher, his ife, and youngest son, and Dr. Edward Eoecber.were present and seated in front ol the Plymouth Church delegation. Mrs. Tilton and tbe women who usually accompany her were absent, but their places were occupied by other women. David Dovn, a produce merchant, was the first witness called, and in answer to quest ions put by Mr. Evarts testified: Mi Bessie Turner lived in mv family. Sho came in the aprinz and left in'the summer, bui I do not recollect the year, nor have I any memorandum of dates. My family with others w?nt on a trip to Omaha tbat spring. We left on tbo 31s? of May and returned on the 12th of Jane. This concluded bis direct examination and the prosecution had no -questions to ask htm. John Winslow was tne next witness called. He stated: lam a practicing lawyer, and have been for ..o vear3. I was formerly district attorney for kings county. I was a member of the in -vestigaticg commiitee of the riyinouth Church meeting at Mr. Storr's bouse. "3Ir. Tilton was before the committee on tho C:h of July, at Mr. Ovingtons. The commi:towere there about five or six minutes before the examination began. Mr. Tracy accompanied us there, and wa3 only absent two or three minutes. Tilton was before tha committee on the 10th of July. He said that there should not be any investigation, .and asked if Beecher wanted one, and be was assured that Beecher did. Mr. Cleveland snowed him Mr. Beecher's let tor calling lor it. Ir. Tilton said his case was in writing. He cever st2t id es to whether Mr. Beecher bad made any con'esslon, verbal or otherwise, toblm. lie saw Batcher's letter and read it very carefully. On the 12th of July, the day Tilton published his card, we had au interview. I met him on the street and told liini I had read bii Utter. Ho said he would like to talk with mejthat tbn inyestication was all wrong and ought not to be. He wanted the committee to adopt a report that he bad drawn; that, indeed, be bad drawn toor three reports. I told him I did not want to bear anything, except the testimony before tbe committee. lie wanted me not to oppose and asked me to do his statement jastlce. I was present when bis sworn Btateinont was read, and at his .cross-examination. I was also present when TILTON ATTACKED TRACT,

and tear! what bo fcaid. There had Veen no regular session that afternoon when TiTton eald to Tracy: "You have no right to bo hero in collision with mo alter the promise you made." Tracy said: "Yes, but when I saw you change your ground I did not consider tbo promise binding." Tracy rent into tbe front parlor and Tilton followed, lie sail "Tracy, I forgive you. I like you bettarth&n any mauin Brooklyn, lie put his arm about Tracy's reck, who eaid something about forgiveness. Tilton aid: "There is one difference between us Tracv; I always forgive, but you sever do. Cros examinee: The first moetinc of tbe committee, when testimony was taken, was on the 6th of July. Mr. Eilenwocd was

present at all the meetings aiierwara, auu took tne testimony. Mrs. Tilton made two statements before tbe committee. They were both verbal statements. Tue first was reale on tbe 6th of July. I never saw it in print. Beecher made two positive statements, tbe first cn the 16th of July before tbo commit jee. They were all pressnt. The statement on that occasion was net leit with the committee. The substance only of It wad published. I cannot say wheiher tbe stenographer took notes cf it. I have never seen this statement since that night, and never saw the stenographer writ9 out his notes of it. Mr. Sage was chairman of that committee. We turned over all tbe evidence after it was written out to the examining committee of the church. Some o-,tnp nnmruittee took cbarse ot it. 1

do not know who it was, though my impression Is that Mr. Cleveland took it. 1 did not see the evidence taken before the committee until it wa3 printed. 1 did not superinteud tho printing of it, nor had I anj thing to do wfch it. I d!d not gat Beecber'a statement

printed. I signed the report ol tne commiitee. Tfco last time I saw the original it was in Mr. Raymond's hand. I made a draft of the report. 1 draw up tho portion cf the rorrt with regard to Beecher's evideccr, and hnow tb'iu i3 a small error wkicu had , crct Into the report, Mr. Hill drew my attentlon to 15 a lew days ago. My recollection is Eeeoher saw or read the pnper which

Tilton read before tbo commutes, uui my iaipreFjrloa i bo us-ed tbe word, ttoryend true story. I must havo had the impression .that be used THE TEEM TRUE STCRY ...When I drafted the report. The report wa? read over and discussed. All tho moniLtrs wero present, and it was done in my cPicc In New Ycrk two days bo.'ore the report wes presented. I was pros3i;t wtcn It was road in church, and all tho members bad agreed with It. Tracy was not present on any occasion where it was read or discussed. Tilton oamo b&loro tbo committee on tho 10th cf .Jnly. He said he did net think it wa best to have an Investigation, as it would be an

nnhar.nv affair and would lead to endless

trouble ar d diatres?, but he did x.ot say to whom. He thought there would bea number ot unhappy relations which Beecher and himself did not desire. He expressed unwillingness to testify on this and ether oc

casions. A aon't rememDer mm saying auythiDg about documents and papers, .lie said be was well aware that be was a discredited person In tbe community, but bis case rcstod in writing. We said we would like to see the papers. This conversation I think was not taken down, but tbe stenographer may have done so. 1 next met rr:l - n 1"H, , ,1 think K ,fV.,TH tr

Mrs. Tilton's testimony on the 6th, and gave J that as odo ot tbe reasons the investi

gation should do ended, lie naa a report which be wished the committee to adopt

, , exonerating himself and Bacchcr. On the

23d ot July li.ton Drought a uunaio oi papers to tbe committee and begun to read something which some member of the committee thought was Dot pertinent. They exprsstod a desire to examine the paper, and I was to be allowed to do so. Tracy was there and Tilton said to him that be Lad no

right to appear e gains : him, a he bad bis promise not to do so, and Tracy replied be bad notified Tilton bo would not keep bis promise if be tal changed bis gronnd. Tlitcn bald that made no difference. Tilton did not say to Tracy you are

prevaricating, tract;

did not say be was appearing against Tilton.

Hill and Tracy were lawyers on behalf ot

ih3 committee, and examined witnesses. It

I was manifested that their services were vol-

there uctil the train for

untary and that they should receive no fees. I know nothing of the We3t charges. TLev were cot disclosed before tbe committee. Mrs. Bradshaw or Mrs. Moulton were not beforo tbe committee, nor was Mr. Bowen. Re-direct examination I suppose the lawyers received the thank3 ot Plymouth Church for their services. Tilton never furnished us with the letters which be promised, and the committee never saw them. The Griffith Gaunt letter I wanted to see very much. A mistake inBeecher's testimony arose from bim calling t te document he saw in Tilton's possession the true story. When Beecher appeared before tbo committee he read from the paper which was never in my hands. The statement was partly written and partly oral. On the occasion of a conversation between Tracy and Tilton, the former asserted that the charge was only improper proposals and tbe latter did not deny it. There was a statement of Tiltoa'a which was frequently referred to before the committee as the true story. There was not anything else rclerred to by tbe committee as tho story. When B'ssie Tamer was on tbe stand questions wero put to bor very fatt, but not faster thanuhe could answer. Tbe witness here lelt tbe etand and Thomas Jamia Turner was called. He said: I reside at PeekskilJ, and am in Mr. Bsccher'a employ, taking care of bis farm. In ths summer of 1873 tho persons employed on his farm were Hison, Nicholas. Sullivan and otber3. On Monday, June 2, 1S73. Mr. Beecher was at bis farm. He arrived there at 3:43 on tho train leaving the Forty-second

street denot at 2. Mrs. Beecher was

with him. Tbey stayed the next afternoon. I sent to

him. beinc? advised of his comincr by a tele

gram. He lelt lor New York the following day. He came there again on the 10th of June. Cross-examined: I knew tbe time the train left by telegram. I have not got it, but I have a copy of it. I had not been in New York since the January previous, until I 6aw a copy of the telegram with Mr. Hill, I had not remembered the date of Boechcr'a coming. I have a memorardum of the fifty cents ! paid lor carrying the telegram to the farm June 2. I have not the memorandum book with me. I also examined tho butcher's book, for I GOT MEAT FOR THEM when tbey were there. It was on Monday when Beecher came to Pookskill on that occasion. It was on Monday, May 2G, that Beecher came there before that. The farm la 29 minutes drive from the station, and I drove there lor Beecher and his wife. Mr. Beecher sometimes comes iu the morning and at othar times in the evening to the farm. He 16ft for New York the following day, Tuesday. Redirect examination There was only ona horse at

tbe farm on thet occasion, which Baecher kept for bis eon. My son went after the

baggage for Beecher, Beecner was up at my wife's funeral on tbe 21th of May. My son bpcan work for wages June 1st. and bis

going" down to the depot for the baggage wa3 the first work he did. All my charges are entered on tbo memorandum book on Saturdays, and among tbe entries on that day waa a charge for a telegram. Re-cross examination. My son, Joseph, bad gone several times to tbe railroad etatiOD bolore bo began to work lor wage, At this point the usual recess was taken. Afcer recess Joseph S. Turner was called. He testified: I reside at Peeksklll, and am a son of tho last wit noss called. I am living with my brother. 1 was attending hor?es in the employ ol Boecher. In June, 1S70, I went in the alternoon to meet Boecher. On June 2, 1873, at 3:43 train I met Mr. and Mrs. Beecher at the depot at rekskill and drove them to the house. Beecher lelt in the alternoon ol Tuesday. I drove bim down after dinner to cither the 2:15 or 4:20 train. Mv motber died on tbe

22dofMay, and Beecher attended the funeral on the 2Rb. Boecher returned to New

York and came back on tho 2Gth of May. After Juno 3d I did not see Beecher until

June 1G. Cross-examined: I baxe no memo

randum t- cuido me in this date. I ro

member tho 2d of June, because it waa the

first dav I did work. Tna first day of Juno

fell on Sunday, and IT IS NOT AWORKIJTQ

day. I went to meet Beecher at the 2 o'clock

train. Mrs. Beecher came then. She had been th6re on the 'Jth of Mayr I drove

them to the station on Tuesday; it was in

the alternoon, but I can not tell tbo time cf

day. I met tbo train on June 2J, and may have waited on it ten or Hiteen minutes.

Thomas Rochefcrt testified: J am a receiver

of the Western Union Telegraph Company,

and was at Peekskill on the 21 ol

June, 1S73. 1 remember receiving

tho dispatch from Boecher on

that day, shown abook tbh is the entry cf the mcs-wce in tho hook. The mesgs are

sometimes not dated, but wo are eniblcd

fir tho date of book. iLIill read the tele-

cram directed to Turner, asking fcimtOEend

and meet birn at the train. Tha witr.e.rs continued! I do not know whether this is in

Bsether'a handwriting or r.ct. Cross ex

ammcd: TLo entry of memoranda i.s i y tbe mauager of tho department. I received a telegram attheofike. Redirect examination:

The original tel?gram has tne date, out l

will swear It was tbe 2nd day of June lrom

thootit.-y in tho book. Iba next witness was Exil B. Dinner, who said: "1 am telrgraph

or3rator in the llrooklvn cCica or tbe V et

-m r - I T A. at.?-

em union, iiaowa nse s.'gpj. i eor.& iu,a from Brooklyn to tho New York oläco on tha 2nd ot June, 1S73. This was taken from

the files twowee-ks ago by Mr. Hu2hfi, tbe mansserof the Brooklyn olila. The me-'s-

ae was put up in separate days. Tue:5S

marked on the margiu is in the morning.

All messages far Peeksklll have to go over to tbo New York oCice." Thi i witness then

left the fctand. Ben KlttrUge, formerly of

Cincinnati. tettified: I reside tt

Peekskill end live about three hundre 1 tut

was the next witness. He testified: 1 resided in Brooklyn about three. years and was A M5ÜBER OF PLYMOUTH CHURCH AJSD AM A STOCK OPERATOR In Ne w Ycrk and am a member ot the legal prol3?sion and practiced In Missouri. I was a membsr of tbe investigating com mit tee, but was not present on July 6, when Mrs. Tilton testified. I was present when Mr. Tilton did on July 6. He said his case dependod on written documents over Beecher's own signature. Trscy said there might be a question about what the papers would stow, and that tbe committee could judge when tbey saw them, lie also said it tie charge against Baecher had been crlmi nality The documents shown to Lim he would not euDiwrt the cbarce. Then

Tilton said to us: 'Gentlemen, you think there Is no case, but there was, and that

Beecher said to him, if ever bo intended to put forward thee papers to let him know, that he might leave the country. Tilton's manner was highly puegestive as meaning that the f tory should come oat. He said tho committee was s.oo large. Tracy said he should bring forward thepspersand let the committe-a Judge. He lelt sorry for Beecher, ha said, and for hiä groy hairs. There was no suggestion ol any couilssiou having been made at that time. He said that bis letter to Dr. Bieon had been called forth by the attitude of Piytnouth Church and Beecher, and that if all were published it would tond to Ehow that Beecher was tho

creature of hi3 magnanimity and cot vice

versa. He said ho nad taken pains in tho Bacon letter not to characterize tbe charge. He also said: "Gentlemen, you do not want it; noither do I," and he did not want any further investigation, and deprecated it as

UDwisa and uncalled lor. He read Beecher s letter calling for the committee and said: "Gentlemen, you do not want them," reierring to documents, and after reading this letter be said he would think about it. I saw bis

card afterward iu some of the papers, saying he would. He presented no letters with his sworn statement. I was preeent at the conversation between Tracy andlilton. I asked Tilton before this if he had not told Blanchard, of Illinois, that be did not like Beecher, that be was a bad man, and PREACHED TO SOME OP HIS MISTRESS K3 every Sunday. He did not deny it, but said bo did not ask him to publish it in bis paper. He said afterward that we did not wart to find out the whole facts of the case. Tilton then charged Tracy with being guilty of unprofessional conduct, and Tracy said it was false; that the charge heTilton) made against Beecher was improper proposal?, and that when he changed hi3 ground he (Tracy) did not com lder the contract binding1. Tilton said be would see about this.

This occurred at 31 Monroe Place in tbo

It's more than likely that the exceptional threng was owing to the announcement made last evening, after a long consultation with Messrs. Evarts, Porter and Shearman at the residence of Mr. Beecher, It was decided to put Mr. Brecher himsr,If on tbe witness stand this niorninir. This course, it was alleged, wa made necessary by tbe absence of several witnesses whom the counsel had intended to examine previous to Beecher, together with the fail a re of the counsel ol Mr. Tilton to cross-examine some of the witnesses for the defense already presented. Every part of the court room reserved for the public wa occupied promptly upon the opening of the doors, but upon tbe formal opening of theproceodings, Mr. Bjecuer and wife were absent. Mrs. Tilton and ettendants were among tho missing. The customary

seals ol the last named people were filled by

other women not yet kcowh in tbe case. When the usual proclamation had beon made Evarts rosa and- stated that a witness

of ., importance, Mr. Henry Cleveland.

was verv sick, and was about to leave the

city. He asked, therefore, that the court should teaks arrangements to take his testi

mony, and be would like Judge NcHson tobe present. The judge said the counsel should make what arrangements micbt be ceces-

sf:rv, and suggested some alternoon, which

waa agreed to by tho counsel, but a d y was not fixed. At "this point it was whispered throughtbe court room that the Rev. Henry Ward Boecher would take tbe witness stand. Immediately after the recess to-day Henry B. Claflln was called and bis examination contlnuod. lie testified: The arbitrator!".

James Freeland, Charles Storrs and mysolf,

met on the tim6 agreed at Mr. Moulton's residence. Moulton, Boweu and Tilton were also present. Tilton made a long statement of his cause, occupying thirty minutes, in which ho stated bis grievacce, and when he had , fiuithed Bowen stated bis case, occupying a few minutes. Aller they got through they retired. We had a consultations After a half hour we agreed on an award and sont for them; Bowen, . Tilton and Mouiton came in, and I made tbe announcement of the result of our deliberation. I said we had made up our minds that they should first BURN" ALL THE PAPERS BXT-OSGISO TO THE SCANDAL and that Bowen should pay ?7,000to Tilton, and they should sign a covenant. The papers to be burned was tbe letter of apology and article in point dated the 1st of January, 1873. Besides other papers conneoted with the scandal Moulton and Tilton sgreed to this and seemed satisfied with tbe award. Bowen said be had no papers to burn, but would like tbo return of tbe Woodstock letter, which wa3 agreed to. The agreement was then brought up and Tilton said he would like to alter it.

I asked what alterations be desired made

end hevtook tho pencil and interlined the

rapor and wrote something on another paper

and attached it to it. Tbe aper was tten eat

backroom. There waa iartber interview isfactory to all of tbem. Tccrewas consid

between the parties In the front parlor. Tilton came in, threw bis arms around Tracv and said, I thiuk, I take bck what

I said, and said something about mm neing the only mau he liked in Brooklyn. I was

present when bo brought letters, ana ne took them awav with bim. Tilton read one by Mrs. Tilton about the enormities of her

ollocso or sin. It was luily agre?d that

Winslow should examine these letters. Cross-examined: Winslow was pres?nt when Tilton came before us tbe first time and re

fused to make a statement. Tho next witness

was Henrv Ii.Huffhes. He testified: I am man

ager of the Brooklyn telegraph ofiic?. lhei

handwriting on tho telegram of Juno 2,13,

is mine. No person requested mo to put tbe date thus It was my own work.

Horace B. Claflin then took thettiud. lie

testified: I reside in Brooklyn, and have lived there about thirty years. I am a dry goods merchant in New York.and before that

was in the same business m v orccsier,!ua3s.

I have known H. W. Beecher eversinco here and I am a member of hi congregation. I know Theodore Tilton a little, about half that time, and have known II. C. Bowen

about thirty-five years. In the spring or 187-1 was present at Moulton's house when an arbitration wa3 talked over between

Bowen and Tilton. There were pre?ent

Wilkesou, Moulton, Tilton and mysell.

Wilkeson had a press prooi or toe uoiaea

Age with him, the same paper a portion of

which was incorporated in the tripartite

agreement. Wilkesou had a draft oljthe tri

partite agreement, which was read and talked over that night. I had not thGn seen

Bowen. The convocation was about tbe

publication of these statements tareatened . m T-

by Tilton in t he uoiuen Age, unless jvnveu settled lor contracts due bim in the Brook

lyn Union and Independent. Tilton said

there was duo mm seven, eubt cr nice thousand dollars. Tilton Baid bo would puolish the article in

the next paptr unless he had a settlement,

the mouej' waa his due atd ho would nave

It. I toll bim thire was no ue

far such a publication. 1 could

do him no go nl, and that Bowen would pfc.v

him. I promised to intercede iorcnnwiia

Bo wet', and told bim that an arbitration

b,ad bem talked over, into which Bjwen was

Willicg to enter. A S-iia 1 mougns inn siat.tmeat should not be published as it was

A ORKAT SCANDAL.

Ti'ton eaid be would publish it nctwlth-

lron Beecher's residence. The ordinary

way ol gring to Beecher's house is past

mine. I nave known Beecher fir ton year?. He was on bis larro oathe2ddayol June, 1S73. I am a farmer and come to New

York about three times a week. I was in

N3W York oa that day and returned on the 4 o'clock train, arriving at home about 5:15 or 5:17. Beecher was at home by the time

1 arrived there. I saw him with sevral per

sons when I turned leto the avenue and

heard him cough distinctly. Bseeber, I do

not think, could have come on that train with me. I saw him text day, aiao. I fix

the dat.) because I wished to sea him about some little basint&3, and because he had moved up for tbe summer. 1 recollsct beins

disarrointed at not seeing him as ho wont

back to New York lor a week or ton days.

Thos. J. Tilney tettified : I am a lawyer iu

New York, and reside in Brooklyn. I was married on Tuesday, the 3d of Juno, at 7

nVU-ck m the eveiiiaLf bv the Rev. Henrv

Ward Beecher. I noticed bo did not seem to

be ar raved lor the oecasion, and wesno

dressed lor a wedding. The next witness was

Dr. Fred A. Putnam, who testlued: I prac

tico medicine at 2öö Fourth avenue, and

I

standljrr. This interview broke up about 10

o'clock. 1 0 saw Bowen a day cr two cfcer this. Beforo parting that

nirrht wo ynvere to meet again Tuesday

nifht. I think I saw Brown next cay when

"... . . j

I went there. 1 naa a prss prooi nuu

showed it to bim. I interceded for Tiltor,

and wd met E.ia Tuesday nliiht, the same

parties being present. The paper Wilkison

had ol tue ar:umani was reau ovut uu u-

cussed. Tilton eaid it was satisfactory to

him. and wanted to sign it, but l withheld

, m an u Jiowen pnouia sikh ii. o mm

about two hours over it, and I said I thought

Bowon would come to tbe arbitration.

Tilton differed with mo aiwut

that. When I took tbe paper to Bowen 1

was to tell him bo ought to sign it like a Christian man.and also that tbe quarrel was trnt.tAii nn bv th newsnaners. I said to

Moulton and Tiltou that 1 thought the pub

lication would inlure Bowen and his papers

r ... .

I saw Bowen tnat night ana reiurnea io

Mniiltnn. T naid Itowtn did cot obiect to

sign tbe paper, and wanted to read it, ana think it over I said to tbera I thought Bowen

would sign the paper. Either Wilkeson or Tilton said that I mada a great mistake in net having it signed, and that I should not

have left it with him. Char!e3 Storrs was

nronnswl as one cf the arbitrator?. James

Finland was ai.so to be one. lue time oi vu

mtMiin" of the arbitrators was arranged

uron that nicht. It was to be in Moulton's

siudy. The coart sdjourned

IT IS BELIEVED HE WILL TO-DAY SOME SECOND-HAND EXPRESSIONS OP AF

FKCTION FROM TH8 MUTUAL FRIEND FRANK ALL ARDÜT THAT THEOLOGICAL

NEWSPAPER SCHEME.

New Y'orr, March 30. An exceedingly

Ki'1 tKaA In Tnmt 1 CTl T m om hoi tha

4th ol that month. I left New York and large crowd gathered ia tbo neighborhood o

went by the Harlem railroad; met Mr. 1 the Brooklyn court room this morning, al

ueecner Dei ween i ana a m toe morning uo- thonzh tho morning was

tween liarttord and rsew navon. l spose i ,w , . ta Mr. and Mrs. Brecher: thev were on thb ul eprlng one, ard

ftriress train for Boston. Stephen D. White ' of people are still out

A beau

thousands

of werk.

erable talk for some time. Witness was

handed a check.! Don't know whether this

was tbo check paid to Tilton by Bowen.

Rowen drew un the check cither tbe 31 or

4th of April, and after Tilton signified his annroval ol the covenant. Itocktno cove

nant to Wilkeson next d3y and received a clean copvlrom his. I think I carried it to Charlos 'Storrs to take to Bowen,

bnt tho rarer was returned to

me without anv ßijrnatura and I took

it .to Mr. Bowen and cot it signed.

It was tbon given to Harris, and given back

to me with Tikon's iiznature. I tLen took

it to Booeher and ho signed it, aftsr which it

remained in my possession, lhat conver sation with Southwick was in April, in re

gard to taking stock in the Goldan Age. I had a conversation with Beecher. but ho

didn't advise me in anv way about it. I so

reported tt Southwick. I re

member the Woodhnll scandal in the follo-yinorsummer. I had a conversation

with Frank Carpenter about tbe Stirling of

& HoN BjJtlJ'Cl t u UHU a mccüug civ v . a house, where there were present Charles

Storr.. I rank Carpenter, Bowen and my

solf. The con verrat ion was about starting

a newspaper. 1 didn't suLscribo lotneeu

lernrlse. , Tilton came to my bouse one

ciglit ancl said he had heard I CALLED HIM A BLACK-MAILER.

Tha conversation turned on his relations

with Beecher. This finished tho direct, and Mr. Fullerton began tbe cross-examination. The witness testified: The first meeting I

had with regard to this matter wa3 at Moul

ton's, in the latter part of March, 1872

Thero were present Moulton, Tilton,

Wilkeaon and myself. Bowcawas absent, I think. I was renue&ted to ro there by

Beecher. Di l not see Bowen before going

there. Too first meeting Avas on Sunday

lcht and I think tbe second waa on Thürs

lav. I think I saw Bowen before the sefond

meeting. At the first meeting Mr. Tilton

QOwel use a press copy of a personal state

ment which be threatened to publish if

owen did cot cive bim satisfaction. When

paw this article I said it voul;l te wrong to

publish tbid and would do barm to all par

t;esii it vere pubr.saed. wil'reson proposed they should sign an f rrecraont and I

agroo with bim. Ha produced a rough drait

of an arre.nent whicri wa3 talked over for a leng time, r.nd it waa agreed that tie agree

ment should b9 signed, liiton insisted luit

ho publication would bo made unless

Bovren rade a settlement with bim. It

was said by Wilkeson and myself that

Bowrn would rcme ii.to thesettlenioi-t, and

that the papers relating to tbe lnattershonld

be burned. Tilton cid cot spnaK oi any in

tention ot ei''ningthe p?tr that evenicg.

Kither Mr.Wilke-jon or myself made thopro-

poa ion that Tilton should s;gn tbe paper, l

ihliik he made objection to some of tbe terms in the paper, and stated that ho wished

It to be altered, lutoa made some sug-

uestions as to what be would or would not

M'jrreo to. The p per was not in a complete

form, and that It should bo

ALTERED THAT NIGHT.

Tit on said he would sign the paper drawn

up by Wilkeson with Tilton's suggestion in

corporated. Tho next meeting wasTueslay

or Wednesday, but I think tbo lormer, in

Moulton's studv. wuiceson produced me

paper then in proper form. Mr. Wilkeson

reidtho paper over toll parties who were

at tbe former mectinz. Bowen was aosent.

Tilton said he would sign it ten times if

Bowen would once. He thought Bowen would not sign, but I told him he would.

Mouiton also expressed bis doubts. Tilton

ass'cnedfome reasons for Boweu's not sign

ins it. and I assigned some reasons tbat he

would. 1 thought Bowen, belog proprietor

of two newspapers, its publication would

ininre him. Tilton expressed a willingness

- . V . 1 - J 1 J

to sign It. lie iooü up a pen, ana, x saia,

vou had batter not sign it row as 1

would tako the paper to Bowen and tell

bim Tilton bad expressed a willingness to

steo. I bavo no doubt Tilton would have

sianed tho paper bad I not prevented bim.

1 took the paper to Bowen and left it with

him. I returned to Moulton's bouse. Tbey were all there. Wilkeson orTiHon saidl

ought not to have left the paper, and I replied that Bowen should rrave time to consider, that when it was proposed to have the arbitration, either by Moulton or Wilkeson,

probably the words used were: 1 now propose to submit the matter to arbitrators, but I can not remember tho language.- I think Tilton agreed to tiis. Tilton named

Charles Storrs as an arbitrator. 1 think I named Mr. Freeland as first arbitrator. I do not know who named the third man. I did not name myself. I do cot remember being named atall. No paperslorthe arbitration were drawn up that night. There was no decision in writing, to submit the matter to arbitrators. The arbitrctora met to bear the parti's a night or two alter this, at the same place. Moulton, Tilton, Bowen and tbe arbitrators were present. Tbe parties were their own lawyers, and we got through quick. Laughter. Tho check was drawn immediately afterward. I did net lend tbe money to Bowen, as be came next evening to my office and said be wonld net need it. I do not remember anythiDjr being said about depositing tbe check for collection. I was present when Bowen and Beecher signed the tripartite asreemeut. Baecher signed it last. A printed slip was attached to the agreement. I don't know whether tbe paper wa3 read, but it was passed around for inspection. vVe never went into "tho truth or untruth ot THE STORIFS IN THE PAPER. nor did we discuss them. I don't know what became of the first draf; cf the tripartite agreoment read by Wilkeson at the firät meeting. I took the completed agreement to Wilkeson and have not seen

either of the papers since. Tilton proposed to leave tbe azreement when si o-n prl -with

Moulton, but this was objected to and I proposed Freeland or Storrs. I finally took

the paper by agreement between Frceland and Storrs. No oollgation was imposed on

me as to showing: it or allowlne it to lie

copied. No persons saw it while in my possession. Storrs afterwards

got it. Baoeher borrowed the Daner

one day while I had it, but returned it soon

alter. I think this was in April, 1871. I remember the time it was published in the

newspapers. I knew Victoria Woodhnll a

little and have seen her on two or three occasions. She called at my office and I re

turned tbe call at her office at Broad street

soon after, bat I do not remember the year.

one nad poen to my nouso and spoken to

Mrs. Claflin, and sho urged very much that

I should be asked to call and see her. This was either in t he winter or spring. I called on her tbe same week or month after. I did not subscribe to bcr paper she sent to

me. Iam not certain if I jiaid for it. I did not advertise in it, but I saw an advertisement of mine in it. I went to her house once with Bowod. butdono

remember tbe date. I know it was tbe week tbat LouU Tappin died, as Bowen came

down to attend the funeral. This was about 4 p.m. We went there to see some docu

mentary evidence ehe bad in ber possession.

I think it was suggested at all tbe meetings that papers relating to tbe scandal should

be burned. ltodiret examination I went to Mrs. Woodhull's at tbe request of her lawyers and Bowec's; taat was the only time I was ever In her house. I think it was at the latt meeting, when the paper was finally settled and agreed upon, thit the proposition was made to leave the covenant with Mouiton. It was said at this meeting tbat thedifilcultles were to be settled by arbitration. At the first two

meetinirs U llkeson said tbat the difficulties

betweeu Bowen, Tilton and Beecher should be settled, and I agreed with bim. Tilton said he would net settle until he get soma

8 1TIS FACTION OUT OF BOWEN.

It was difficulties set forth In personal state

ments which were to ba settled by arbitra

tion. Tilton statod In one of these conversations tbat he bad already one suit against

Bowen. This concluded the redirect examination and no'furtber questions wero put by

the prosecutor. Recess was then taken.

Beecher wa3 absent daring the entire morn

ing session, but Mrs. Beecher and her daugh

ter-in-law came in shortly after the opening

of tbe case, and occupied tbeir usual Places

luvarts remained about a hair an hour and then left tbe case in the bands

of the remaining counsel lor the defense.

After recess; Lonisa Jonna lioeger. a

voudz lady, took the stand and testified: I

in which Til Mrs. Boecher

wa a conversation, ton complained of and Mrs. Morse turning

RETSIli TURNER AGAINST DIM. Ho sa d that Beecher had said that be humbled himself before bim (Tilton; as before Lis Gad, and he would make him do so. I expressed my sympathy for him. I met him on anotber occasion, when he said that his wife had charged Beecher with having made improper proposals to her; that hehad told this to Beecher and the latter nad procnre-1 a retraction from her and that Moulton had gone to Beecher with a pistol ar d made bim surrender it. In March, 1872, Tilton called and said be had been West on a lecturing tour, where he bad been coldlr received. He didn't understand why be waa discharged by Bowen. He showed me an article he was toing to publish and I said this rMV Pr"Pfru article tobe published. I told bim Beecher denied all tho charges, and he said he knew it. This was in the article, and I called his attention to it. I told bim Bowen would do him Justice and something was said about arbitration. I promised to see Bowen about Tilton's claim for six month's services. Ue left this personal statemont with mo to show it to Bowen I oflered to show it to Bowen tbe next night. b.Qt sai . either that be knew of it or had real lt. I talked with him about the settlement of Tilton's claims. I saw Tilton after this and told him a part of the conversation between Bowen and myself. I told him Bowen said he never received any such letter as that ot January 1st, 1371, and tbatlsucgcstcdtoBowentbatit would be wiser and better to settle with him and avoid t ae scandal and he thought not. Alter some taik. I said 1 thought Bowen would settle the claims. Atjthis time Tilton wanted to know 11 I would act as arbitrator for bim, I acted with Claflin and Freeland at Moulton's bouse. I went there with Bowen. Tilton and Moulton were there. Claflin and ' Frosland had . not arrived, and I went lor them. I advised that Beecher's matters should Dot be brought io, but it was af-

lerwaras understood that tbey should

come in. Bowen and THinn im

their cases down aud withdrew. The mut

ter was discussed and they came in. Claflin stated that these parties were to sign the agreement; all the papers were to be burned. Bowen was to pay Tilton $7,000, Tilton objected to sizninethe naners ami

wished to change it. Ha was.

fioally allowed to ammend it by the arbitrators. It was understood tht

Claflin Bhould take the paper to Wilka-

son and have it engrossed, and there was an arrangement that It snould be given to one

person and not given up unless with the

consent of all the parties. Bowen then

drew up his check tor the amount. Tilton and Moulton agreed to burn the letter, but Bowen said he bad none. Tbe letter of apology and Tilton's letter of January 1 to

üjncu were among

THE TAFERS TO BS BURNED.

When the check was dralrn it was given to

Tilton, and weihen separated. Alter this.

Tiiton said to me thai he thought Moulton

was the proper custodian ol that paper.

This was dissentadto by other parties. A

lew days after the arbitration I had a conversation with Tilton and Moulton at tbe

latter's bousef Moulton said that Sam Wilkeson thinks that I burned those papers; Ob, yes, I burned thom and he laughed. Said he: "If I burned them what would Theodore do in case of trouble. After the publication of tha Woodhull scandal, Tilton called at my bouse. He said it was an iolamous article and contained

a great many lies about hi wile and Beecher. and that he was writing a story about it, not that Baecher had net made improper proposals to his wile, but nothing criminal occurred, and that 'his wife was as pure as

licht. lie spoke of bavin cr written Woodbull's life, and tbat it damaged him more than f 10.000. I told Tilton that Car

penter had talked with me about ttarting a

newspaper in jew York lor his benefit, ana

am a telegraph operator, and was so in 1S73. haviDg Feen Claflin he wa9 not favorably dUV ' I I a. " I X - i v I .1 . A J . 1 1 . . 1 . -Tl I

I was in that business in New York in June

of that year, in tbe eaiploy of the Western

Union Telegraph Company. Handed a dis

patch. I reoeived this message, and am able to swear I received it on tbe

2d oi J une. I recognlz9 the message

by certain marks written upon

it. She was not cross-examined and left tbe stand. Mary C. Joseph taptified: I am

telegraph operator ia Peekskill, and wa3 so

on the 2d of June, 1873. I received this

telegraphic dispatch thoro on that dat

This wUness also If ft the stand without being cross-examined. Tho next witneES

was Gto. F. Williams; be testified: I am

law editor of tbe New York Herald, and

havo been a journalist lor eighteen years. I

was at one time managing editor

of the New York Time3. I

saw the Woodhnll publication cf

Novemliar 2, 1S72, and saw proof

slips before it was proauced publicJy. I re

ceivod proof slips cl the srandil aaint tho

Rsv. II. W. Beecher. Thl3 wa objected to, and Shearman said that they proposed to

show that theso slips were in existence be

töre the story wa published, aud in the

plalntill s sight before the publication prior to tho time on which Woolley said be saw them. Fullerton said that the other sida

desired to

BOLSTER TJP W00LLEY'3 LYIDENCS,

but they could net do it in this way. He subrnbted that the proof ia regard to tbe

matter wes entirely irrelevant, and the

ether side must show that the plaintiff Lad

some connection with it. Hill arcued that

the plaintiff was connected with it as shown

by the testimony cf Conley, Cooke &, Wool

ley, and h6 desired to show that newspaper

men were Intimate wim the story before it was published. Hill, in the support of his

argument, quoted from the testimony

riven by the witness, Woolley; and

Mr. Shearman also quoted lrom

cross-examination by Fullerton of tbe same

witness. Judge Neilson finally ruled out

the last answer of the witnes?, who was then allowed to leave the stand. Charles Storrs

was the next witness. He testified: "I re-

tide in Brooklyn, and have tor twenty

rears. I am a commission merchant in New

York, and have been in tbat business for

twenty-five years, l carry on busi

ness in dry goods, l uavo Known

Tilton for a dozen years,

and have had friendly relations with Mm

during tbat period. In 1SG7, 1SG3 and 18G9

ho remitted moneys to me when ho was cn

led urlnz tours. I have lunched at Delmon

ico's for 16 or 17 years, and so did Tilton. I

sometimes saw I Uton two or threo times a

week, and sometimes oftener We were In

the habit of talking often on general affdrs.

I learned on the 21 or January, 15a tbat he ws3 discharged from the Independent. I

saw Tilton that div in bis bouee. I asksd

bim if be bad been discharged from the

Independent and Union, and he. said

he was. He seemed depressed and dejected

lie said ne wanted me to go to irank aioui

ton's with him. We went, and on the way he said Mr. Beecher and Mrs. Mcrse had been talking to Bowen against him, and that

some ladv had made soma statements to

1 to wen against bim, and that it was a caso of

Joseph and l'otiphar's wile over again ; tnat

he bad put n:a case in Moulton's hands, and

Moulton did not wish biia to tcko any steps

iu the matter. Wh5awe got there there

posed toward tbe scheme; that Beecher was to be editor, Tilton foreign correspondent, and Carpenter was to have some office in it. They proposed to buy &

paper which was in the Asso

ciated Press and the Express and

Commercial Advertiser were talkel cl. So was the Brooklyn Union and Golden Age, I tcld him all these schemes were discussed.

He sail Carpenter had talked to bim about .

it. If we were to buy a Brooklyn paper.

Tilton was to be editor, and Beecher to have -

nothing to do with it. Otherwise if it was a New York morning

paper, Boecher was to be c-ditor. Tiiion

told ni9 tbat his father owned one share of'

tho Tribune stock. He asked me atone time-

about selling and inviting the moaey in other securities. I had a communication

with Tiltoa s.t Ovintcn's after hU wifo lefl him. He said ho must now, bis wifu Lavingrleft him,

SMASH ELIZABETH AND BEECHFR.

I said I was sorry, and that this wm

unfortunate. In August, 1S71, I was sent for to. Mou'toa'i houso by YVoodrufL i" went there and bad an r.tcrview with

Moultcn up stairs. Mou'tin lausrhed and

sa'.d no oid not üeow trat l would coma to soo a blackmailer. Ho also said that Beecher

bad confessed .U adultery to him, and that-

it his advice had been followed it would

have teen better. Ho also said, your brother

muet net sign tue report or tbe church committee until I be crossexamined or I will make another statement.

Ho said be bad been Breehei'a friend until he had called bim a feleek mailer, but tbat now Beecher had got to look out for himself.

This was on August 23. Moulton had boon

down east beforo this interview. I do not remember Mr. Tilton chargipghis wila with adultery with Beecher, exc?pt on influence in a conversation.

with me in 1871 or IS. 2. lie talked of suinga party for having said bis wife bad committed adultery with Beecher. Alter the termination of a certain law suit aeainsu

Moulton last year, December 10, 1S7J he-

sent for me to come and seo bim. I went.

and bad a conversation with him. He said

Beecbcr was a liar, and used other words in

substance. He said, also, that be was a libertine. The court here adjourned. It is be

lieved tbat Beecher will be on tbe stand to

morrow.

HOT SPRINGS.

WHERE THE REPUBLICAN PARTY " SHOULD

RETIRE FOR REPAIRS. The famous healthful resort known to in

valids lrom indiscretion as the Hot Springs.

which has been 6o long in litigation, has.

grown to be of great yalue. The Washing

ton special to the Cincinnati Gazette says of it: The celebrated Hot Sprincs cases, which occupied so much lime this wiater, and iu which there aro so many contesting claimants, was decided to-day "in favor ot the government as against all the claimants. J udge Nott read an elaborate opinion. This property is now producing an income to the lessees ot $70,0CO per year, and is said to boworth jl,150,C00. It baa been a subject of litigation for more than thirty years. Judge Liovering dissented, and said that ho thought. Rector had a good title. A a appeal to the Supremo Court will bo takou on behalf, ctf Kector,