The New York Herald Newspaper, March 17, 1875, Page 4

>» THE TRIAL OF TRUTEL Forty-ninth Day of the! Great Scandal Case. ——— RAILROADING THE WITNESSES | Damaging Testimony for the Plaintiff. More WHAT AN INTERVIEWER KNEW. Mrs. Woodhull and Tilton) More Than Familiar. Ik CABMAN Bessie Turner was early in court jterday, wearing a plain black hat and no veil. She sat pinching her lips and doubling over her immobile | chin, and the Juxuriance of her rosewoody-reddish hair was in decided contrast to her vhin neck, Tuere were several females in court, not gener- ally of prepossessing appearance, and the average Spectator ut once said :— “WITNESSES |”? Nice. dainty people are more often spectators than actors in this trial. 1t exudes, so to speak, a boarding house whiff. The worst air, the most soupy clouds, the soggiest mud even of this winter draw near the court house, All the natural scavengers of evaporation and condensa- tion parade for employment before tae court. There is nothing of the look, or light or purity of the Cbristian home ground tuis vast convention of the odors of avtics and alleys. Nevertheless it plays its part, like the sewage of citi aod instructs posterity upon the imperfectness even of a period of victory and freedom. The natural man, de- tached from bis mstitutions and fame, is here dis- eected and produced, Yhe evidence of several witnesses was taken early in theday. Butone ortwoof them were croasexamined by the delence, altaough Judge Fuilerton was present to lead the questioning. he shook hands as he entered court with Shear- man and Porter, and several of the jary bowed to him afabiy. He looked a littie out of sorts at first, as if just risen from a sick bed, but in @ short time recovered his natura! color and method, and put in @ bard day’s work, He did not, however, pro- duce any effect upon the chief witness of the day, @ newspaper inierviewer by the name of Thomas Cooke. This man was employed to give and prolong a newspaper sensation in the household of the Woodbull tamily, and while there met Theodore Tilton as an inmate and favorite visitor. He swore that after Mr. Beecher refused to come to the Steinway Hail meeting Mrs. Wood- huil was idignant, and endeavored touse the witness to expose Mr. Beecher’s connection with the Tilton story Im the press, and that sbe finaily | offered to employ him to do it; Tilton offered him @ simation also on the Golden Age contemporane- ously with a position he was to take on Woodhull: | and Ciafiin’s Weekly; Tilton was present wheo Mrs. Woodhull asked Coose to expose Beecher, and ssid :— *“Theouore will give you all the letters apd doc- vments. FE $ shown them all tc me.’? As this occurred before the scandal in her own paper break down utterly Mr. Tilcon’s theory that he had sought Mrs. Woodhull’s acquaintance in or- der to procure her silenc d it cast a very sin- ister compleXion upon the plain‘ifs cause. He manilestiy Jelt it, and the cross-examination did noching forther to impeach the witness than to show that Mrs. Woodnoli visited aim privately in Detroit about three weeks ago. Mr. Cooke said at the noon rec that accord- ing to his understanding Mrs. Wooahul! was in- | censea at both the plaintif’ and detendant, put most with ‘ilton now, because he had repuisea her affections and quit her society. The cabman who drove Mrs. Woodhall to Coney Isiand with Tilton also strengthened the case against Tilton of extreme intimacy and familiarity with Mrs. Woodhull. Assistant Pastor H day and tes ls ayear and knew very little of Mrs, Til- liday was put on the stand ed that be made 2,500 pas- er, solemnly, im nis preseace. was, on the whole, a black eye jor Tilton all the middle of the day. Oliver Jounson, Sameel Wikeson, Jackson 3. Senultz and the reporter Cooke have made a very strong defence for Mr. Beecuer. This is admitted 8 now more mysteriouathan Reapen Ropes, the first witness yesterday, took the chair ata iate hour of tue morniug. He is @ brother of a prowinent trast compauy pres:- deut in Brooklyo, and is himself @ member of Viymouth cuurcn, A round-headed, red-faced, gray man, with tangled gray eyebrows and a stentorian voice, he gave his testimony with a loud, quarter-deck voice, and was Gismissed to the midst of bis resounding echoes. THR KVIDENC: He testified :—I carry on vusiue at No. 73 Pearl street; | am acquainted wits Francis D. Mouitoa ; i bad ap ioterview with him in the autumn of 1875, crossing the ferry; I met nim and | said vo bim, “Moulton, I wat to kaow it \here is any truth in tha hull people,’ pistol story puvlished by the Woud- nd he saia f 18 AN INFERNAL LIB; I then said, “Mr, Moulton, you know a great deal more about this matter taaa I do, and { want to ask you ope question—Is there any truth to these charges against Henry Wara Beecher /”’ Moulton replied, “Not a word of truth; they are @ pack of es irom bez mping to end. ABNER H. DAVIS took the stand in @ jiffy, there being no cross-ex- aininauion of Mr. Ropes. Ropes walxed out of court and Davis proceeded in @ hoarse voice to tell mis tale, He was a little like the family por- traits of General Israel Putnam, wore a blue over- t $ coat buttoued up to the neck, a baldish sconce, a | lean'y shaven face, with @ gray eye, and some little gray bair en the yack of nis head. He also was an clocutionist and deciaimed forciviy. It, was a plain story of Moulton’s indignant and sar- castic devial of Beecber's guilt told by a piain parishioner of the Plymonth pastor. Mr. Davis testified that be was in the general commission busin n New York, fave been In LUsinEss alto rior about ihirty years; L remember the publication of wwe Woodhull dal; | was at that time acquainted with Fran », Moulron and had various conversations with him; i ta 1 with bim ab at the scandal; I said to im, “For Goa’s sake What does this mean? is there @ word of truin im this Wooduull story said, “Shere is not a word o: trutain it; you dv bot suppose that aman like Mr. Beecher, wuo has lived in Brooklyn near wirty years, could be capable of sucu & Urime, ii te Was that he could remain undiscovered for any lengtu of ume.” JOUN W. MASON was witness number three, the other two having left the stand betore weil seated in the chair, Tne Judge looked rejoiced at the swilt dismissal of witnesses, and his strong Scottish features migh* have fitted the couplet :— Speed Malise, speed! The dun deer’s nide On Heber i0ot be never Led Mr. Mason was another Piymouther, and quite meek and docile compared to the preceding sten- tors. He sat with great gravity in the chatr, grasped tue arms, and showed clean shaving and 4 hotiaay sensibility. They quarrelied as to whether he should say anytuing, and raed him out of Failervon’s objec- tion. He couldu’t be found im the index of the proceedings of the trial, and was, therefore, not relevant to the plaintif’s case. Be retired with a doubt a# to what be had been begum jor if su speedily done lor. He test.fied:—I reside in Brooklyn, and have lived there over twenty years; | am a Commission merchant, doug bUsiLess in New Yorks; 4 know STORY. | . Woodnuil published | 1% appeared to | Mrs. Moulton be related to have exonerated | NEW YORK HERALD, WEDNESDAY, MARCH 17, 1875.-TRIPLE SHEET. ancis D. Moulton and ¢' embers of his { remember the publication of the Woodhull i 1 Bad & conversation with Mr. Moulton on the subject within a short time alter 1ts— Mr. Fullerton—We object, Your Honor, to thts evidence a8 @ Waste of time. Mr. Moulton bas ac- Knowledged to what they propose to prove. | After some little discussion the deience ac- | pores the position, aud the witness vacated the stan EDWARD 4. BIDEN F took the chair at half-past eleven and showed a fine paroquet nose, elegant shaving, arcued brows and grayness of chin tu(t and thin uair. All these wi! nesses looked like deacens. Mr. Biden, Mading himself objected to, went into a cheertul dectine, but the Judge knew by his appearance that he had some importance and let bim through the wicketinto the vast repository of scandal, and history. Mr. Beecher was sitting back by bis wife, more modest and composed in manuer than in the early stages Of the trial. His race is in some respects hardened up, less professional and more worldly and realistic than when be was new and unversed iu the court room. Everybody with any measur- ing memory or eye sees this. Tilton and Beecher are beth alterea men. Mr. Biden testified:—I am engaged in the storage of grain in New York; I remember the eventor the publication of the Woodhull scandal; 1 ave know Mr. Moulton avout ten years; I met him after the publication a tew days, Q.—Wnat did be say to you then ? Mr. Fullerton objected. The question was put again and witness answered—I spoke to Mr. Moulton first oa the subject of the scanaal; lasked him whether in tus Woodhull & Claflin story there was apy truth in the story as far as Mr. Beecher was concerned ? he said, “Mr. Biden, [am as good a friend of Mr. Beecher as you are ; that story has bo truch in it; | on a subsequent occasion he answered inthe same | way, but more emphatically than ever; nis exact words [cannot recollect, but that ia about the substance, WILLIAM B, BARBER. Mr. Biden stepped down with a good feeling be- bind him, as if something moral and responsibie bad walked off and left @ moral dearth in the rear of him, But presently the moral emotions of the audience were restored when it saw the venera- bie Mr. Barber climb the merry-go-round. He sald at once he had known Moulton since he was “stripilng.”” We remembered Mr. Barber as a bishop-looking man who had been sitting in court a good deal on the Plymouth vencbes. Clear open eyes, an ex- pression of pain abd resignation with strength in it, and a good dcal of lawyer’s talk thrown in, completed the pictare. Mr. Barber shook bands | with the juror Jeffreys, who bas been sick these several days. Rev. Edward Beecher was in cours, looking amiable and antediluvian. Mrs, Beecher wore a queer rumMed cap, with tassels, which gave her tne | appearance of one of the mothers of a western race, @ pioneer of a former generatton. Her face yesterday was decidediy ghastly. She dozed very early in the aay and propped her head with a fan, and people said “That woman wWiil die in the court room.” William B. Barber testified :—! have resided in Brooklyn since 1862; 1 deai in grain in New York; I remember the Woodhull & Claflin scandal; I bave | known Francis )). Moulton since he was A STRIPLING? I talked with bim on the subject of the scandal in the Produce Exchange: | asked him whether it Was trae in respect to Mr. Beecner; be said that it was faise, or words to that effect. Mr, Shearman—What were the words used by Mr. Moulton ? Mr. Fulierton—I object to that. ; _ ine connse! had & little sparring on this point, and finally Mr. Shearman proceeded and witness state Mr. Mouiton said something to the effect | that Beecher was a pure man; he said that Mr. Beecher was entirely innocent, and if his life record was not 8 sufficient reiutation against such charges he had nothing more to say. Mr. Beach said beiore the next witness was called that he could not see the materiality of tuts evidence, because Mr. Moulton had himself ad- mitted the words (hat these witnesses were called to prove, CHARLES H. CADWELL. A gentieman of a more convivial exterior than | the preceeding four witnesses was in the chair at & quarter to eleven o’ciock, ion inclining to spot, a goatee struggling for its original tint, a complacent manner and no evi- dence of consequence compietea Mr. Cadweil’s testimony. Both Beach and Fuliertoa argued that all this reiteration of Moulton’s industrious defence of Mr. Beecher in taverns, shipyards and on wharves and jerryboats was @ waste of time. Frang Moulton Was iu court advising with Fauller- ton. Mr. Cadw testifiea:—I remember the Wood- poll publicauion; | know Mr. Moulton; I met him ailer tue publication; he told me there was uo truth in it, tuat it was a damned lie. THOMAS N, COOKE. A tall newspaper man with no chin took tne ebair at tive minates to twelve. He knew the Wovdoulls and Tueodore Tiltoa in the palmy days of their common regeneration of society and morals. The Woodauti party is the great “side hold” of the defence. Mr. Cooxe consulted apiece of memorandum from bis pocket, “What are you iouking at, sir” inquired Beach, sternly. “A tavle of dates,” said Mr. Cooke. Mrs. Woodhull, whom the witness ¢: da “The Woodaall,”’ had introduced Tilton to Cooke. Tnis was ap inierviewer’s true story, ali the way from Detroit, He said they met, each “feellag their way" at each other. Judge Morris, geuerally addressea as ‘San arose and objected to so much Woodnoull as having BO association With (he question of damages. Cooke, however, tied up Tilion witn lis inamorata, Theo- dore bad not covered bis tracks with that wise dis- cretion aue to a philosopher, but as Cook ana he may have gone on the Same errand, to interview the priestess, they involved each other. Mr. Slearman wears tie look of @ lad who climbed up on » high sheli of the pantry and at- tacked a jar of preserves, whenever he gets near the Woodhull secret, Between jear of being dis- turbed and joy in the repast bis expression is that of a wasp caught fast in sweetness. 1his Witness, Cooke, spoke low, rather mumbling- ly,and he somewhat jretted the piaintia. Frank Moulton, sitting at the small table between Peck- ham and Pryor, with Morris, Tilton and Fullerton on the other side, interjectea some whispers. All the religious jurymen, headed py Carpenter, the foreman, were peeping on now and Mr. Beecher wore 4 simile on bis red face, Tilton was working hard with bis gold penctl and paper, and Evarts interfered to help the story on. ) _ Mr. Cooke testified—I am at present residing in | Detroit; Lhave veen @ jourualist jor the last il. teen years; I was on the Sun during 1870 aud 1871; £ became acquarnted with Theodore Tilton during that year; | formed the acquaintance of Mrs, Woodnull and Mra, Uladin @ suort me be- | tore. Mr. Suearman—How was that Jormed? Mr. Beach—Objected to, Alter a iittie discussiou between the legal digni- taries, the Judge suggested questions of a more direct nature, and witness resumed:—On the evening uue 8 J was sent to tie residence of Mrs. Woodbuil aad Claflin to interview them about the death of (heir brother-in-law, Mr. Sparc; I visited them trequentiy durimg the next jour monins at ther residence in Thirty-eignin street and their office in Broad street; I met Mr. Tiiton at their office in Broad etreet and was in- troduced to hima by Mrs. Woodhull: I was talking to Mrs. Woodhull about an interview that ap- peared in print when Mr, Tilton came in and was introduced; | bad @ conversation aiterward witu Mr. filton, and be spoke very bighly of Mra. Wood- hui; be was probably FRELANG WS WAY and | waa feeling wy way; he said Mrs, Woodhall Was a very remarkable womav, & Very spiritabie Woman 4nd # Woman that Would make @ stir in the world; | met Mr, Tilton on several occasions during that Summer and \all at the residence ana omce of Mrs. Woodnull; I called there two or toree times a Week, and [ usually met bim every time; | have taken lunch with Mrs, Woodhull in Broad street, aud met Mr, Tiltou there on several cccasions. Mr. Morris stood up here and asked the Juage What tuis testimony bad to do with the cherge whether Mr. Beecher committed adultery or not. He insisted that it had no earthy either question in tie case. How does toe issue What Mr. ‘Tilton said about Mra, Wood- * boul or Mrs, Woodhull about Mr. ‘Tilton ? Witness continued—Wnhen I visited Mrs. Woodhull | generauy spent my time in the parlor; | was only once up stairs; | pave heard Whe jadies lute in the eveniog calling down stairs to Tilton, telimg bim not to go yer; Tiiton and 1 did not on ail ecasions leave the house togetler; i remember coming over to Brooklyn with hit acquaintance once; I ieft bim oace in Woodnuil'’s nouse about eeven or tweive; on one vccasion there were resent Colonel Bic Stephen Pearl Audrews, rs. Woodhull and her sister; there was a general covversation; | remember ao Interview with Mr Woodnuil the day of the Steinway Hail meetin, it was at the office in Broad street; Mr. Titon came in and Mrs, Woodhall put on her dress aca wentaway with him in @ Carriage; | lad a taik with Mra, woodbuli tue nexe day. Q. Did she speak in that conversation about Mr, Beecher? A. Yes, 81 Mr, Beach objected Le to tts being related, A fine red complex- | | a8 the McOue libel; I did not write the headin, | ern society; she said furcher that it wouta p: | & Clafin paper. | tn the midst of this hot cross-examination. Mr. Evarts said the question waa not matertal, | only, as being harmless, with which to connect more important testimony. | Witness resumed :—I afterwards had an inter- | w with Mrs. Woodhull, at which Mr. Tilton was present; we talked about Mr. Beecher and alluded | to & previous— Mr. Beach—Watt, sir; stop a moment. Mr. Beach argued that the conversation should | be given a8 it occurred, and the Judge ayreed | with the counsel for the plaintiff, ! Witness continued :—I cannot swear that there | was any direct reference to any previous conver- | sation. Mrs, Woodhuil urged me to write up the Beecher scandal; I said if I should attempt to write up such @ ry on mer nesragy, 1 would | involve my rin of law suits; she Ptr Theodore had ail the documents in the case; he showed them to me, and be will show them to you; she said it waa the greatest sensation of the age; would blow the Toof of Piymouth church and revolutionize mod; ay mn well. and any paper would be giaa to get Te roid her 1 was not in the habit of hawking my mate- rials around the street to find a purchaser, and deciined the job; a6 an interview, where Mr. Til- ton and Mrs, Woodnull were present, with myself, they urged me, as { would not write tt up for the | general market, to write it up for tne Woodhull | | Mr. Shearman—Did you not say thatthe pro- position that you should write up this story for Woodhull & Clajtin's Weekly was made in the | presence of Mr. Tilton? Mr. Beach—stop, sir. I opject to the question. Witness continued—I camnot recollect the par- ticular conversation that occurred; 1 was asked d urged to write the story for Woodhull & Clajén's Weekly; | was asked by both Mr. ‘Iilton and Mrs. Woodhall; I was asked on several occa - sions; | was asked fo take a joint position on the Goiden Age aud Woodhull & Clajin'’s Weekly; wat proposition was made to me by Mr Tilton; he proposed that I should write sensational local | paragraphs; | told bim | had no objection to tak- | Ing @ position on the Golden Age, but Idid not care | to risk my reputation by @ connecuon with Wood- nul & in's Weekly. Mr. Shearman then showed a few photographs of Woodhull aud Claflin, which were identiled by the witness. COOKE ON CROSS-EXAMINATION. The story told by the reporter Cooke was un- doubtedly powerful evidence against the plaintif, if not for the defence. It appeared to connect Woodhull and Andrews with Tilton as the princi- pals in the suggestion of the original Woodhull publication against Beecher and Tilton’s wife. ‘This Was a new feature in the trial. Some asked why the cross-examination was stopped by Suear- man so suddenly, and others guessed because it might have been that Cooke wrote the story of Beecher in Woodhull’s paper, and that the deience did not wish this to be shown. Some photographs of Woodhall and Claflin were produced, which several of the jurymen declined to look at, Mr. Pullerton began to cross-examine Cooke, with a cool, forevoding manuer, almost iriendly, bat witn a touch of acid init, ‘The witness was a man of good memory and smart address, Falierton ran through his vagari- ous life, bookseller, detective, oMceholder and writer on many sheets, and fually brought him to the admission that last summer, when Tilten made a statement to the public, be (Vooke) com- municated with Shearman and engaged to give information to the Beecher side. The recess came By Mr. Fullerton—W nat ts your present address ? Witness—t live in Detroit and am @ journalist and am now engaged in winding up a newspaper, the Detroit Union; [ left Brooklyn to go to Detroit in May last; I was connected with the Sun pedore 1 leit ior Detroit; my connection with the sun was on piecework; except tor three mentns { never had any regular connection with the Sun; the matertal { wrote for the Sun was chiefly sensation; { am not aware that the proprietor of the Sum was prosecuted jor anything I wrote; L was at liberty to sell whatever I wrote to any other paper; my first occupation when | first went to Detroit years ago was school teaching, then I sold books, alterwards | joiuea @ Detroit paper; | Bad po proprietary mterest in 1t; 1 cannot say how long I was there; I_was then an army cor- respondent for the New York HERALD; I remained with the Heratp three or four years; I went into the government employ as special agent ol the Post Oflice Departmeut; I was. then special agent of the Treasury Department, investigatin; frauds; | was afterward mspector of customs; was removed from the Custom House and co menced my work with the Sun; I have corre- sponded with several persons about what 1 know here; I wrote to Mr. Shearman an account of a | statement printed by Mr. Tilton; | wrote a letter to Mr. Shearman; I came on from Detroit at Mr. Shearman’s solicitation to attend the trial; I have received &8 compensation $100; [ was here the second week of the trial; my expenses to ana | from Detroit consumed the money; | returned to | Detroit after being here about a week, being ex- cused by the Court. Here the Court took a recess until two o'clock. AT THE RECESS the witness Cooke was left to himself, and he | stroiled around in the neighborhood for oysters. | He 18 knowif®o possess an intimate knowledge of | the Woodhull family, to be a believer in Mr, | Beecher’s innocence and to have asseried that Mr. Tuton’s motive in bringing the present charges was envy. He asserts that the cause ior the deience will yet consume @ monthor six | weeks in taking testimony, that the jury will fod for Beecher, and that Tilton will first be made opprobrious in the community and Moniton sfter- ward, and Mrs. Tilton then le!t unsupported, but | unassaticd, between the two. Cooke is a person of sharpened senses and orii- | nary brain, with brownish gray eyes, wide apart, | aod aleré and siy for interviewing. He is agovd talker, a strong partisan, of criginaliy fine mem- ory, a8 his over-roofed nose shows, tue bumps pro- | truaing there; and by many years of lsténing, | iu bad draughts, for [fragments of conversation, his | hearing is reduced and he often replied to the law- | yer with a palm venind bis ear. His noses | sligntly hooked, his large mouth is covered by a | thin and ragged mustache. His low voice, confl- dentiality and deafness suggest a natural detect- ive agent. . That his testimony made a decided impression | was manifes. at noon, as Mr. Beecher received | many congratulations irom his membership, law- | yers and strangers. He did not return iu tne | afternoon, although Edward Beecher did. Only one female was present in the aiternoon, a news | paper correspoudent. the court. Moulton was aiso present again, list- ening anxiously. | Ata quarter past two o'clock the witness was | cross-examined by Mr. Fullerton Have you received no wore than $100 from Mr, Shearman? A. i received $60 since to come | | on here again; 1 did draw lor $50; I ieit Detroit a week ago last Wednesday and arrived here last Sunday ; I did not wrive in the Sun wiat is known i which tae libel was contained; never heard that any part of the article was libellous; the Sun wus indicted; my leaving tbe Sun was not at ali in | Consequence of my writing that article. | q When did you first see Mrs, Woodnull? A. On the evening Of June 8, 1871; | reier to a memo- | randum in my possession to refresh my memory; saw Mrs. Woodhuil at ber house, in Tuirty-eighin street, New York; 1 bad not then known Theodore | Tilton; I Was introduced to Theodore Tilton a day | or two alter tne 20a of June, 1871; | Was Intro: | duced to him at the office of Mrs. Woodbull by | Mes. Wooduull; my business at the office of Mrs. | Woodhull was to ascertain some particulars o! the death of her brother-in-law, Dr. Parr; I was di- rected by either Mr, Dana or Mr. Cummings to go tod oodhull; Lwrote some articies in the Sun about the object of my visit; | saw Mr. Tilton almost daily in the summer or fall of that year in the office of Mrs, Woodhull; I had seen | him there before I was ‘introduced to him; 1 was quite frequently at the office ot Mra. Weedon; 1 am quite sure I saw Mr. Tilton there almost daily aiter the 23d of Jane; he used to be conversing with Woodnuil and Claflin, and held private conversations witn them in the back room; there was aiwaya a pum: ber of pevpie coming and going there; 1 do not know but there may have veeu a dozen people there at the tim | Q. During the time Mr. Tilton was in the back room in consultation with Mrs, Wo can you Say that there were w dozen people Iu tuere we- sides Tilton? A. [cannot say tuat tere were & dozen people there at any one Une: I say there Was @ private consusbation, because we dour Was closed and pers ona were in tue room; | saw Mr. ‘Tilton & dozen tines at Mra. Woodvull’s house In 1871, belore tue Stelaway Hall meeting; IL was | once up stairs in that house; I cannot say m | What room; I caunot say that it was in Colonei Blood’s room; | am very sure! went up only one fight; 1am sure 1 came down again; (aughter;) 1 don’t remember saying on my direct exgiuination (hat | was in Woodbuii’s house half a dozen times; 1 \hink | can swear that I saw Tuton there avout a dozen umes; Ido not rememver when [ bad the first conversation with Tilton or who Was present when [ had that conversation; I Was onto: towo in Sepvemver, 1871, lor about, perhaps, two weeks. (, During those jourteen days you did not see Mr, Tilton datiy? A. Certainly not. Q You take out those fourteen days? A, Yeu; aboul a week alter toe Steimway fall some conversauion with Mr. ‘Tilton; present at that meeting; conversation I bad with Mr, the Steinway fall meeting was Mce of Wooduuil & Clafin, ta Broad street; meeting I it Was within four days aftew the meeting; I am hot aware tuat (heodore Tilton leit New York the day ater the Sveinway Hall meeting; Colonel od, the reputed husvand of Mrs. Woodbail, Mrs, Wooahull and Mr. Tiiton were present at the in- terview J tave spoken of; Ido not know if Miss Clafiin was present; Blood 1s 4 man of ability; [do hot care to swear that be is @ man ol ed UcaWOUs A I | think [ can tell you the substance of what took | | and ez aficio one of the Board of Deacons, | 1872; 1 saw Mi. Beecher that day before I saw or did not understand that ne ts a writer; Mrs. Wood- holi is a Woman Of intelligence; she has the rep- utacion of betng a writer. Q Hassne not the reputation of being an ac- compushea writer? A. I do not know, | Did you ever hear her lecture? A. I can’t | impression that I dia; in said | ear, but I have rime something to the effect th 1 could not di distinguish the subjects that were discussed capnot undertake to give all the conversatio! place at the interviews when myself, Mr. Tion and Mrs, Woodhull were present; | ani quite sure there was @ conversation When Tilton was present about pla writing up the Beecher scandal for Woodhull & Claftin’s Weekly; | am quite sure of that; it was in the fall, a year betore the puvlica- tion; [ did not apply to the Golden Age for employ- ment; it was Tilton who suggested to me to be employed on Woodhull ¢ Cluftin’s Weekly: I went | to Woodaull’s house unce with my child, ien yeurs Old; 1 Cannot say that I met any one there on that occasion. THE DEEP PIT. The inquiries of Judge Fullerton appeared to | produce no effect upon the witness, Cooke, until a quarter to three o'clock, when it was extracted from bim that be had taken his child to call on Mrs. Woodhull and had been waited upon by Mra. | Woodhull herself in Detroit a fortnight or more ago. Judge Pullerton’s cross-examination was a disappointment to the abettors of Mr. Tilton, and he produced no more general effect upon Cooke than Mr. Beach had the day before produced upon Jackson 8, Sehultz. Q. Where did you see Mrs. Woodhull last? A. A week ago last Sunday. in Detroit; she sent for me and I went to her room and remained abouts | an hour; that was alter Mr. shearman had written to me; | recetved a,letter from Mr. Hill, one of the counsel im this case; 1 have received hal @ dozen letters from Mr. Hill; I did not confer with Mr, Hill when / was bere iast, but I conlerred with Mr, Shearman and General bigs I did not know tbat Mrs, Woodhull was coming here. To Mr. Shearman—I refused three salaries on the Sun, as I think 1t more preferable to Nous the piece; the Sun would not print any immo: articies. (Laughter.) Q In stating what you said took place in Mr. Tilton’s presence, did you omit stating what was said in his absence ? ‘The Judge—Toat may be assumed. JOHN GALLAGHER. Alter the brief cross-examination and easy escape of the witness, Mr. Cooke, the defence called the cabman who drove Tilton to Coney Island with Mrs. Woodhull in 1871. He wasa nutty headed Milesian, witha spikey beara ana Mustache and hollow features, and presented a generally reliable appearance, Tilton’s counsel made an effort, througn Mr. Beach, to shat out this evidence, but It was ad- mitted, to Tilton’s great discomposure, as was manifested by his tace. He looked half Nushed and talked rapidly with Judge Fuller- ton. Is was generally understood that this wit ness meant to swear that Tilton and Mrs. Wood- holl went in bathing nude at Coney Isiand beach. Hall the people in court knew of this announce- ment and listened feverishly. Tae witness, how- ever, did not at this paint make any such dis- closure, but afterward he showed’ that he took Mrs. Woodhall and Mr. Tilton from Moulton’s house at midnight to Mrs. Woodhull’s in New York | city. ‘his finished tne direct. Judge Fullerton asked nothing whatever. John Gallagher, being sworn, testified as fol- | lows:—I know Theodore Tilton; known him since Thave been in business a8 @ hackman in Brook- lyn; he bas often employec me; I was emploved by Mr. Tilton to take lim to Coney Island; & lady | accompanied kim; it was in 1871, in the latter part of the summer ot that year. Mr. Beach would iike to know what this testi- mony was offered for. Mr. Tracy—To show the association of Mr. Tilton with Mrs. Woodhall. Mr. Beach submitted that tvis was collateral matter; It was not pertinent to the issue. Tne Judge—Under the assurance o! Mr. Tracy we wiil take the evidence. ‘Witness—My memory is that Mr. Tilton came from bis own house with w lady; it wasin the aiternoon they took the carriage; it was an open | carriage ; Ido not recollect anything else but that ey Went to bathe; my recollection is that they got out at Green’s, very near the beach; they gave me their gold watches to keep for them; I did not see them bathing; I could not see them; they were absent about ao hour; on returning I aid not take notice of their hair; Idrove back vo Mr. Tilton’s house; I moticed that Mr. Tilton nad some two or three shes of paper in bis hand; I think it was on the way to Coney Island I saw the papers with him; after returning to Mr. Tik | tou’s house I drove him to Remsen street, be- tween Hicks street and the river; it mignt have been dark at now Mr. Moulton’s house; Mr. Tilton and tae lady went tpy ihe house i Remsen street; he told me to come for them a midnight, and | did; I browght a close carriage, and took them over to Fifteenth street, as I re- | collect, in New York; they got out and weat into 4 house; Mr. Tilton, I think, came back with | me to Brooklyn; (photograph of Mrs. Woodhull | handed to witness) 1 think that Is the lady. but | the hair is cut short. The witness was not cross- examined, | | i | SAMURBL B. HALLIDAY, Mr. Beecher’s assistant pastor, was called at three o'clock. Mr, Halliday 1s 8 snort, bald, gray | gentleman, with a perfectly smooth face ana @ bulbous nose. He had met Mr. Beecher in | Providence, R. J., many years ego, but knew him intimately for twelve years past. The witness folded his arms, looked demure and precise, ana | conveyed au impression of genial and pulpy good | nature. Re spoke alittle through his nose, testi- | flea with great conscientious accuracy, and was wi particalar to say that he nad a very limited know}. | edge of Theodore Tilton. He then plunged into a speech as to his ca'ling aud avocation, tu a clerical way, and was allowed to go on ad ithitum by the lawyers on both sides, | Mr. Hailiday’s testimony was as follows:—I re- side at No, 69 Hicks street, Brooklyn; | think L have resided in Brooklyn ten years; I am Mr. Beecher’s assistan have assisted him about five years; lam a member of the Examining Committee , Q. How long have youknown Mr. Tilton? A. I think [have Known hin about twelve years; my acqnaintance with him is very limited; ft is lim- | ied to about five years; | was introduced to him at Captain Dancan’s honse, at a reception of tue | lady teachers; Mra, Tilton was present; I wag | about eleven years connected with the House of | Industry at the Five Points, New York; I|_remem- scandal; ] saw a copy of it on the 28th of Octover, heard of the publisied scandal. Q Now, Mr. Halliday, did Mr. Beecher, in that | conversation—ans wer me simply ‘‘yes’’ or “no” — consult with you with reference as to what course would be prvper for him to pursue with reference to the Woodhull scandal? Objected to by Mr. Beach, 5 The question was admitted by the Court, who | instructed Mr. Shearman to ask the question, “Did be consuit with you with respect to this | publication?’ The question was put, and the wit- | ness replie I don’t know how to iswer the | question very well, ua Mr. Beecher sp to me, | but I can’t say whether he conguised with me | about the puvlication or not. | Q. Well, wid Mr. Beecher speak to you about it ? A. He did, Q. Did Mr. Beecher have any conversation with you in respect to the proper course lor him to pursue + Objected to by Mr. Fullerton and ruled out by | the Court. | Mr. Shearman said that they proposed to show that Mr. Beecher had a conversation with the witness Jor the purpose of consulting the brethren of the church with reference to oviaining their advice as to the proper course to purse in reier- | ence to tue publication of the scandal, Objection Was made by the counsel to that. Mr. Shearman then said that evidence has been introduced by the counsel for plaintif® to show | that Mr. Beecher had endeavored to con- | trol bis church in regard to what line of action they proposed to pursue in re- jation to this = acundal, They had en- | deavored to show that he endeavored | to conceal tue facts in this case audio suppress the action of the church, Mach evidence has | been introduced on thas subject. The defence pro- | pose to show that Mr. Beecher did not undertake at any time vo control the action of the church in any iespect; but that, on the contrary, he aid consult them on the matier, and that tt was upon the advice of members of Piymouth churen that | he parsuea the policy of sileace on the subject of | the publication. Heald not think that the evi- dence on the sudject is very Important In itself; | bat, as the plaitiff’s counsel tad brought itin, | it Was US prover to show the contrary result to that which had been impuieo, Judge Netlson said:—Ol course, Mr. Shearman, you recognize the restrictions 1 am under—that ihe rules of evidence do Bot admit the introduc- tion Of conversation with the defendant in the absence of the deiendant. The question is not | wamiss. bie, Mr. EVarts argued that in civil suite such as the present it was in the power 0! the Court to admit the conversations. He propounded the law on tue subject, aod #ataown alter expressing the hope that His donor would take that view of the premises. Judge Neilson—TI still think we won't receive it. Mr. dvarts—Thea Your Mouor will please nove our exception. Mr. Shearman—tI offer to prove that at this in- | terview Mr, Beecher told hun that this publieauion was to be made, and tuut It Was an utter falsehoud from beginning toend, The counsel then proceeded to read from the speeci delivered by Mr. Morris | in opeuing che case tor Mr. Tiitoa, in which Mr. | Morris had asserted that ‘Mr. Beecher had made no denial,” and had asked “Why cid be net deny it; because 1 would have led to an investigation o} his courch, which Would have been rnin.” Mr, | Shearman Continuing, said we now offer to show that Mr, Beccher made uis denial to We Clark of , | the face of the There was (ieep interest in | ber the publication of the Woovbull and Clafin | sition that the action of | introduce Plymouth churcn and to nis assistant, and that ne directed nim to communicate it to the ofticers of the chureh, and to show that Mr. Beecher did make the dental ugh the proper channels of his church and that he left discretionary to the officers thereof the questien as to whether be should make it public or not. SHEARMAN WITTY. arman was interrupted by Judge Ful- “We are not desirous to make that speech the law of the case.” “I don’t think it ever will be,” said Mr. Shear- man, sarcastically. Mr. Beach objected, and asked, “What ts this Prosecution against Mr. Beecher?” It turns out that an infamous publication was made smputing to Mr. Beecher the very charge which we allege, and the deience now Pro to show that in the conversation with Mi Nitty y, the assistant pas- tor, Mr. Beecher ted it. Counsel submitted that such a line of evidence was contrary to the Tules of evidence and inadmissible. Judge Neilsoun—Mr. Shearman you can take the | same ruling. Mr. Evarts said the Court would please note their exception. Q. Mr. Halliday, did you calla mecting of afew members of Plymouth church at or about that time? A. I did call meeting that very morning orin the afternoon of the day that the pastor called on me. Q. Where was that meeting held? A. It was held in the hat! of the church, . Who were there? A. I can mention but a few, sir. Q. Name them. A. There was George A. Bell, Abram Hill, J. B. Waite and Deacon Hawkins. Q. What was the subject of discussion at the meeting t Objected to by Mr. Beach. Judge Neilson said he would take the testimony tf this was a regular meeting of the church. Witness—It was @ meeting of officers of the | | church, broaght on through the pabiication o! the Woodhull scandal, Objected to, Mr. Shearman said they desired to show the action of the church on thé question. Q Was it nota rule of the churen that three deacons of Plymouth church or of the Examining Comuittee | could bold a meeting ? Obdjected to by Mr. Morris. A When was the meeting to which yoo refer held? A. It was on Tuesday evening. Q. Were there as many as three members of the Board of Deacons present at that meeting? A. There were Deacon Bell and mysel! and others who were members ex gficio of the Board of Dea- cons present; all the members of the Examining Committee are members of the Board; they were prevent at each meeting. ‘The Court inguired whether the rutesof the church require present to call each meeting Of the church. Mr. Shearman said that deacons were all mem- bers of the Examining Committee at shat time, and they could at any time come together an hold a meeting, which was in accordance with the. usage of the chureh for many years, Mr. Beach asked whetner these meetings were nal Eecokied in the business transactions 01 the arch. Mr. Evarts rose to explain what was legal in matters appertaining to the United States in rec- ords, when Mr. Beach humorously remarked that the counsel was better acquainted with the rules Of the United States courts than he was with tne Tuies of Plymouth church. Judge Neilson said he would like to see the books of the church recording these meetings in the morning, and Mr. Shearman said he would produce she records, Q. Mr. Halliday, are you acquainted witn Mrs. Francis D. Moaiton. the wife of Mr. Moulton; were you not intimately acquainted with her, and state When your acquaintance terminated? A. Yes, sir; but not intimately; I saw her first in the spring of i872 or late in the autumn of that year; 1 saw her at her residence. Q. What was the object of your call? a. It was @ simple pastoral call; I make 2,500 every year. Q At that time, during a conversation with | Mrs. Moulton, was your attention called by her to @ portrait of Mr. Beecher hanging on tae wall? A. Yes, sir. Did she say anything of him? jected to re afr. Beach. id Mrs, Moulton speak to yoo on that occa- Q ston of Mrs, Woudhull? A. Not at that teme, sir. Q. Well, on amother occasion. Dia you have & subsequent interview; state when and where? A. | Yes, about Wednesday, the 20th or 20th of Ucto- ver; it was the last Wednesday of that month— that is my impressien; I can teli how I know the time if you wiil permit me. Q. How soon was this aiter the meeting? A. It Was the next day. Q. State what occurred between you and Mrs, Moulton at this interview. Objected to, Q. Who received you at the door? ton received me. What did you say to her? bjected to, Q. Did Mrs. Moulton say to you that she didn’t see what Mrs. Woodhull Bad to do with this busi- ness? A. I said to ber, ‘What does this Woodhall story meab; how is it, Mrs. Moulton, that your name is connected with it?” she answered, “I don’t kuow whatright Mrs. Woodbull nad to use my name; I had nothing to do with it;” then there was gome mor oversation; Mrs. Moulton said, in sul e tance, Ctr. falliday, and bas been from childhood, and tuey can say A. Mrs, Moul- MB. BEECHER IS MY PASTOR | nothing that can lessen my affection or destroy | my confidence in him;" 1 fegarded ber as being in earnest. Q. During that year 1872 and ata later pertod do youremember seeing Mrs. Moulton in attena- {| abce on Plymouth gburch? A. Yes, sir; several times; I may have seen her there ag many as six umes since the period of my call; | never saw her at church unless she called around alter services to the foot of tae pulpit stairs, amd waited uli Mr, Beecher came and shook bands with her, Q. Did you shortly aiter this meeting attend a regular monthly meeting of the Board uf Deacons? | A. did; [can’t remember bow many were pre: ent. Q. Was the question of THK POLICY Tu BE ADOPTED BY THE CHURCH entered into? Objected to by Mr. Fullerton, Wituess—The regular meeting was gone through ‘ith and will appear on tne record, Mr. Beach interrupted the witness, objecting to the dejendant giving in evidence any proceeding of Plymouth churcu or oi 1's officers and mem- bers, except such as were called gtteution to oy | the piaintim™ They might upon the West charges, but the action of Piymouth cuureh upon the gen- eral sodject of the scandal ts inadmissible. it would not be competent evidence, as Itis Honor would admit, to give declarations of Mr. Beecher when Mr. Tilton was not present, They had only to do with the materiality that the church had to do with tue issue of this case. On what principie | of law coud the Court allow the defendant to give the acis of the officers and of TRE UNDERLINGS OF HIS CHURCH? Mr, Shearman said it was offensive, wiat word “unde: lings.” Mr. Beach—Yes, underlings, 1 ase the word in no invidious sense. Isit uot a compliment, an honor, to be an anderling to “the greatest man on rth‘? It is @ monstrous propo- in this case between those two individuals, Where is to oe the limit of this inquiry if we are to enter into the action of this corporate body ? Judge Neilson said the report of the Standing Committee is not part of the action of the church. Mr. Beach asserted the contrary, inasmuch as the church had adopted it. Mr. Eyartg said the matter layin @ nutshell. The plalotif® had introduced evidence to affect Mr. Beecher, principal issue during the alleged act. uilt because of the evidence of suppression. They had the piaintif’s selection of evidence to determinable on his series of years following the sdow this, bat they did not propose to take the | roduced, but to show the | steps that the plaintimt action of the church independent of Mr. Beecher, and their action in adhering to nis policy of allence, because no vindication of Mr. Beecher was necessary, Mr, Beach said that the plaintiff haa given no evidence of the action of Plymouth church. They had heard the West charges to Mr. Beecher and his reception of them, and the other side had in- troduced evidence 01 the action of the charch ior | the purpose of reireshing the memory of Mr. West on Lhe subject. appose they had proved the ac- tion of the Examining Committee en the West charges, Would that entitie the defence to evidence of the action of the independent of Mr. Beecher’s. They simply followed the action of Mr. Beecter in’ his private capacity and his private infinence. If tis acts in his absence could not be proved the action of the church or of any of its committees could not be proved either. Jndge Neilson said the deiendant’s counsel is at liberty to bring the records oft the church and to give such evidence as to the investigation or Buppression of the Woodhull or any other sei dal, if he has any. The details of any conve tions or interviews which may have taken plac charch | one evening aud veen lorgottéen the next cannos be given. At this poiwt the court was adjourned until eleven o'clock this morning, THE IDLE PAINTERS. Quite a number of the painters, who have left their employment rather than assent to tho rule of ten hoyrs for a day's work at $3 60 pay, assem. bied informaily yesterday at sueir renaezvous, Twenty-third street and Third avenue. No tormai | meeting was organized, but the men gathered in groups and discussed the situation, ail asserting in the most positive terms that they will not, no mavier what the pay offered, consent to tha lengthening 01 the day's service beyond tae legal rule of elgtt hours, They are confident that | as tne pressure of work comes on the bosses Willi ve obliged to come to the elgnt uour system. On the contrary all tne lead- ing employers assert tnelr beliel that they will find mo dificulty in procuring men competent and willing (uv Work long lours a# fast as jobs demand, and they remain firm in thew determination either to control their own hours or to ieave the work to ote At present, when tae demand jor work Is siack only avout’ oue hundred men Who had empioymens are idie, They say that the non-society men who are willing to work ten hours per day are not competent for the work. But oe lar the bosses have the vest of whe algu- men that three deacons should be | the church can be given | oy making bis conduct on tne | conduct | They claim there 1s evidence of carensaliaieeeniaaiiae MR. BEBCHER ON THE CARDINALSHIP. Fenisiaoeige AN HONOR THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN BESTOWED LONG AGO—IT HAS NO SIGNIFICANCE. In the usual datty tumult attending the break- ing up of the proceedings at lunci time yesterday Mr. Beecher looked caim, confident and good- natured. In the part of the court room wiere he sits there 1s always, at this eventful pertod of the day, @ great knocking to ana fro of tie cane bol- tomed chairs, The lawyers draw their seats (u- getber, talk for a few moments, and then kick them away to go out to lunch. The Plymouth chureb people tumble over chairs and tables to greet their pastor for a moment and pour into bis ear words of hope and comfo:t A mass of visitors block up the passage at the rear of (ne room to enjoy @ near and ample view of the gr personages in the trial, so that there is mu | pustie and confusion for some twenty minutes. Mr. Beecher had a pleasant twinkle in his eye when a HERALD reporter drew him two feet asiie from THE MOB OF LAWYERS who buzzed all about him and asked him ils opinion tn regard to the appointment, at Rome, of Archbishop McCloskey to @ cardinalship. Mr. Evarts was passing at the moment, and Mr. Beecher overheard nim say “We have made agood! opening this morning,” whereat the defendant's face lighted up, and for an inatant he seemed io feel as 1f a load of dismal forebodings were takem of iis mind. He was glad to find the reporter, had no intention of referring to tie weary topic that must now consume his thoughts potn day aud! night. A relief was welcome and ne cheerfully re- plied to the inquiry. NO SIGNIFICANCE. “Has the appointment of archvishop McCloskey as cardinal any sigaificancet”’ Mr. BENCHER—None beyond showing, as I think, that the Coart of Rome takes more interest tn tue! Catholic Church tn America, In my opinion, Rome has neglected it to agreat extent. The Catholia Church has made great strides in the United! Staves. I¢ bas thrown off its baby clothes and en- tered the lists for trial with the foremost con- Gregations of the land. 1 think this recognitiom: of the New York Archbishop has been dilatory. There was Archbishop Hughes, a very able man, upon whom the honor should have been conferred! years ago. ARCHBISHOP HUGHES. RE —Did you know nim, Mr. Beecher? Mr. BEEGHER—Not personally; buf I knew enough about bim to see he was @ strong cham~ pion on his own side—wary, shrewd and forcible. His energies never suffered from stagnation. He was no half-hearted apostle of Catholicity,,and, aw a rule, Catholicity ts well served by its agents, It) ig foremost in zeal and persistency, the qualities that belp the spread of almost all ideas. Rerorrek—What do you think of the new Car dinel? Mr. BrroueR—By all accounts he is an excellent man. He performs nis duttes quietly but faith« fully. He holds aloof from controversies and leaves the quarreling to other people, For # dignity like this he ta well fitted, and Catnolics will have no reason to be ashamed of the man sa honored. Ionly wonder the Pope did not think’ long before now of paying this graceful tribute to the great and growing branch of the Ohurctt located in this country. NO AGGRESSION. RerorTeR—You do not think, a8 some do, that this thing means Papal aggression in America. Mr. BEECaER—By no means. My theory is that - | every religion in this land should have a fair and equal chance, All being on the one footing, l say, let the best one win. If the Catholic religium gocs to the wall in the struggle, its innerend weakness will be shown. Living in the bright light of the nineteenth century, that religion alone can succeed that has bread in place of ciied to offer its followers. I have always maintain: that this soll was to be the race ground of the @arth’s religions and the scene to witness the, triumph of the true one. Liberty of thought and expression is as unfettered as the wins, Give ait then the same chance to prove themselves and an enlightened people will finally discover where tue pure and sincere teaching lies. Papal aggression 18 @ mere bugbear. If it be the aggression o! thought and argument every disinterested man, will welcome it. Aggression, in the sense of aim- {ng to subvert tne country’s religious and politi« | cal liberties, is absurd, for tt implies that 30,000, 000 of people must be tuferlor to her. Away with big- otry and intolerance, and leave to reason, con~ trolled by faith, the solution as to which religion best deserves the suffrages of a great people. Mr. Beecher, shortly after expressing these libe eral sentiments, left to go to his lunch, “s, (TALMAGE AT QOOPER INSTITUT LECTURE ON THE HOMES OP BROOKLYN. Rev. T. De Witt Talmage delivered a lecture iast | evening at Cooper Institute, in aid of the Africa Methodist Episcopal church of Peekskill, his suv- ject being ‘The Homes of New York and Erooklyn.” The interest felt by the public in the church at Peekskill would seem to be small, as not more than a hundred persons wera present, which the speaker, in his opening, attributed to the entire lack of advertising in the public journals, It is natural, he said, for @ man to love the country and | elty in which he resides better than any other. Standing at the gate of the Continent we endea- vor to retain the best and let the balance go West. The best pictures, the best parks, &c., are ours. The question we are now to consider 18, what shail we do to beautify and adorn the nomes of New York and Brooklyn? Wealth is not necessary to a comfortable and beautiful home. We should acorn Our homes with pictures—cheap ones if need be. Remember tuat pictures are a constant edu- cation of your hoeusehola. And let these ; De cheerful; not doleiul representations of | death, bat something bright and pleasant. Let us bring into our houses, too, the attractions of music; @ piano tf you can, if not, a guitar or ac- cordeon—the iatier the meanest music you can have. Mr. Talmage advocated parlor games as tending to make bome happy. It is an ignomini- ous thing for @ man who had @ good time when hoe was young to go about at fiity or sixty growling because other people are having a good time. | The vid game o! biipd man’s batt was graphically described as a Sampie of the games Which might | be innocently indulged in. Toere are mea who think themselves too good for the soctalities of Iie. This class was ridiculed in @ Manner which calied forth hearty laughter. We can’t afford to be anchorites, have no | patience with those who are always being 1il- treated. From whatever degree or natiopality & man may come let us welcome him into NEW YORK AND ‘our homes if pe loves God and hates sham. Again, if we would make our homes attractive we must throw around our dining taples great, good cheer, He denounced the rapid Method of eating in this country. From one to two o’ciock the scomacns are crying out, “Man alive, give us time; whatdo you expect of ust! He also spoke bitterly against the adulterated food too orten used and advised all to be careful of what they eat. There are, he said, a million men in the country to ling, toiling, who are denying themseives all sucial advantages, fratein . EFAS ing. What for? To spoti their chiidren. [ believe the reason why young people don't get along bet- ‘ter i they do not have to Work hara enough. Light and cheerful conversation at the | table was advised as ated to aid the digestion and improve the temper. | Again, let us create especial attractions tor the children, Make the nursery bright, for we never escape from its power. nen you depart | trom this piace to-night take & biessing to the nomes of New York and Brooklyn. See to the children and go © bed Without @ fret or @ care. Don’t worry about the world, All wrongs shall be righted aud we shall yet see the gush of the morn- | ing. Don's fret; you will sleep better if you do not, Ileave you at the door of your sieeping apartment. Good night to old and young, On your com/ortabie couch thank Hun who oad not where to lay His head. CAB” FARES. To THR Eprror OF THE AeRALD:— | Is there a aw fixing the rate of cab fares in this city? Ihave understood that in hiring thqm by ihe hour the rate was $1; yet on several occasions when using @ cab for two or three hoars, ana prof- fering the driver the proper amount at that rate, he nas demanded $1 60 per hour, and upon my re- jusing to pay itl have irequeatiy met with the vile est AUS ITO these Lnperubell lelows, By giv | ing some information on this suoject through | your colamna you Will greaciy obuge me wed no | doubt many otuers Wao Wave met Wik sumuar an oO huyances