, 1874-09-19

whoae woalth above such tomptaslon,-thas this
FALSE DnrzrsE or DESPERATE man
Who, In TINS baanly pretending thai Ills best
friend black1nacd him, thereby unconsclously
eonfotscs Tho guilt which Mould hare mads
Whorofore Us tic Comn,ittoo dismissed the
,hsrgo Of blackma,l from their verdict, 80 dis
Xv. a1r. nocohar sAys that I havo "garblea
btu lotsers." prosecuted in my sworn stateaiohs
E2.,Aoss fno,r Iria 1crr1:Rs
,linply hooanso had not access lo the Iolsers s
tomploto. But tho lcttors complete bear moro
severely against him than the frasmonta Mn'cm
tauotcl l now ask the public to Judge nun ~
bis complete lotters, mt by my extracts, l9r , no
in my Bacon letter quoted n fow lines Of Nlr;
Docos,ors apology 1t MIA naid tint II had ntldod
the remainder Of that apology tho aeconA T. Pars
would havo explained away tho first. Dnt IT
was found attorward that tho entire apology,
wlou printed was sen-fo)d wclght!cr than Tic
fow lites In my first extract. Ill like manner
the brief ph!asoa and paragraphs which ga"o
in my pwostl statement from liia lottert, mere
NOT afterward softenod. but ,,ntcn1Mslla1. by tho
publication Of The letters In full. Tlo brief OK
tracts uoro tho wind-the complete letters Woro
tho whtrlwind. no moro garbloa Mr.. Docohor's
3etGs M ,n b. nng & f,0a ,Sn hs e 5 'fsrsfs sc,a %9 S
quoting to him from It tho single oconinandmont,
''TioU shalt not commit Auditory"
Nevertheless 1t is truo, aa Mr.. ncocher says,
That his lettors have boon garblod." no .goeh
30 far as to ray Tint they haSc boen ".wickeAiy
garbled;" md this, too, cannot bc douicd. but
It Is not who haTo garblod a1r. Deecller's let-
tors; /; il is 0lt. Dcoclor himself. For maintain
that tho pretended explanations mhich he llas
Eison Of thcm--agalnat their plain meaning
against What he knows 10 DO tna factH to which
thoy rufor-nnti ngaiust tho common aerso nt vi,
Intelligent public; alfthiti ia garpl!ng Of a holm
ons kind. Mr. Dooclor ia the man who has
garbled his letters. 1t is ho WHO has triod to
tnko ont Of them tfacir mnnsfest meaning. It In
ho who has perverted their plnin phrases into
doubtful Interpretation.
Mr.. Bccchcr saw at glaoo that bis lotters Oh
bring read IN d straightforward manner by tho
CONVICTED 1IIu or ApULTEn1.
TIC know That nnpss these lettetA could bn OK
plaiucd iEto Aomotllng which thoy did not mean,
ho would stand aHc't-conaomnoa-put to death By
tho point Of his own pen. It Is Tho pnrt OF /.
brave man when be apvkks to abide by his words.
Mr. Boocllor's behavior toward bis own lbttora
proves him to ba that moat pitaahlo OF nlf CON-
ardu.-a man who daros not lace his own hand
writing.
His lefensc Is that thoso letters wore written
to e1prcsa HIS 1e1norno for having given to stra.
Tilton bad adTlco. bare already proven by tho
writscn Testimony OF Mrs. T,lton's mother that
Mr. Bcecler novor gave any such advice to El;zn-
both, but gave Just tho opposite. but even had
he giyen suct, adyce-nssnely, that MrA. Triton
should sorarnte from her husband--1 hold that
such advice, given, on the theory that her las-
band had depriyud her Of food, fuel, aud por-
aonal liburty, would not have beon bud. but good;
and tho giver OF such adyico would never noed
to have roponsed Of giving It.
But will 30 flrthor, aud say that. granting
such advice to hare boon givon, and to have
beon bal, yct suce Mrs. Illton did not accept
this advice, but rejected it,--ainco al1e did not
separate from her husband aud home, but TO-
n,ainod with lcr family AZ Ielore,-in othor
A1r ,nrfn hal ,1x,Jrn tnt
followed by Ill consequences, but no harm what
over CAME OF it;--lt IL a m0tkorY Of luntan
reason to snr that lo spent four yoals of romorse
in contemplating tito giving OF had advice which
wns noyer taken and which produced no effect Of
harm or i'll
Such ~ explanation of Mr. Deoehor's lottorn
Had N1r. Bcochers alleged advice over boon
boen followed by
Mns. T1LToH's SEPARATION FnoM HER HUSBAND
Mt that timo, though no such separation then en-
autd; had permanent BuuderinG actually taken
place between husband aud wife, induced with
out other cause tlan simply clcrgynlan's bad
ndvico-inTolying tho scattering Of family Of
children mado fatAerlesB aud nlotherlcas ny that
worst Of all orphanage, which conleB by tiB di-
vorco Of parents lad hlr. Deoclor scen al tlliB
during tho paat four yea,s ~ he vii! 500 itduriHg
tho next four ho might well haSo had occasion
TO mourn tho giving Of buch advice; but repeat
that tho advice which ho prctcnds to have glyon
was not followed aud there il tho best evidence
that
he NEVER GAVE ANY SUCH ADVICE
r. ail, nor over wrote QUO Of his lDttelR for any
such rCasuD.
1t is he, then, who has garbled aWuy tho mean-
fpg from hta }ottorH.
S1r Decchor's adroit effort to persuade The
public to accept false Interpretation OF these
lGtteEa is vain. Thoy hase plAin meaning
which no counsor-e1plauasion Gun ever blot out.
They nre all
BAsED on THE CENTRAL FACT,
criminal Intimacy between ;l!Msolt and Mrs.
Tilton, which had bosn coufeEsed by bpth pnrtics
to her husband and to Alr. Moultot. This sinl-
po fact is tho key which unlocks all the mSa-
torios of tllhBo letters-if mysteries tlloy cvtl-
tain AL these letters, notes, aud memoranda
refer to the CRIME Of adullery, to thu fear Of
disclosure, and to the consequent "deyiccs" for
the safety Of the participants.
When Mrs. Illlon made to mo her confession
OF july 8, 15I0, it Waa q confession OF adultery.
Whom in her note of Dec. ~, following, eho
said, ~ gaye letter iiapltcatiug my friend,
Henry Ward Deechor," it was an implication oi
adultery. When in her second noto ol tho samo
evening sho said that ar. Boechcr had visited
her bedside and ieproachel her for having
"atEuCk him dead" It was because Bhe had dis-
closed his adultery. Whom Mr. Doechor Gust
hmhels upon hlr. aioulton's strong and faithful
protection, it vas because the wretthed mau bal
been detected in his adultery, Wheu, during tho
four years that followed the LIST Of January,
1871, hardly month week paHscd which did
not wltneaa Dir. Ueecber lu honle consultation
with Mr. Moultop. either by lotter OF in person,
1t was to concoct measures for col,ccaliug this
adultery. WAen Mr. Dcechor, conscious of hls
guilt and feafihg detection, foil often into hope.
leEs gloom at the prospect Of disclosure, it was
because the crime to DO disclosed was
ADULTERY.
when from tho beginning to tho end OF Mr..
Moulton's relationship with 1lr. Beecher, those
!wo men pufHued a common p!an-iu which !,
loo, partjclpated-tlis plan WAS to guard two
lanliou Of children from tia consequences of
this adultery. Whom Mr. Deechor wroto To Mo
hs letter of con TRITON, 1t was because lie sought
to piacato mo into foreiyenoss Of Ills adultery.
Wion ho asked me to remember tall the other
hearts that would aclle," it was becallHo oi tia
misery which two households auu their
wide connections would suffer hy tho DIS
royory ut h,s adultery. When lie wrote to
AIRS Tilton tint Dir. hloulton had "tied up tho
storm which was rcady 70 burst upon their
hoads." 1t was because hlr. Moul!on had BtiLful-
ly hold back Alr. Dowou's mcdltated proceedings
against Alr. DeecLer for adultery. When MIR.
Boechor wrote that tt would kill him il Mr..
aloulton were not friend to Mrs. Tiltou's l,on-
or" ho ,ueant that this lady'a ''Lonor' like ey-
cry othor "lady' "a honor" WAS hcr reputation for
chastity, md ho relied on alr. hloullon to keep