Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1874-08-05
Sage Gives TiltOn Some Sage Ad-
Vice-He Wants the DOcu-
ments Alluded to in Til
toms Testimony.
The Outraged Husband Refuses,
in a Formal and Very Severe
Letter, to Furnish the
Documents.
MOultOn Willing to Testify-Re-
SultOf the CEOSs-ExaminatiOn
Of Mrs. TiItOn-A Life
History.

OF Mrs, I1ltOn-A Lille
History.
DIR. sToRRs KNOWS NOTHING ABOUT
THE BUSINESS.
New YORK, August AT a meeting
of the Plymouth church investigating
committee last evening, a letter was
presented from Rev. DR.. Storrs, in which
he stated that he had no personal
knowledge OF matters which came De-
fore the committee; that be had a state
ment signed by Mrs. Tilton and referred
to in Mr. Carpenters statements and in
Mrs. TiltOn's testimony of Friday eve
Mug, which contained q grave charge
expressed in these words: "Ou q GER
tain occasion Mr.. Beecher solicited me
to become a wife TO him, with all that it
implies In this relation. This PROPOSE
ton was communicated to my hus
baud" but on account Of 3 laek OF per-
sOnaI knowledge, DR.. StOrrs expressed
the opinion that It would not be neces-
sary for him 10 appear before the COM
mittee.
THE PLANS OF BEECHER's COMMITTEE
DEVELOPING.
The Brooklyn Argus says: az The fol-
[ lowing interchange uf letters took place
yesterday, between Mr.. Sage, chairman
of the Beecher investigating committee,
and Theodore TiltOn:"
BROOKLYN, July 81, 1874.
| Theodore Tflton, Esq:
DEAR SIR am instructed By the
| committee TO state that the letters and
/ documents referred to in your statement
/ presented TO Us have not been delivered,
notwithstanding your several promises
| to furnish them. As your statement, in
/ absence Of these documents, is deprived
! of its greatest force, we think you should
desire to place them in our possession,
| and l desire to impress on you the i'm
/ pOrJance OF delivering them to US at
! your earliest convenience. Very truly
/ yours, H. W. SAGE,
Chairman.
BROOKLYN, August 3, 1874.
I Mr.. Henry W. sage, chairman OF committee:
I Ny DEAR SRI have just received
I your note of July 3lst, four days after
/ date. Unless you accidentally misdated
| il, the communication should have
/ come to me several days ago. This leads
me to recall similar dilatOriness Of
the delivery OF your original note, first
summoGing me to attend your commit
tee, which received only four hours be-
fore I was TO appear, and yet the sum-
mons bore date Of the day previous
But let these tritles pass. Your note
inst received surprises me by its con-
tents, for you seem to have forgotten
thai on the last day Of my appearance
before your committee, / carried to your
meeting not only all the documents
which l quoted in my sworn statement,
save those in MOultOn's possession, but
many more besides, making q double
hardful Of interesting and important pa
pen vital to my case and destructive to
yours. All these papers L purposed to
lay before you, but no sooner had be-
gan to read them aloud in your presence
than one Of your attorneys stopped me
in reading and proposed that should
save the committees time by referring
these papers to one Of your members,
Hon. John WiDslow. l acquiesced in
this suggestion and returned from your
com mittee with the expectation
Of speedy conference with
Mr.. WinslOw. Perhaps it was my
proper duty to have called on MIR. Wins
low, but as the whole committee had
previously set the example Of calling in
.
controversy, I took it for granted that
Mr.. WinslOw would repeat this prece-
dent by doing me the nOnor 20 call sJ
my house, at which he would have been
welcome guest. But, while waiting
for his coming, was called upon instead
by a policeman, who arrested me and
carried me, at thirty minutes notice, be-
fore Justice Rsilley's police court, to an
swer the charge OF lioelling Rev. Henry
Ward Beecher, ag tinst whom l had
spoken, not libel, but the truth. Up
TO the time OF this arrest, l had employ
ed no lawyer, not needing any; but on
finding myself before a police court, and
not understanding the motive of my ST.
rest, nor methods Of courts, l requested
my friend, Judge S d Morris, 10 an
sWer for me in technical proceeding, in
which 1 knew not how to answer prop
erly for myself. Twice already l have
been before this unexpected tribunal, and
may be called before it third time on
Wednesday next. Meanwhile, my cOun-
sci, TO whom l have just shown your
note, iustructs me to lsy no documents,
papers, or remaining testimony before
your committee, nor to hold
any further communication with
YOU in any form, except to
senh you this present and final letter,
con tanning the reasons for this step.
The sc reasons are the following: First,
you are a committee of Sir. Beeeher's
friends, appointed by himself, expected
10 act in his behalf, assisted by attorneys
employed exclusively fir his vindica-
tor, holding secret sessions inaccessible
to the pubhc, having no power to COM
pei witnesses, giving no opportunity for
10
as voluntarily appear, publishing or sup
pres sing their testimony, as you see fit,
and, so far as my own experience goes,
asking me 10 questions save such as
were Irrelevant TO the case. and omit /
ting TO publish in your imperfect and
unjust report Of my testimony all that I
was most pertinent TO my own side OF (
the testimony. Second, the daily papers /
Of Brooklyn and New York have been (
artfuily fed, day by day, with crumbs Of I
ficti tiOus evidence ayainst my own char /
acter, Is IL not Mr.. Beecher, bat ] alone,
were the man on trial; and though l I
have little right, perhaps, to bold your (
committee responsible for this daily mis- I
representation which may come through /
the malice OF others, yet the result is the I
same 10 me as If you had deliberately |
designed it, and that result is this,
namely: I expect no justice either from
your tribunal, since you cannot compel
witnesses to testify; nor from your re-
porters, since they do not give impartial
reports. Third, I cannot resist the con-
Vicuon, though mean no offense in ex-
pressing 1t, that your committee has
come at last TO be as little satisfactory to
the public az to myself, and that your
veeIulet, II you render one, could not pos
hra FfaG "a HFssaa 81 f.-Hna
have no power to compel witnesses. nor
70 verify their testimony by oath, nor to
SIT II by cross-examinaIiobs. For tbase
reasons, which ought to have moved me
carrier have at last instructed nv
counsel 70 proceed at once, at his discrs.
ton, 10 carry nay case from yOuT inris.
diction to a court 0! law; and In view Of
this instruction from me he mas In tnr,
instructed me to hold no further CON-
muDieation with your committee except