Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1874-07-27
TuE INTERPRETATIONS SCANDAL


furnishes tuil report 01 the Observation-Disclosures
Of Theodore Tilton to the press.
MIR. Sage states, IN IL letter .prclaclng the
document, that, in fai. ress to all parties, the
whole of the testimony should be made puollc
at once. The document shows that after the
discovery OF the alleged offence oil Mr.. Beecher,
Bovn expressed wish for Illton to say more
in the Independent about Plymouth Church.
He replied there was personal domeStic
reason why he could not 20 there consistently
with sct-respcct, that Bcecher had been un'
handsome in approaches to his vile: That was
the sum and substance OF all he lllton) ever
said Gu this subject to the very lew tN' people TO
whom he had spoken about it. This was the
occasion upon which be agreed upon the letter
demanding Bcccher to leave the pulpit.
Being asked when he first learned that MIR.
or Mrs. Beecher had 10 any way communicated
facts TO Bowen which ipfamed him in the mat
fer Of his (hIr. Tilton's) dismissal witness said
be learned that from Beecher himself on the
day after the apology was written, the I'd, pos
sbly the Sd of January. 1t was in Moulton' 5
room. Beecher came. 1t was an unexpected
meeting, Beccher burst out in expression OF
great sorrow, and said he hoped the c1mmunl,
cation he sent witness by MOulton was satlsfac
torv lie then and there told Mouton be had
done wrong, not SO much as some others-re-
ferring to his wife, WHO had made statements
| 10 Bowen that ought 10 be uumade, aud v0lun'
| teered to write a letter to Bowen concerning the
facts he had misstatcd. Mrs Tilton had told
witness of visits Mrs Beecher had made her,
and of testimony they wanted to get. Mrs. lliton
spoke a number Of times OF the enmlty which
| Mrs. Beechcr had for some strange reason,
connected with Mrs. Morse, Mrs. Hilton $
mother. .
There was conspiracy between Mrs. Morse,
and Mrs. Beecher before September. The
truth is Mrs Titon' confession was also made
| to the mother, aud the mother naturally want
| ed to protect the daugh Inter and made KIND OF
alliance with Mr.. Beecher, and Mrs. Beecher
| took part 10 it. There was desire on their
| part to protect Elizabeth. Mrs. Iilton thought
| witness retirement from the paper was due 10
some way to Mr.. and Mrs. Beecher, and as wit
ness was very indignant against Bowen, that
unless some reconclliation took place between
| Bcecher and her husband her secret would be
exposed, she begged witness to have an inter
view with Beecher, and wrote note to that effect
effect. The sole purpose of that interview was
Mrs. Tilton felt that Beecher and witness were
| ia danger of collision. For her sake and at her
| request it took place. Iiltons dismissal from
| the Union was two days after that interview
The interview had nothing to do with it.
Being asked why the difficulty with Bowen
| would involve his exposure of his family secret,
| which he obtained from Mrs. Tilton six months
before, witoess said it was not through fear of
his exposing it. Mrs Morse and Mrs. Beecher
| were sometimes 10 collision, and Mrs. Titon
always made me believe that Mrs. Beecher
knew this secret until in December when she
told me. took it for granted all sumner loug
that she had told him what she had told me
and what she had told her mother, and sup
posed that Mrs. Beecher was cooperating with
Mrs. Morse
@. Did you not complain of Mr.. Beecher for
not aiding you to remain the in Independent
a. No, sir; would have scorued it.
Mr. Tilton continued aud said be never told
Samuel Wikcson that Beecher had not be-
trlendcd him 10 that matter.
| In further testimony witness said he accepted
the apology made aud forgavc the offence with
as much largeness as he thought it possible for
a Christian man to assume. His relations
| thereafter with Beecher We're not friendly, but
not hostile. They were relations which Moulton
forced With an iron hand Witness had taken
pains to have it appear in all quarters that
Bccchcr and himself were not in open hostility,
and suppressed his self respect many times in
doing It, He never stated the otfeuce of Mr..
Beccher to DR.. Storrs. Showed DR.. Storrs
letter which Elizabeth and himself had written,
and which he still preserved. Did not charge
Becchcr with any otlcuce 1T all. Elizabeth
stated that to the question, How was the Of,
fence begun Illtou replied, 1T began
in this way: That 90 certain day u the SUM-
lucr of 1870 she had informed her husband
that Mr.. Bccchcr had asked her to be wife
to him, together with all that this implies
She was very solicltous to make it appear that
she did not accept his proposition, aud happily
iu reading it those who saw 1t naturally Inferred
that she did not accept his proposition. 1t was
i perfectly correct statement Witness read
the statement to Becchcr, who objected to it,
aud witness made no further use of it. He, how
ever, prepared document on his relations to
Bowen, in which Elizabeth letter was stated,
as we'll as the letter OF apology. which he put
in, not wishing to make the offence more than
that. He was solicitous not to have the worst
known. This was also read to Dr. Storrs, to
whom the witness went 10 great distress, wanting
counsel.
O. So to get correct counsel you misstated
the case? A. Yes; it was statement neces-
sary to be made, after Mrs. Woodhul's state
ment was out of town and the thing had filled
the country, and Beecher had taken no notice
eff it. 1t was seven or eight days old, and |
went to Dr. Storrs for counsel. He asked me
about the story, and said, do not ask me
for that" He said, Give me some facts by
which | cau judge, give me that which can be
proved" So gave an account Of my affairs
very largely about Mrs. Woodhull-and said
the origin Of that document was seeking for
something that would put before the public a
plausible answer to the Woodruff tale, and L
conceived that by action of facts we might per-
haps explain it away. read it to Mr.. Beecher,
and he drew a long sigh, and [ saw that he
would not or could not stand upon it, and Eliza
beth burned or tore it to pieces
@. Why did you abandon the document A.
Because there was no success in it.
Q. Why was it? Not because he did not &C
cept it? A. Because be did not accept or reject
it. He would let no statement be made and so
the thing was burned.
@ Have you not frequently asserted the pu.
rity of your wife? A. No, have always had a
strong technical use of words. | have always