The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1874-09-15
Our New York Letter.
The Mention Beechcr Siafement-GrOss
Perversiou of Private Correspondence
The Charge of BIack-Mail NOT Die
proved-A Vindication of Mr.. Beecher.
NEW YORK. Sent. 13. 1874

fegned extreme reluctance to unseal his lips,
we are now deluged with torrents of words, OF
defense, special pleading, explanation, little
tattIe and malicious gossip, which throws no
new light upon the main question, but does
show, in striking colors, the duplicity, treach-
cry and baseness of the friend who has un-
dertaken to bolster up the conspiracy against
the greatest preacher of our age.
That Mouton should feel the necessity of on
effort to extrcate himself from his igneminious
position is natural enough. But the desperate
means to which he has resorted il furtherance
of that object will only serve to sink him to
lower depth of lnfamy. The interminable plea
which Gen. Butler has prepared for him with
so much care and labor with the view of break
ing the force of the presumption OF black-mall,
raised by disclosure of the original facts, is
based upon false premises. The counsel argues
that because Mr.. Beecher did not realize that
he had been made the victim of extortion, and
because the demand for money was not accom-
panied with threats of exposure, therefore the
client was not the broker and accomplish of
black mailer. The absurdity of this reasoning
becomes palpable when we take into considera-
ton the obvious fact that Mr.. Beecher was de-
ceiyed in Moulton from the beginning, and
throughout every stage of the progress of this
drama of wickedness. He parades Mr.. Beech
ers confidential and affectionate letters to him
self as evidences in support of his repeated as
sertions that he has behaved honorably, where
as they prove precisely the opposite. he de-
duces from Mr.. Beecher's expressions of trust
in him, made orally and in writing, the conclu-
sion that he was worthy of that trust. This is
very weak sophistry. 1t was because of the
blind, uncalculating faith which was so unre-
servedly reposed in him that he had the oppor
tunity to deal an assassin's blow at his uusus-
pecting victim.
1t will be recollected that Mr.. Beecher did
not charge nor suggest blackmail. He evident
ly did not regard the money transaction in that
light. But when for the first time he related
that part of the story to his legal advisers, they
saw and said at once that it was an unmistaka-
BILE case of black-mail. 1t was conclusion SO
plain that nothing could more clearly illustrate
the absence of guile or worldliness in the ma
ture of the Plymouth pastor, than the fact that
it had never once occurred to him. Gen. But
Ter saw the Matchmaking feature of it instantly
and undoubtedly advised his client that he had
involved himself in the necessity of appearing
as a defendant instead of prosecutor. Hence
this elaborate publication, which leaves Moul-
ton precisely where he was before in respect of
that allegation. but reveals with painful dis
tinctness his utter restitution of moral percep-
tions, and the absolute worthlessness of his un-
corroborated averments.
Let us Judge him by his own admissions. He
confesses that for four years he has held possess
sion of guilty secret; that he has "prevari-
cated"-a shorter word would have served the
purpose and misrepresented the matter repeat
eddy; that he has undoubtedly given many per-
sons the impression that he vouched for Mr..
Beecher's innocence; and that he has used lam
guage guarded but intended to mslead All
this he iustifes, SO that, taking his own plea
of guilty to the charge of falsehood as start
ing point, we have an undoubted right to
dismiss him as as an unreliable witness.
There is, to be sure, basis for speculation
as to- whether he was telling an untruth
when he said Mr.. Beecher was guiltless,
or when he said he was not. He opened the
campaig1 with the avowal of purpose to tell
'the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but
the truth" phrase not original in itself, but
havinga certain SAVIOR of originality through
the rhetorical emphasis, and melo-dramatic
roll, with which he pronounced the words. But
he is such mass Of contradictions, that it will
not do to place any dependence upon that
PROMISE LII Is raJner more probable that feel
ing he was about to say something which had
no truth in it, he thought it essential to prop it
up with ostentatious asseveration. However
that may be, this latest Statement contains
SO many intrinsic evidences of false differences,
distorted meanings, and gross misrepresenta-
tions, that here where the parties are known, it
is received as an unmitigated fabrication, and
not verv plausible one either. In so far as it
processes to quote language attributed to Mr..
Beecher it violates all probability. Its inter-
probation of passages in the letters is strained,
unnatural and coarse. Its introduction of an
old scandal which has for many years furnished
the staple of conversation in the coterie of
which Tilton is the centre and Moulton and
Carpenter prominent figures in the circumfer.
ence, is regarded on all hands as one of the
most dastardly outrages upon decency ever per-
petrated in social life. If it were not that the
avenging of it would inevitably lead to wider
publicity, the friends of the lady would be very
apt to make Brooklyn an unsafe place of resi-
dence for Moulton The use he has made of
this old worn out story shows glaringly what a
piece of jesuitical perversion the whole state
ment is.
Many years ago, Mr. Beecher became in
volved in controversy with a lady in the
course of which she said some harsh things
about him. 1t was on a literary subject, and
had reference to the publication of book.
Ten years later, she wrote a few lines, express
sive of regret for what she had said, declaring
herself mistaken, and satisfied that Mr.. Beech
er's course toward her was "meant to be kind
and honorable" Now can it be believed, that
there is lawyer base enough to write, or a
client mean enough to sign document in
which this disclaimer of ill will is tortured
into retraction Of charge of sexual crimi-
nality, with sneaking insinuation of still
grosser offense?
Then again there is letter produced written
by Beecher to Moulton from Little Falls, Dec
q 1873 in which occur these words: 81 intro
duced you to young Raymond because he is a
personal friend acute and safe should you need,''
(the last three words italicized) ''Of course 1
have never exchanged word with him as l
have with you-and he represents me only in
church action" This is quoted to show that
'Beecher purposely kept him from knowing all
the facts" 1t happens that the letter from
which the foregoing extracts are taken covered
two letters to Mr.. Banfeld, the then Solicitor
Of the Treasury, making intercesson in behalf
of Moulton's firm which was at that time under
examination on an accusation preferred by
Jayne, of frauds upon the revenue, which were
subsequently compromised for $4,000. The
subject on which Mr.. Beecher had never ex-
changed word with Mr.. Raymond was the
revenue matter, and the words "should you
reed," relate to possible advice Moulton might
require, and which Raymond 9;acute" and
safe could give in respect to that involvment
This is another notable example of the spirit of
perversion which pervades this remarkable
document.
Buffers explanation of Moulton's assurance