New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1874-08-29

he and Mr. TiltOn bad learned that Mrs. lutoh hau
given the retraction. He expostulated and said tue
| act was uufriendly. and would not mend Matters
and that Mrs Tton had already recanted the re-
traction That Mr.. Tilton had already DESTROYED his
wife's first paper of confession. Mr.. Moulton
claimed that Mr.. Beecher had acted unfairly That
all difficulties could be settled without such papers
and that Mr. Beecher ought to give 1t up. MI Moui-
ton was under great apparent excitement. lie made
no verbal threats but displayed pistol ana iaid IL
| ON the bureau near which he stood.
| MR. MoULToN's DESERTS.
The paper was given to him. and after few mo-
ments' talk he left. 1t is an amazing pity that az
this juncture Mr.. Moulton was not handed over to
the police 1t would have saved much that followed,
which is deeply deplored Mr.. Beechers distress at
| the situation was boundess. He saw the peril OF
being even falsely accused. He blamed himself Tor
| much that had occurred He could not tell now
much of the impending trouble copid be attributed
| to Mrs Tltons undue affection for him. winch IL
was his duty to have repressed. My earnest
DESIRE he says, to avoid public accusation and
the evils which must necessarily flow from it, and
| which have now resulted from it, has been one OF
the leading motives that must explain my action
during these four years in this matter" While
in morbid condition of mind, produced by those
distressing difficulties Mr. Moulton again called on
| him. His manner was kind and conciliatory. lie
professed however to believe that Mr.. Beecher had
| been seeking Mr.. Tilton's downfall; had leagued
| with Mr. Bowen against him, and by his advice had
| come near destroying Mr.. Tilton's family. Mr.
Beecher expressed many and strong regrets at the
misfortunes of that family. Mr.. Moulton caught
| ND some of these expressions and wrote them down.
saving that If Mr.. Tilton could see them, there
would be no trouble in procuring reconciliation.
This paper which is dated JAM l. 1871 was entrusted
| by Mr. Beecher to Mr.. Moulton's keeping without
reading It, nor was it read to him. This paper, some
times called the apology, and sometimes the COMES
SION is in no proper sense Mr. Beechers production
OF correct report of what he said No man will be-
| lieve, for instance that Mr. Beecher SAID: " hum
| BILE myself before him TiltonI as 1 do before my
| GodD Another sentence d" Her forgiveness have"
Mr. Beecher states it was not sad the semblance
| of it. Pausing here, q very important question
arises in this connection To what does the apology
referf 1t declares Mrs. Tilton gutless," and yet
! Mr. Tilton says it refers to adultery, which MT.
| Beecher denies. Without now considering the
weight of credit to which the respective parties are
entitled where there is a conflict between them. we
| believe, and propose to show from the evidence,
| that the original charge wasimproper advances and
that as time passed. and the conspiracy deepened 1t
was enlarged into adultery.
LOGIC OF THE RETRACTIoN.
The importance of this is apparent. Because II the
charge has been so changed, then both Mr.. Tilton
and Mr. Moulton conspirators, and convicted OF
vile fraud. which necessarily ends their influence
| in this controversy. What is the proof that the
charge in the first instance adultery 1t is said
| that it was and that the memorandum in the hands
of Tilton, in his wife's handwriting, was to such
effect But this is denied by both Mr.. Beecher and
| Mrs. Tton and the written paper is not produced.
1t is said further that Mr. Beecher confessed the fact
of adultery. But this, again, is denied by him, and
such alleged confession is inconsistent with the re-
traction he received that evening from Mrs. I1ltoD
| II he had confessed what service could the re-
| traction renderf Why procure one at all If.
| as alleged Mr.. Beecher had that evening con-
fessed adultery to Mr.. Tlton and Mr. Moulton or to
| either7 What, then, was the charge preferred on
the evening of Dec. 80 We answer 1T was improper
| advances, which, of course, Mr. Beecher denied.
| What occurred in the matter OF retraction that
evening and all the subsequent conversations, acts.
and letters of the various persons directly concerned
in dealing with the scandal consistent with this
| view and with no other The retraction procured
referred to improper advances and to nothing else.
Is it likely if the main oense had been charged Mr.
Beecher would have been satisfied with anything
short of retracton of thatf THERE'S sort of post
script to the retraclon in which the charge Of i'm
proper advances is explicitly denied-thus showing,
we submit that this the charge that was in the
mind of both Mrs. Tilton and Mr.. Beecher and no
other ofense.
THE LESSER oFFENsE CHARGED.
But look further: Mr.. Tilton in the last four
wears has many times said verbally and in writing
that the charge was the lesser offense This is i'm
portant under the rule that where complainant
has made different and inconsistent statements of
the offense he alleges Ills credbity is damaged
and in most cases destroyed. In the written state
ment of the ofense shown to Dr. Storrs by Mr. Titon
and Mr.. Carpenter, which was made in Mrs. Tiltons
handwriting under the demand OF her husband,
who saws he dictated the precise words characteri-
zipg the offense the charge was an impure proposal
This statement Mrs Tilton retracted, and says she
protested against it as false when signed, and
| afterward saw DR.. Storrs and told him So
| Dr. Storrs, in letter to the Committee, con-
| firms the retraction. In the manuscript pre-
pared by Mr. Tton which he called the true story"
the offense was stated to be improper advances
This true storyn Mr.. Tilton was in the habit Of
reading to newspaper men, personal friends and to
| Others without, it would SEEM much discrlmina-
tion considering how anxious he professed to be not
| IN make known his secret. Mr.. Belcher testifes
| that he met Mr. Titon the ferry-boat about two
weeks after the publication OF the Woodruff scam
dal and they talked the matter over. lie says that
Mr. Tilton was al first mysterious and n-commit-
| tai but on their way home in Brooklyn MIR. I1lton
invited him into his house. where the true story
was exhibited to Mr. Belcher and prolonged con-
yersaton was had which lasted until midnight, and
during all this not one word was said limited by Mr.
Tton that he believed Beecher had committed adul-
terry On the contrary he asserted his mistaken con-
fdence in his wifes purity and complained only
of the improper solicitation. Ex-Supervisor Har-
man, who, like Mr.. Beecher, is one of our we'll
known and reputable citizens, testies to substan-
TALLY the same experience with Mr. Titon as to the
nature of the charge. Mr.. Hartman goes further