Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1874-08-26
The Deecher SCnndnl.

Coultes NhtIc IT, 10 our uluut hVNhl"b t"hBi
bic, nothing conclusive as to who are really
the guilty parties in this wretchcd business.
First, we have the statement and letters
Of Mr.. Mouton, who was thought to have
in his possession the key to the whole mat.
ter. But his statement and documentary
evidcnce-coveribg, as it does from eight to
ten columns Of the largest city papers in
finest types far from solving the mystery.
The animus Of his statement is clearly hos.
tile to Mr. Bcccher, but the letters he pro-
duces have really little more in them than
those already published. Indeed, out Of
the whole mass Of correspondence which he
produces, nearly all which could in the least
implicatc Mr.. Beecher has been previously
given to the public True, Mr. Moulton
ailirms that he received verbal confessions Of
adultery from both Mr.. Bcecher aud Mrs
Tilton but his own assertion, unlortiGed .
by proof, isn't worth the paper it is written
on. Has he the proof? We have care.
fully looked through the vouminous let
tiers and documents he publishes, and we
find that altogether the most suspicious are
those which have already been given to the
public and fully explained The new evi.
dences are not as strong as the old Many
Of them fully confirm Mr.. Beechers ac-
count, and are utterly irreconclable with
the charge Of crime while some Of them,
we confess, stagger us now, as they have
before on any other hypothesis than that Of
guilt.
1t appears, however, that the evidence ad-
duced before the committee has been sufi.
cient to satisfy it of the innocence Of Mr..
Beecher, and the gist Of that document,
which will be given to the public on Friday
next, is thus foreshadoved by New York
paper. The report Of the committee is a
long document, given in two parts, one a
mere review Of tho evidence, and the other
giving the conclusions Of the committee.
These are all in favor Of Mr.. Beecher.-
The statement of Theodore Titon is first
taken up and gone over piecemeal, and each
main allegation set plainly forth without
verbiage, the principal prominence being
given to the alleged criminal commerce be-
tween Mr.. Beecher and Mrs. Tilton. This
is compared with the statements made 10
the cross-examinatiOn there used. 1t is
shown that the statements of what is now
known as the ankle scene arc not supported
by the evidence of the person who claims
to have been witness to it, inasmuch as he
could not swear to its taking place at any
particular period during term of nine
years.
The report then goes on to review Mr..
Tilton's allegation of personal chastity, and
claim to high moral character, compared
with the evidence of other persons as to
his alleged corrupt practices and criminally
immoral conduct, notably in the case of the
girl known as Bessie Turner, whose evi.
dence is given to show that Mr. Tilton states
himself to be what he is not Therefrom is
deduced charge Of perjury, showing that
Mr.. Tilton states under oath 10 one instance
what is fatty contradicted in another--the
committee giving as conclusion to this par.
ticular branch Of the subject the rule in law,
that the entire testimony of any one shown
to have committed perjury is worthless
Tho report then reviews the testimony Of
several witnesses, among them Mrs. Stanton,
coming at length to the discrimination Of
Mrs Elizabeth Il. Tilton and her accuse.
tlons OF brutality against her husband, and
OF intidelity, as still further showing distinct
contradictions Of Titons accusations. Mrs
Tiltons evidence is also quoted to give her
denial of having ever had criminal relation,
with Beecher, and her own explanations Of
. several Of the most prominent portions o.
her letters.
From this the report proceeds to give the
short statement of Frank Moultou as givcr
to the committee, and dismisses it briefly al
having made no charges whatever agains
anybody.
Finally, the Beecher statement itself il
. taken, and contrssted with several of tn,
more serious positions Of Tilton's, as showing
that the circumstances, in themselves APP
parently against him, we're in reality capa
bic of explanation.
After this review, giving in detail tn,
more prominent episodes of the entire con.
= troversy, the report sums up the whole
matter, pro aud con, as showing on the one
hand man standing before all the world
with great reputation for spotless purity
Christian character and moral worth; on
the other, man Of proven bad and Grim.
inal character, the latter making accuse.
. tons against the former; the one with
nothing to prove his story except personal
allegation, proven in part to be perjury
and supported by some letters which mean
a dozen things but the one meaning given
TO them this story denied by all having
any connection with the matter but one
with the circumstances as well as the bur
den Of proof all on one side, the other I'm.
supported by anything but bad character
the committee find that Henry Ward
Beecher is not guilty of the charges pre-
ferred against him. 1t is possible that a
short paragraph may be added to the report,
noticing briefly the failure of Frank Moul-
ton to bring any new evidence to bear upon
the subject which can 10 the slightest alter
the conclusions the committee have come to.
The people Of Massachusetts, are not
little concerned about the determine.
ton Of Hoar and Dawes not to accept re-
nomination for Congress. They are afraid
that the successors Of these able representa-