Clearfield Republican. [volume] (Clearfield, Pa.) 1851-1937, 1874-08-05
MR.. BEECHER' IS DEFENCE.

MR. BEECHERsS DEFENCE
The Rey. Henry Ward Beecher, in
answer to the very damaging "statc-
mentp of Mr. Tilton, has published a
document in which he positively as-
serts his innocence and defends Mrs.
Tilton as II perfect immaculate woman.
But this manifesto contains nothing, in
the nature of testimony, or proof, to
sustain Mr. Beecher's assertions. The
public has only that gentleman's naked
veracity upon which to rely in his be
half whereas on Tiltons side of the
question, documentary testimony is
given, including letters written by Mr..
Beecher and Mrs. Tilton, in which they
both virtually acknowledge all the
criminality charged against them by
Mr.. Tilton. The statement of Mr..
Beecher does not touch these letters
makes no attempt to explain their CON
tents nor to account for the writing of
them. If Mr.. Beecher is innocent of
the charge brought against him by Mr..
Tilton, why did he write such a letter
as the following to Mr. Moulton
MY Dean FniESD MouLros. / ask, through
you, Theodore Titons Jorgirensss, and / humble
myself before hin, os before God. lie would have
been better man IN my circumstances than |
have been. eau ask nothing, except that be will
remember all the other breasts that would ache.
will not plead for myself eren wish hot
,sere dead But others must live to suffer. will
die before any ono but myself shall be incupatcd.
All my thoughts are running out toward my
friends, and toward the poor child lying there,
and praying with her folded hands. She Il guilt
less, ,inned against, bearing the transgressOns Of
another. Her forgiveness | have. | humbly
pray to God to put 1t into the heart Of her Ams-
band TO forgive me. n.f
have trusted this to Moulton, in confidence
II. W. BErcHER.
This letter implies that there was
something far more serious in the wind
than mere spiritual affection or platonic
love. The fear Of exposure in respect
to such an attachment would not have
wrung such n letter from Beecher or
any other man--wonld not have driven
him TO wish himself dead or threaten
suicide. Nothing but the conscious
ness of great guilt and the fear of in
fanny could have prompted Mr.. Beecher
to write such letter-such a humiliat-
ing confession-or TO pray so humbly
and earnestly for the forgiveness Of the
injured party. Would man ''humble
HIMSELF before fellow-creature as he
would "before God if he had not foully
wronged himY Would man 40 this
and wish himself dead If he had com
mittcd no greater offence than winning
the spiritual love OF another mans wiieY
We think not. we cannot AVOID re-
garding Mr.. Beecheras grossly guilty
man, and we are compelled to do this
by his own confession, which his late
statement does not dispose OF or m any
manner affect. We do not condemn
him upon the mere allegations OF Ill
ton, but upon the corroboratlve test-
mony furnished by Tilton, including
the foregoing letter and others from
Beecher and Mrs. Tilton.
To our mind the testimony IN the
case of Barton Key and Mrs. Sickles
was not more conclusive as to the guilt
of those persons than is the testimony
in this case of the guilt OF the Rev.
Henry Ward Beecher and Mrs. Eliza
beth r. Tilton. Her attempt TO make
her offence resemble that of "Catharine
Gaunt, in Charles Reades fiction, with
tba n,.iaet Leonard and his attcmpf TO