New-York tribune., 1874-09-12
were the suggestions of others. and not of his own


conclusion that II Tlton also consented would mako
the full statement before the Committee which have
since published. When began the preparation OF my
statement did not desig 10 include the letters OF Mrs
Hooker and her brother Mr. Hooker because they
had only a collateral bearing upon the e0ntroversy'I
very unwilling to DRAG the name OF Mrs. HOOKER
for whom I entertain the highest respect, into this
matter But having seen In the newspapers an attack
In advance upon Mrs Hooker's sanity, inspired by tho
friends OF Mr. Beecher; aud Beecher through the ad
vice of his counsel, believe, having asserted thAt
retained letters OF his brother and sister that were not
given into keeping part OF the documents In TINS
controversy felt at due 10 the adys position
and self that they should appear, aud hence they
inserted. ....f ...-
After Tracy had learned by my published letter that
would go before the Committee and make fun state
ment, he desired earnestly that should DO no
such thing. bringing TO bear every argument that oc'
Cured TO him to dissuade therefrom. and, among
others. that IL made statement 1t would have to
out In the crossexamD patton that had received
money from Beecher for the OF Tilton, and that
Beecher's friends would thereupon make charge OF
backmail against me- told him In the presence OF nv
COUNSELLOR whom I had again sent at his (rracy's)
request-hat that would not out on cross-exan-
naton for the facts in regard 70 the money were al
ready fully disclosed my statement, and that In that
transaction there nothing disb0nOrabe on Beech
ers part or my should fear seeing the light
of day. Tracy strongly assured me that ought not
under any circumstance to disclose the letters ana
documents in my possession; that bound, by
every principle OF and sacred Obligation TO keep
them private, and that II would be better, both for T
ton and Beecher, that should do
At his suggestion called meeting on Monday morn
ing Of some OF Mr. Beechers friends. and some Of my
most valued friends who could be got together 10 lay
before them this proposition. AT that meeting my
counsel advised that there two honorable course,
before me- One seal my lips to personal state
ments and produce documents but those OF which
extracts had been made and already been put before
the Committee as it would but iust TO both parties
that part Of paper being seen, the whole should bo
known; or TO take full and complete statement OF all
the facts and documents, both parties having con-
sented These alternatives discussed In the meet
ing of my friends, and by majority OF them It was de-
termined that less would come TO tho community
TO the families OF the parties aud To the parties them
selves II took the former Yielding to the ad'
vice OF those SO much respected concluded TO 90 De-
fore the Committee and make tho simple statement Oh
an intention not to take part In the controversy ana
producing only letters which had In part been Deioe
them in Tons statement, reservng the right to pro-
my honor and purity OF action In TINS matter
attacked, as have since done.
FATE OF THE CONFESSION.
In order that the exact credit due to Mr.. Deechera
statement may be seen and It's value as testimony may
be fully appreciated compared with the facts ana
documents that shall hereafter bring forward In my
own yindication, compelled to notice some other
patent msstatements this special plea OF counsel
made In behalf Of Mr. Beecher, IL not by himself; and
one OF the in order which claims attention IS the
ayermen in his statement that the only copy OF Mrs
Ttons confession torn In pieces IN his own pres
ence on the light OF the 3Oh OF December 1870 an act
about which he could hardly be mistaken. On the con-
trary have stated that that paper OF confession
was delivered into my hands the night OF the meeting
of Beecher and Tlton at my house. when Beecher was
first charged with his adulteres with Mrs Tlton; ana
afterward when demanded the retraction OF hlm no
asked me- What Will you do with IL n give IL upF
answered: 81 will keep 1t as keep the confession IT
you act honorably will protect 1t with my lite' as
would protect the other with my life" may be allowed
TO say here that at this remark made reference to the
pisol In my oyercoat pocket which always carried IN
the night as emphasizing the extremity Of defense
of the papers. Yet Mr.. Beecher says, " He made no
verbal threats opened his overcoat ond with some
emphatic remark he showed pistol Why mlsrepre'
senti Is possible that he his confidence al once
to a man who extorted paper from him with pisolf
Yet Beechers Committee make point OF TINS preyarlca
ton in their argument for the accused
After the trpartite covenant handed back that Same
paper TO Tton at request OF his wife In order that
she might be satisfied, and herself destroy It,
Now, which of these statements Is true Let cotem-
poraneous facts and acts answer
It will be remembered that that meeting was on Fiji
day the 3oth of December. 1870 Mrs. rton sent mo
note heretofore published, dated the next Saturday
morning, In the following words:
SATURDAY MoRsISG.
MY DEAR FRIEND FRANK: want you to do me the
greatest possible favor My letter when YOU nave and
the one which gave Mr.. Beecher at HIS dicatlon last
evening, ought both to be destroyed Please bring boh
10 me and will burn Show this 10 rheodoro
and Mr.. Beeeher They will see the pr0prely OF ths
request Yours truly L. H. libioN'
The "letter" referred to- of course II will be seem IL
the "cOnfessiOn" the only letter then had OF hers
referring TO this matter.
And again, to show that cannot be either mistaken
or untrue refer to Mrs Tltons note to Beeeher OK
April 81. following, heretofore published:
FRIDAY April 21, 1871
Mn RrrcuFR: As Mr. Moulton has returned, will You
use your influence have the papers IN his possession
destroyed NV heart bleeds night and day at the ds
Would not Tlton have caused such a 20 be pre-
served after he had founded accusation upon itf
This fasehood put in by Beechers lawyers lest Til
ton might produce copy my statement had not then
been published with its documentary evidence.
Still another variation from the truth occurs IN Beech
statement regard to the destruction OF the letter
OF conrtiou." In his explanation Of he speaks as fol-
lows:
Ibid not trouble myself about 1t till lslc than
year afterward when Tton began 10 write up MS
of which hereafterl aud was looking up documents;
wondered hat was In this old memorandum, aud de-
denly asked Mouiton for that MEMORANDUM and said.
"You promised to return It TO me-" lie seemed con.
/ answered. He replied that the paper had been de-
stroyed. On my putting the question again, hc said
next two years, various conversations OF ms own
accord he spoke OF It as destroyed had never asked
for nor authorized the destruction OF this paper.
Upon this point have said in my statement that
retained that letter OF contron OF the papers
necessary keep peace between the parties and now
add that this was well known to Beecher, and shall
prove 1t at last from his mouth II will be remem
bered so from Beecher believing, within more than
a year afterwards, that 1t had been destroyed and
burned up that in April 1874 Mr.. Samuel wilkeson.
Beechers friend and partner in the publication OF his