New-York tribune., 1874-11-10
tor was not named In his statement and further thas
the indictment against him is detective
MOULTON's ANSWER IN THE CIVIL sUIN
MR. BERCHRR MADE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ALLIE
1ArIoNs MADE AGAINST MISS PROCTOM

ANSWE AihD
MR. BEECHER MADE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ALLIE
CATIONS MADE AGAINST MISS PROCTOR
Messrs. Fullerton, Knox and Crosby, counsel
for Francis D. Mouon In the suit for libel brougho
against him by Edna Dean Proctor filed the answer Of
their client yesterday morning in the United States
Court.
The answer Is that he ia not guilty OF the said sup
posed grievances In the declaration or complaint In THIS
action laid to his charge either part thereon IN
manner and form as the said plaintiff hath in said
declaration or complaint complained against him. and OF
this he puts himself upon the country And for further
plea in this behalf and for first defense in this action,
the said defendant says he denies the allegation therein
contained, that about the time therein referred tn one
G. Bowen. in which i was stated, that the said aid
presence Of oliver johnson that the Rev. Henry Ward
Beecher. referred 10 in the said alleged libel, had
ravisbed certain woman whose name was not then
given whom the plaintiff in this action claims was her
SELF but of that fact the defendant has no knoweage
by information that he does not admit the same
but leaves the fact to be proved by the plaintin ms
defendant further answering the said compliant admits
that did about the time that behaf alleged IN
the said complaint. publish in the newspaper called ne
Daily Graphic, published In the CITY OF New W. orR, %
matters alleged in the said complaint 10 have been 80
published. but he denies that the said matters were
published with the motives and Tor the purposes &
In the said complaint and he denies that the SAID mat
that any portion thereof Is false scahuai
Tine answer then rehearsos point after point of his
former in the public print and declares tue
statements therein n Sa beba the defendant
further answering saith that heretofore and before the
Henry Ward Boecher oiciated as clergyman OF rei,
gious association in said Brooklyn known as plymouth
fnence, and said Beecher was widely known its
pastor for lis oratorcal and literary abilities
not nOa oHly ''si with the come%bers composing said
religious association, but also with other per
ton or Christian sect. with others. And this dspo
nent saith that the 1st OF January. lS Theoaore
known as Plymouth Church and Society, having had
certain business transactions with henry W 'e
OF wdey IN said
erest for the OF the tehets neu anu
fV tween GH''s said TiOn and said Bowen. said Til
lie newspaper the following letters and communication
addressed said Bowen Of and concerning the acts and
said Bowen (IIere Mr. Tlltons letter Bowen, dated
jan l. 1871, was included And said Ilton; among among
ons against the conduct OF said Beecher WIN otner
women and especially with one Ezh4caa Scandsls
aud lmputations upon the Christian character and ne
in said BROOKLYN and else where where said Beecher
known And the defendant, further answering, s9ltn
that on or about hs Fst gay OF IN M of
OF said scandaous mputatons as were Deng Haue
OF such nsnuaons and the Church ana renglOus asso
said letter made known to him. the said Ton, carried
the same said Beecher and exhibited 10 h ana az
with him as to the manner in which the scandaous ale
cations contained therein could be best met and sup
Dressed and said Beecher relieved from the injurious
consequences thereof
And defendant, further answering says that he dd
ter Of said nton to said Bowen said Beecher
whom the allegation therein set forh as iOows
SsA'G s nearly al can recoect Your wOrds that
Mr. Beecher took her in his arms by foroe threw her
down upon the sofa accomplished upon her his devitry
and left herr wlth other matter not TIT to be spread
uDOn the record Of this Court, referred But said
Beecher then Informed the defendant that the woman
the advice Of this defendant said Beecher In order 10
ton informed the defendant that he would endeayor
TO obtain retracti0n or denial Dy said paintiH Oh
Beecher. & and aiierward produced to the defend;
ant the paper writing signed by the name OF sara ia
her as unsigned, and tnat paper writing
to the defendant together with certain other paper
writings signed by said plaintiff which 1t Is not
here 10 produce be held by him In trust and coni-
dence used by him in such manner as TINS defend
ant may think proper to protect said Beecer from te
injurious imputations alleged to have been made
against him by said Bowen.
April the business differences between Bowen and
Letter TO Bowen was then exhibited concerning the
plaintiff and that the paintif was the person reIertea
Of investigation was in progress, Samuel j. Wilken-
SON. who had assisted IN preparing the tripartlte
dnced COPY of Tons letter to said Bowen as first set
forth 1he defendant further says that he appeared
judicial tribunal and made statement OF the 1acts IN
controversy that subsequently said beecher appeared
called the facts, in which statement said Beecher
charged the defendant herein with blackmall and
accused him OF conspiracy.
And therefore SAID defendant put his said statement
in print published the same and caused the same
ee and offered himself to be thereon as
a witness by said Committee. And said defendant had
statements therein exhblted-a copy Of which said de-
fendant annexes to his answer, and Prays the
and parcel thereof. when seen and examined and
derstood by said investigating Committee and es,
.t,I1xvi Ioln nf
attorney for the people Of the State Of NewYork prose
outing their behalf all crimes and oenses committed
within the body OF Kings County and In said state be-
fore whom the Of conspiracy and extOrng money
wrongfuy by threats was by tho statement and testi
But this defendant, further answering saith that
the contrary when the report of said Committee Of the
results of said investigation made TO said Plymouth
Church, and signed by said WnslOw, the prosecuting
attorney. founded upon ex pare statements and EVIL
depce under the sanction OF oath, the de-
found that he therein and thereby accused
by the Judgment OF said Committee OF having
spired with said Tlton to njure defame and defraud
said Beecher by ext0rtng1money from him, Dy accusing
him Of very heinous crime to wt-the crime Of adul-
innocent, and said charge Of adultery had been
cocted and made up by conspiracy between me de-
conspiracy of extortioD fraud, and injury OF said
Beecher. -, .
seeing the report OF said Committee signed, aud de-
fendant informed and believed drawn up by said
defendant accused OF grave crimes and Ofenses,
and fearing he well might that unless he could dis
abuse public mind aud especially the mind OF said
Wnsow prosecuting attorney aforesaid OF the belief
that he had been guilty OF using the documents and
papers in his possession and his position as cOnfdant
said Beecher for very heinous purposes, that said
WnsOw wonld deem IL his duty to such defend
ant to be presented the Grand Jury for Kings County
said state TOR indictment for said crimes and ofenses
especially in and by SAID report drawn by said
WnsOw 1t stated that said Beecher ought to have
handed the defendant the police for his defend
ants) conduct occasion toward the said Beecher
Therefore, III order to vndicate himself from these
great charges In the public mind, which set forth
in the report of the said Committee. and which were
very widely published in ali the principal newspapers
in the United States, and especially in the newspapers