, 1874-08-16

MR. BEECaER's DEFENSE.
Tie c1oss-examiuation OF Mr.. Bcecher. a
published by the Committee, ls an elaboratio
OF his original statement. It contains one q
two statements which must provoke. if they wer
not intended to provoke, controversy for til
future. He charges Moultcn with having oh
taiucd from him between June, 1871, and june
1875, $1,000 in cash, and several checks for othe
sums, making Ell aggregate OF $1,000, and says
iu effect. that this money was obtained BY Moui
ton to ne paid out to Tuton to keep him quiet
In other words, he charges Tlton with having
Obtained from him 81, 900 l.ush-moaey. aud tina
Moulton was the agent employed to demand and
receive the money. This clear and specific &C
cukation, which WAS not made, but merely alluded
to. in the direct statement. brands both Tilt1t
and Moulton with an infamy from which, unless
the statement is disproyed, they cannot escape.
Mr.. BcecLer evidently knows the force Of lii
accusation, and acted accordingly. Neither Til.
ton nor Moulton can raise their heads again, u1-
less that statement be explained or disproyed-
hIr. Beecher. however, declares that, even af-
vet this practical extortion Of $1,000 from him,
5000 of which he raised BY mortgage on his
house. he had full confidence in Mr. Mou!ion
down to the time when tho Churcl, Cornell met.
Then, lie considered, Moulton fai1ed him. alr.
Beccher says that the money was given to keep
Tilton quiet, and. if MouIton demanded or con-
sented to the payment Of any money By lfr.
Beecher for that purpose, then he must stand
convicted OF blackmai]lng. Mr. Beecher must
have, al the time, regarded him in that Light, and
Jet he extended him his unlimited confidence.
Certainly, for the sake OF common deccncy,
Mr- Moalton must be able to mako some ex-
planatl,n Of this disgraceful accusation. When
it il remembered that the ouly wrong done by
Mr. Beecher 20 Tilton, according to the formers
statement. Was tho hasty advice to Mrs Iilton
to separate from her husband, and that it Was
due partly to his utterances that Bowen sudden
ly dismissed Tilton Dec. 81, 1870. it will appear
perhaps strange that he submitted to any de-
troublesome accuser-
It il, however, hardly necessary to criticise
Mr. Beecher's statement, enlarged by his 60
called cross- examination. He denies the main
charge and it's incdentals. He accounts for the
vnrious letters quoted by Tilton in manner
Which, if not entirely satisfactory, will probably
be accepted by bis friends, except as to the
apology" That paper reads thus:
AF DE-An FRIEND NoU11os: ask, through you,
Theodore Tiltous forgiveness, and humble myself
tcfore him as do before my God. He would have
boen better nan in my circumstances than have
hecn. can ask nothing except tlat he will ye,ner-
Ar all the other breasts that would ache will not
plead To- myself. even wish TINT were dead. Eut
others must live to sufer. will die before any one
but myself shall b. inculpated. AL my thoughts arc
running out toward my frieuds and toward the poor
Guild lying there- and praying. wi:4 her folded hands
She is guiltless, stuned against bearing tho tr,ns
gresaion OF another Her forgiveness I have
E1bly pray to God to put it into tile heart Of her
husband to forgive me.
1hare trusted this to Moulton, in confidence.
E. #. BEEcHm
This extraordinary paper, Mr. Beecher sayB,
was written down by afoulton as memoran-
dun. IN his own words, Of the substance Of
what alr. Beecher had told him to say TO Tilton,
lie (Mr. b. declares lie never read it, nor heard
it read, except the lasr line He therefore repn-
dates it. Mr, Tilton swears that Nou1ton wrote |
it as dictated by Deecher. Here this vital point
OF the whole case depends ca the evidence Of |
Aoulton, who put the paper in writing, who up- |
ceEstood it's object, and now holds the paper.
The denial of lir. Deecner transfers the burden |
of proof upon Iilton, aud, until 1Ioulton gi9es |
nnother version of the matter. the "apology"
must be considered rejected, and no longer
bearing any evidence OF guilt
lao cnarge stands, therefore, as sufficiently
repe!'ed by Mr. Beecher to cali for the additional
testimony said to be in existence and held hv
hou1ton- AL Titons statements rest upon
evidence said to exist, and held BY Moulton.
Mr- Beecher refers to so much of this evidence
as Is produced By explaining part in way that
WILL probably satisfy his friends, and branding
the rest as fraud, so far as it assumes him to
De responsible therefor. He follows this
up by charging Moulton and Tilton with
har1ng extorted 67.000 from him. For
the present, therefore, despite the glar-
Ing tnconp1etenesB Of AIr. Beecher's
statement. the case may be considered
snihcsen:lr answered and ailenced to compel
1oA "1o 24cu1toa 10 produce their further te3- |
a1aony OF to retire from the field.
A'11ons position in this roa:tor il at this tlmo
iooss la'ntul. He made his statement and
fo'D'ea 10 Aoa3ton as the depoaitary Of all tho
-oe4.ne1'e and all the facts Nov, aoulton.
"'>l A's "no'e statement in writing, Keeps away,
10 soeot' and viii not SPEAK II Iilton has baen
.'&Afepresentlnss him, OF he has been doce,v.
sns 11ltoo' truth demands that thu x,o,o
enaA no" De made pahlic. Mou1ton ,nna+ no,r
defend himself and prove Tnton's case. r .~1n
himself to be false accuser blackuailer ,na
generally most disreputablo character. n.
future silence eau be construed only aa proof ot
'nfam5, aud. until he speaks and gives all tn.
1a>ts to the people, the verdict aa to Mr. Beecbar
n1ast ba Not proven" Il the case ahould nsy,r