New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-06-08
Mr.. BEECHER NEVER VERBALLY ACCUSED
OF ADULTERY

And now gentlemen, let me once for all call
your attention final question which was put by the
learned counsel for the plaintiff both to Nj Tilton when
he was on the stand and to Mr. Mouon also and that
was
During all these interviews taking them in body,
did Mr. Beecher deny the adultery
And the answer is No, he never dd,"-and for the
best OF reasons for when asked Mr.. Bcher not only
displaclng one by all the supposed admissions. all
the implied admissions, all the rected admissions, |
asked him
Mr. Beecher did Mr. MoultOD, did Mrs. Moulton, did
Mr. TiltOn from the beginning of tnis matter III
December 1870, down 10 your last interviews WIN either
or them, ever accuse you oI h.l.'oS an. ~ @
canal connection. ever suggest this inquiry III any
form or degree He says NJ person ever dld Ia my
house. in either OF the houses nom the ps Ol either Oh
these persons.
And adds that the first word OF that kind from any lips
would have been the OF any intercourse be-
tween them So you how easy it is by form Of cues
ton and answer apparent proof until il is searched
and probed and shown 10 he worthless. Mr.. Beecher
never did deny adultery, did deny carnal connec-
ton never was accused by word by hint by suspicion
indicated in any FORM And the whole course OF this
affair shows the impossbility of Mr. Beechers hav
ing submitted any OF this intercourse TO get his friend
ship 10 obtain his aid and he is quite justified every
principle OF human when he says 10 you in his
evidence:
The whole Of my interviews with all these par
es-Mrs. MoultOn Mr.. MOut0n, Mr. Iilton-was utterly
Inconsistent with there being an idea OF that form anu
degree OF crnlinaty, without nnputlng the utnos' IN
fanny 10 all OF them.
And we recognize that How are these respectable
peope they would have themselves considered 10
plain this long continued intercourse and effort 70 get
the services either in money or in aid in help, in sup
port In redistribution Mr. TltOn in employment, in
character in eredit-how are they TO accommodate
those coursesSf conduct and with him their part,
with anything but the basest compromise and money
settlements Of this great disgrace
ask your HonOrs attention 10 the case Of Giles V.
al Note NJ Ecclesiastical
Courts. D. i6I): The facts
Witness gentleman OF responsibility who had
peen called IN as H. @ @ Una, ne ss .a
him that the husband in effect admitted the charges
The witness testified that he considered the husbands
conversation 10 be admission OF the truth OF the
charge but the witness also stated thar before leaving
he wine with the husband. entered into general con-
versation. and shook hands at parting Held not SUI
| ncent proof OF guilt 800 -,
cannot possibly how all this conduct il To be-
| Tense imputed 10 him. How Ia IL possible To conceive
that gentleman in Mr.. Humes situation having re-
ceived this communication from Mrs Giles, aud comics
Mr.. Giles, could sit down with him. drink
glass Of wine with him. talk with him, he he did,
OF the road he had been making 20 QueGns Charlton
shake hands with him at parting and conduct himself
he admits he would not have done u Mr. Giles had
been convicted the offense The belief OF Mr. Hume
this that Mr. Giles not only guilty Of the
oense but that he had confessed II, ana where ~ the
difference bet yeen and his being convicted Of the
0fensei II impossible To reconcile the evidence OIL MI
| Hume with his conduct upon the OCCASION
Ana that IL the way tue ia" anyways ueais Win "oi's vi
witnesses when they confronted aud compared with
their conduct II does not hesitate 10 Of Mr. Hume
You profess 70 be a respectable gentleman; come
here report after information from the wife OF charges
against her husband the confessions of the husbandand
YOU 20 and describe the interview Just would have
gone ON IL this gentleman had had guilt, dshoncr
no crinnaity that avowing before you You tell
us you wond not II he hal been convicted.
and yet You tell that the wife had told you. and the hl
band had assented." Gentlemen, the law says people
must understand that here In the practical inteL