New-York tribune., 1875-02-26
MR. MOULTON EQUALLY A CONsPIRATOR WITH
Mr. TILTON.

Now, gentlemen there is another fact in this con-
Aecton 70 which Idesreto cali your attention which goes
how the good faith the honest paTp1e Of Francis Mou
You remember that he tod he j. the feAd and has
been the intimate friend Of Theodore Tton from boyhOOd
lie SAYS learned this night that Ms friends wife had been
debaached by Mr. Beech and he had consulted him regard
10 that matter az friend. The question consider
ng lie whether Moaton eon-prator With rton against
Henry Ward Beecher Having been consulted by MS most mt
nate friend and having pledged him his friendship in this
ansacon he goe Henry Ward Beecher and invites
Mr. Beeeher up TO tn n,crvlew and he es you genemen
that before Mr. Beeeher reached his honse he pledged h hd
ship and adeity Henry Ward Beecher IN th same matter
xo that he was the sincere friend ~ Mr. Ton YOU know
uoboAv will doubt that Wa be the friend Of Henry Yard
Becher and acuac by good faith when ne made that
promise, That the only question for you 10 CONSIDER acre
IN order TO determine the character in which Mr. Nouon
stands in this case II you believe that assurance 70 hf
Reecher was made in faih for the purpose Of getting MS
confidence the better enab him 70 peEpetrae 'he scheme
and ret his paper from him tha him cOn-praor with
Theodore Tton in this ransacton Bi fushe gentlemen
he nes back 10 Henri Ward Becher the morning OF the
sst and requests the 70 the retraeon Presenting
,eer Of Mrs Ton and he obtains the retfacon ana goes
WAY Now, be knew 81 that ume mat he 90
AIMED this rerac,ion by presenting this letter Of Mr.
Tl,on Yet when the is hrst Published by
The Woodhuls Il published by Them IN this way VT It"n
u represented az saying Ny fread took pistol went 10
NJ Beecher and demanded the letter OF As T. und be pam
ns,an, death" That was one o. the ho>I seNefe Da
against Mr Beecher the article In NJ Ilioh sA'e'heh
and in al Of Mr Mouton statements they nal conveyed Tue
hea h one form Of language and another ha' Nj beecnet
was copeed In some way surrender that retrAch0n TO
them that s that they demanded Of him anf mat he sur
rendered and the question Nh ch has nhheSee tIe puoO
against Mr. Beer more than any fact the question Of
how be came 70 surrender this esracton npon the demand Of
Nop, that night They have always concealed the fact that
AsT had Mrs TltOns letter who had rght 70 demand IL
return and that they presented letter to Mr Beeche and
vop thar induced MIN to surrender the reracon That
fac, sways concealed by neyor made pnc unl
forced out Of them IN this judicial investigation
Has that conceAlmen made IN goOd faith OF has oeh
Oue Of the tricks Of these parties like the ssslng Of Mrs Til
tons letter for The purpose Of creating public opinion against
Henry Ward Beecher Why do they not Pabiish' when
nsy nabI,.hed ANYTHING the simple fact that they
tot mi, letter OF Mr. Tton Nr Beecher, requesting
he return OF this retracon upon that he surrendered ~
IN, would have been simple tuih would have told the
cory tthfuy but they would not have accomplished The
Seiect they had in view
Now another thing the of ta wa asked M honoh
sso the witness stand He asked 70 ain that ana what
aoe. nav, He says had absolutely forgotten the exist
soc. Of t psDer Foreotep the existence OF such an i'm
est paDer as this In face Of Woodruff scandal even
ne existence Of this paper bsi DOT occurred to MN bai
yOu learned II somewher. Nj MOulton =! Yes sh.
-YOs published IL IN Oi y0ar stalehehs' h1
koatony' yes sir 'Dd you there publish II h connec
too with the surrender Of the rersc0n OF the accusation OF he
Se0det Of the resrscnon No: lac did not ana ne II com
Haed 10 say he did not Now, every paolcauoh WAC"
A nAkcs which be pun This letter. carries tne "eA
ns, his re,rac,ion W.. surrendered 10 him upon de
aAh and be publishes this letter In an eh'rcp
sseui connection TwsrtE pages away from te