The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1875-03-02

might nave been well made to believe, since 1t is
hard indeed Tor vile to disbelieve an earnest as
presents itself 10 her as one between her
husband. asserting the substantial truth, and
her husbands enemies asserting substantial
certainly been guilty Of adultery. Isn't It
less wicked that ! should say ne has
husband by falsely asserting ne has not con essed
10 nim9 Since he has confessed TO somebody, OF
course when talking upon the same subject, he
must have meant TO confess 10 me. He expressed
himself sorrowlnl and for what else could he have
felt sorrowlul. He ACKNOWLEDGES that he mad been
in fault. and 10 what fault could he have referred
except the crime OF adultery II, then, put that
very language into his mouth shall be only ex
pressing his view, and be serving the cause Of
substantial truth. The first interview which
Mrs. Moulton relates obviously does not suffce TO
convict Mr.. Beecher, while IL plainly shows that
sion of the case. MIR. Beecber, she says asked her
and said he had. Nothing else that Is pretended
TO be concession follows until June 2, 1873, when
extraordinary language for a lady 70 use in her
conversation with her pastor Ia his great sorrow.
The WORD crime Is offensive and coarse, and n O
lady OF the refinement OF Mrs. Moulton could pos.
sibly have used IT on such an occasion. This, 1t
Mrs. Moulton said she kissed Mr. Beecher on the
forehead in sympathy for his distress. In her d.
'.Tlton striking at me SACRIFICES his VIE" and
Immediately changes the words into this strange
ats n Stang ru
mode Of speech. reminding us Of her husbands
saying that Mr.; Beecher spoke Of his relations, and
relations with Mrs. Titon 1t Is perfectly clear
that these charges were made for the purpose
the conviction OF Mr.. Beecner. The language.
1.-THE tortures OF the damned" is copied plainly
advice to 90 to the church Immediately and tell
all trnthiully, given day alter Moulton mad
strangely dssuassa nm any
to shoot Beecher II he aid tell the ruth; the allu-
sion to the card In the Eagle as the thing which
he was considering, but which he thought useless;
but at that time the card was in type the
Eagle ONCE as Moulton has told you; the unur.
he would never see her again, and would poison
himself but had postponed his death TOR one day
some OF his friends: these are improbaOllitles
winch need not dwell upon, as they are apparent
TO everybody who has any understanding at all OF
the bearings OF the case. desire you to take
notice OF what Mrs. MOulton says in reference 70
ner interview OF July 80, when she coniesses her.
self having used these unladylike expressions =
III you had confessed 1t then, you would have
been better on now, and you have now the Orgl
nal crime and four years OF lying and perjury to
answer lOr.' You have seen Tor yourselves. gen.
tlemen that Mrs. Moulton Is lady, ana she could
no more have made that gross. vulgar speech
than she could have cut or her hand, nor could
she have alluded to perjury, because ut that time
Mr.. Beecher mad not taken an OATH or published
OF June 2. 1879. But the climax is reached when
she represents Mr. Beecher responding to that in
sister, Then in ner interview with Mrs Tson
she testified to what that lady said to
but uavne s sea Srs son 70 s,sns
ana tears not to allow Mr.. Triton to destroy
at the time Mr.. Beecher had gone down to the
church. but feeling arterward the di1culty Of
ner position. sne subsequently qualities her state
ment by saying that she only begged Mrs. Tilton
TO stand by Mr.. Beecher as long as she could do 50
q bolioVad IL 1mDOaSho Triton
to stand Dy Mr.. Beecher at all without sacrificing
the truth. There IS other evidence on the part
OF Mrs. Mouton tnat will fix the date of that inter-
view. How can you believe this story If amended,
as amended II Will beS Mr.. Beecher will give you
such interview as that OF June 2 lS73 with Mrs
Moulton that he never spoke OF suicide. and that
June 2, 1873. MIR. Beecher, In place OF having had
an interview with Mrs. MoullOn, was speeding
away TO Peekski with Mrs. Beecher; That ne re-
turned ON Tuesday, when he married young man
and woman, members OF his congregation; and
that on the following Wednesday ne went to New
Governor Claim. OF Massachusetts,. Counsel then
referred to the efforts that had been made to IN.
he had committed an oriencewbut not q crime
against Theodore Tllton. Moultons plan was that
Beecher should acsnowledge snat be nad commit.
mttins That he committed suc capea an OF Of.
to sign such letter. saying he would destroy all
the papers in the case, and that he would stand
Dy MIN rs his ITleuu. III beeCuoE H8u NOT Deeu
conscious OF his own innocence, he would have
signed that paper; but he refused, and Tor this
was, II the card specined an onence, Mr. Beecher
would have signed 1t; but leaving the matter
in vague and indefinite way was what Mr..
Beecher objected to. and he positively refused TO
sign the letter in thar way. Mr.. Beecher, in all
his letters and correspondence, pointed to an Of
fence against Mr. Tilton, referring to complicated
variety Of de tai but he never referred to crime,
and, least OF al. mad ne ever reIered to the crime
OF He pyDiainpd
the letters. He desired that the case
should explain the letters, and that the letters
expiain themselves. When Mr.. Beecher was
ferrng to generalltles what had these parties IN
their mndsY Was It TINS complicated afair.
independent, or was IL a question OF adultery? In
all this correspondence there were very few
sorrow and anguish. Whenever the correspond
ence refers to TACT that fact - entirely opposed
to the ldea Of adultery: In 1865 Mrs: Ilton never
Counsel read letter from Mrs. Tilton, OF that
year addressed to her HUSBAND. expressing "re-
MORSE" There was word 'remorse" in one OF
Mr.. Beecher's letters, and men asked what
could 'remorse" mean but the crime OF
adultery Counsel also referred to the letters
OF Theodore Tilton. He, too. spoke OF ''remorse."
because life with him was failure. In weighing
the case the Jury were to- view the PROBABILITY
neved tnat at the time ne wrote those letters
they could have been construed INTO charge OF
them. And then. where did those letters come
from' Why from the archives OF Francis d.
MOuttOQI III MT. beeCHeT udu COuulLleQ the
crime OF adultery and had admitted it In those let
tiers, would he have given the evidence OF it into
the possession OF MoultOn Mrs. MOulton told
the Roblnsons about II, and MIR. Beecher was so
glad 20 know that all the firm knew about
his adulterlesl Did the jury believe that ?
There was this other TACT, that wnen Mr. Beecher
knew that Mrs. Moulton knew he was adul,
terer, he asked her, as she testified, to go to
church.; that he would be SO glad TO see ner there
Is a member OF his congregation! Did the jury
believe THAR Did they believe that man who
was covered over with the leprOsy OF sin and
adultery would, while IN that state, and as pas
tor invoking the blessing Of God on MS congrega-
ton, ask q lady who kne his crime to go down
and worship at his church ? He INT. Tracy did
not believe they would. Mrs. MOulton says she
told Mr.. Beecher to confess before MS congrega-
ton that he had committed adultery; tnat his
congregation would forgive him, and That she and
Frank would stand by him. DID the Jury imagine
that the congregation. Knowing their pastor to be
an adulterer, while invoking on himself and them
the blessing OF Heaven, would forgive him IL
was utterly Impossible TO believe IL.
Again, In 1872. we are told that Mr.. Beecher cor.
responded with Mrs. Tllton through Mrs. Mouton,
pYDrpesed hone that would continue