The Leavenworth weekly times. [volume] (Leavenworth, Kan.) 1870-1880, 1875-07-01
TLTog EEECEER.
I'm Able Article from the Chicago Tribune,

TLTox- EEECEER-
In Able Article from the Chicago Tribune.
The later developments in the Beecher
scandal outside Of the courtroom cannot be
put side as having no bearing on the case
They will not be permitted to influence the
iurv in Mr. TiltoU's suit for damage against
Mr.. Beecher, but there j. no way in which
10 prevent their making an impression NJ
on the public; al the very leas; they will IN
crease the, doubts that already possess the
minds OF most people who take an interest
in the scandal. They canno. he dismissed
a. fabricatioHs. The receEt statements are
given w.ih too much circumstantiality 10
admit OF this theory. No responsible news
paper would incur the risk Of printing
charge 50 grave unless IT were sure Of be-
ing able 10 support them by the evidence OF
those accredited with the allegations.
There is another element Of pr0ba-
bility about them. No statements
have hem made in this scandal by
anybody which the makers were not
ready and willing TO sustain upon oath
when called upon to do 70. 1t Is not like
IL that anv one would commit such an in
discretion at this stage Of the proceedings;
it il too serious . matter 10 tribe with.
Mere anxiety 10 achieve notoriety will not
account for these statements, because, ii
that had been the motive those who are
now accredited with knowledge on the mat
ter could have pushed themselves forward
long ago, when they could have gained
much greater notoriety than now. In fact,
the appearance Of new evidence at this
time seems to indicate that ii has come out
accidentally and not by the free VIII and
consent OF those who give 1t.
There appears TO have been an effort on
both sides to exclude certain testimony,
which has been curiously aided by cir
cumstanccs. Some important evidence rel
alive to the real issue has been exclud-
ed by the rules OF. practice from
civil suit for damages; the
suppression Of other evidence seems
T. ave been at the instance Of one or the
other Of the contestants. Thus Mrs. Til
tom testimony was excluded by Beechers
counsel, though the plaintiff agreed TO adj
nit it, and Mr.. TiltOn refused TO call his
daughter Florence ION. very natural and
praiseworthy grounds, though there is lit
tie doubt that her testimony would have
been more direct than any other that has
been taken. Both sides seem TO have been
somewhat afraid Of Mr. Bowen. Other ev-
idence has been made public, and is al
legged TO have come to the ears OF Mr.. Til
tons counsel since the testimony in the
case has been closed.
The evidence outside OF the trial which
has come to light since the case was closed
embraces the following: |. The allegation
that Mrs. Tilton confessed adultery with
Mr.. Beecher 10 Mr.. Richards, her brother,
and Mrs. Richards, her brothers wife.
This, if brought out, would be coniirma-
tory of her alleged confessions 10 Miss
Anthony, Mr.. 1ilton, Mr.. and Mrs.
MoultOn, Mrs Morse, her mother and her
daughter Florence. All evidence concern
ing Mrs. Tilton'- confessions was excluded
except as interviewer in conversations with
Mr. Beecher = Mr. Carpenter state
ment, which contains some significant
points, concerning Mr. Becchcr's denial Of
knowing him prior 10 the scandal, Dr.
Storr's knowledge OF the real charge in the
case, Mr.. Beechcr's virtual confessions in
alluding 70 the scandal, etc. 1t is stated
that the reason why Mr. Carpenter was
not called was that Tilton's counsel reSer-
we'd him for rebuttal, but that Mr. Beecher's
failure of memory on certain points render
ed this impracticable 3. The statement
OF Legs, the druggist, concerning Mr.. Beech
er's purchase OF pruSsic acid, alter con
versatiOn with him concerning the dif-
ferept effects Of different poisons on
the human system. The value OF this
evidence would dcpend somewhat upon the
agreement Of the date upon which The poi |
son was purchased with the time when Mr. |
Beecher was talking about committing sui |
eide, as related by NJ. and MIs. Moulton. |
A. The alleged ability of two upholster-
ers, one OF them named, 10 testify to hav-
ing seen Mr.. Beecher and Mrs. Tilton in
improper relations,-which is the most di-
rect evidence yet rendered in the scandal. |
In addition To these points, which are en-
tIrelv new, and stand as yet uncOntradicted,
there are the alleged confessions Of Mrs.
Hilton 10 various persons which have not |
been brought out in the trial, but which |
have uiquestionaJly had their influence on
the public
The import Of this outside evidence viii /
depend largely upon the character OF the
verdict in the pending civil suit. II there
Is verdict for Mr.. Beecher, he Will not he
able to claim a complete vindication 50
long rs this outside evidence reRains un-
challenged, and Mr. Iilton will have the
right TO demand prompt prosecution of
the Indictment against him for SANDER
which was found at Mr.. Beecher's inyesti-
cation and on Mr.. Beochers evidence. Ii
the verdict Is for Mr.. Tilton, there will he
no need OF his pressing the matter further.
a. his object Is not understood TO he money
and this new and outside evil
dence will I've merely cumulative. Ii there
is disagreement Of the Jury; Mr.. Beecher
is not vindlcated either as to the evidence
before the jury or as to the evidence which
was net introduced on the trial, and, in
order 10 assert good claim upon the sym
pathy and confidence OF the public, he
will be obi ged TO prosecute the criminal ,
suits he caused to be brought against ,
iilton and MOultOn. To enter Rolgc
Droseqn in these suits would be sort OF
confession on the part OF Mr.. Beecher.
In the event Of an unsatisfactory conclu- :
non TO the present civil suit, the criminal !
'uit will, in all probability, develop all the c
acts much more fully, and in a more intel {
igent shape, than they could possibly be
included in civil suit. 1t will open the |
way for all the evidence hearing on the s
.harSe, except Mrs. Tilton's testimony. 4
Witnesses who have been restrained from q
coming forward in the civil suit for dam
lges will scarcely feel justified in holding i
I'll when the personal liberty OF one of the |
PARTIES is insolved. We think, therefore. Il
hat the speedy trial of Mr. Tilton is a L
ling TO be Justly demanded If he has I
l.ndered Mr.. Beecher, he ought to he pun a
shed for it if not, he has right to vindi- a
.7tion from the charge.