New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-06-22
THE DRIFT OF THE ARGUMENT.

THE DRIFT OF THE ARGUMENT.
Mr.. Beach in beginning his argument for the day
referred to made by him in the OF his
speaking on Thursday last when he referred to the
persons in the story of Pauna in JOsephus being
of the Jewish faith. They we're not Hebrews The
alleged faithlessness of Mr.. Mouton in refusing to
Mr.. Beechcr access to the originals permission TO
take copies of the documents in the possession
of the former was then commented on the
speaker urging that Mr.. MoultOn had acted in the
only way in which he honestly could act. Mr..
Moutons position at the time of the demand on Mr..
Beechers part then explained by the speaker by
reference to the correspondence which passed on
the subject between Mr.. Beecher and Mr.. Moulton.
All attempts at a suppression of the scandal had
come to end. and Mr. Mouton could not in justice
to the other side, to whom ne owed duty, give
copies Of the papers to Mr. Beecher. "MoutOn would
not be very severely condemned for following that
! policy of silence which the interests of both
parties demanded" At this point the speaker de-
Tended Mr. MoultOn from the charge of being
heather and one destitute of moral sensibilities.
Mr. Tracy's invectiyes against Mr. Moultons charac-
ter severely reprehended the speaker saying in
concluding the topic 1.-THE worst of 1t is, 1t is not
even original with himself"
In taking up the testimony Of Mrs. MoultOn Mr..
TtOns counsel said that the only question for the
she is to be believed. Mr.. Tilton, Mr.. and Mrs.
Moulton had given testimony to the same point.
These three witnesses must be convicted of perjury
before Henry Ward Beecher can be adiuged inno-
cent With reference to Mrs. Mouton's character
Mr. Beach read selections from Mr.. Beechers letters
showing what estimate he had made of it.
The speaker then went on to urge the impossible
ity of Mrs Moulton's having invented the interview
| of June 2, 1873. Mrs. MoultOn had told the jury
that her advice to Mr.. Beecher that occasion had
been to tell him to 60 down to his church and con-
fess. The improbability of her having given such
advice was made point in the argument for the de-
PENDANT. "Well," said Mr.. Beach, ait was Chris
tan advice, gentlemen"
Again it had been alleged that ii improbable
that Mr. Beecher if guilty, should urge Mrs Iilton
as he did, to separate from her husband This advice
was given however, before Mr.. Beecher knew OF
| Mrs. Tton's confession, and when separation
would rather facilitate Mr. Beechers purposes than
otherwise After December 1870, Mr.. Beecher al
WAYS advised Mrs Tilton to continue to live with
| her husband.
| The difficulty of inventng such interview as
the one with Mrs. Moulton was again insisted on by
the speaker and the improbability of maintaining it
if false under so strict examination that TO
| which she had been subjected was urged. The
terms "section of the day of judgment" &C., used
at the interview were Mr.. Beecher's words.
| Mr. Beach then claimed that no alib had been
properly proved in regard TO the interview. NJ
Beecher had accounted for certain hours of the day.
but had not done so satisfactorily in respect TO the
| time between 9 a. m. and the hour when he went
over to The Christian Union office. Mr.. knsela, 1t
was claimed would have been able to prove thealib
Yet said Mr. Beach, he had not been called, and the
presumption was that if called he would not have
aided the defendants case by his testimony. The
evidence of Mr. James, as corroborating Mrs. Moul-
toms statements was here referred 10, as was also
the testimony of Mrs Eddy. This part of the argu-
ment was concluded with an earnest appeal to the
manhood of the jury not to condemn Mrs Moulton
to infamy perjurer.
Mr. TtOn's religious opinions were glanced at by
the speaker, who put him in the class of think
ers as DR.. Claiming, Theodore Parker, Charles
| Sumner, and Edward Everett. Mr.. Beach then
aimed to show that Mr.. Tilton. believing as he did
in his wife's purity had acted rightly in receiving
| back his wife 1t was not in the nature Of manhood
to resist an appeal like that of Mrs. Tltons to her
husband. This closed the speakers references to
the direct testimony in the case.
| Mr. Beach then took up the circumstances which
he said were notable as affecting the guilt or limo
ceuce of the accused. Mrs. HoOkers alleged threat
10 expose Mr. Beechers sin from the pulpit OF
Plymouth Church, and Mr.. Beechers correspondence
with Mrs. Bradshaw in regard to her offer to tes-
tifv before the Investigating Committee were two
of the topics touched on.