New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-05-19
THE TILTON.BEECHER TRIAL.
POINTS TO BE DEVELOPED IN THE SUM
MING UP.

NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS. AS TO CONTRADICTIONS IN THE
rrsT,MoNy-ruE EVIDENCE IN REGARD TO MR.
pvrcurR,s ALLEGED CONFESSION TO MRS. MOUL-
TON ON JUNE 2-BEARING OF THE REBUTrAL ON
TaH CLAIM OF AIJBI FOR Mr.. BEEC1IER-wHERE
TESTIMONY OF MR.. BOWEN AND MR. BELL is IN
HARMONY WITH THAT OF Mr.. BEECHER-ATr1-
TUBE AND PLANS OF COUNSEL FOR THE DEFENSE.
Several misstatements of the manner in which the
evidence in the Beccher affected by the re-
butta testimony circulating in newspapers at a
distance from New-York. One of the most
singular of these miscellaneous is to the effect
that on the rebuttal Mr.. Bcecbers abb
of June 2 the day of his alleged confession
to MIS- Moulton had been destroyed, ana
Mrs. Moultons version of the affair had been sus-
tanned The facts are that the only witnesses called
sustained Mr.. Beecher as to time, if they sustained
any one and Mrs. Mouton no longer SO positive
as to the date.
Mrs. Mouton, it will be remembered, had fixed the
time of the interview when the alleged confession
was made as on Monday, June 2, from o to o'clock.
She was very positive to the day and the hours
particularly the latter-as Mr.. Beecher she said, had
gone home to lunch at o'clock. She also posi-
tive TO the day. because the nature OF her testi-
mOny fixed il of three consecutive days which
were prominent in her recollection. Her version
of the confession had illusions in 1t 10
q publication which had been made on
a Friday and another which was to be made on the
Monday following. Mr.. Tilton and MIR. Mention
had in their testimony, accounted for Mr. BeecheTs
presence with them on Friday and Saturday. On
Sunday he had preached twice and had written Mrs.
Moulton a note, so that she was The important
day could not be Sunday. Consequently she was
positive that the interview was on Monday, June z,
from 9 a. IN. TO about p. M. and she further
swore that she saw Mr.. Beecher during the next
week.
copy of The Brooklyn Eagle submitted in evil
dence has an introduction to a card by Mr.. Bcecher,
showing that it prepared by him on Monday
morning June q Mr. Beecher swOre that he wrote
this card between 0 and 10 a. IN. at his house, the
Editor of The Eagle being then present. Henry NJ
Cleveland swore that Mr.. Beecher was
oloseted with him from II to II a. M
the same morning. +. J. Turner and
his son swore TO receiving Nh. Beecher at Peekskill
by the o'clock train from Ncw-York Four or five
telegraph operators, with the original dispatches
before them, swore that notice was sent by MI
Beeoher to Mr.. Turner ia meet him on that day. MT.
Turner swore that MIR. Beechcr did not leave Peek
skill until the next day. L. j. Tilney swore
that Mr.. Beecher, in travelling dress"
married him Tuesday, night On the
next day. June 4, at o'clock, DIR.
Putnam SAW Mr.. Beecher on the Boston train, and
Mrs Perkins was with him for whole week subse-
ouently. 50 that Mrs Moulton was mistaken in say
ing that she had seen Mr. Beecher in New-iork that
week. Instead of weakening this strong alb, the
rebutta appears to have strengthened it. Mrs
Eddy did not swear to the day at all on the
contrary she could remember only that it was
three or four weeks before the 4th of July. Her
recollection Of the hour comedies with Mr. Beechcrs
statements OF the hour when he left Nh Moutons
on the Saturday previous to the day mentioned by
Mrs MoultOn. Mr.. James testified that he had seen
Mr. Becclcr about o'clock June going
to Mr.. Mouton's, but his memory of the date
was wholly distinct from any memory of the circum-
stance 50 that it is alleged that h. may have been
wrong a. to the one without being wrong as to the
other Ills statement of circumstances comedies
with Mr.. Bccchers in regard to what took place on
Saturday, May 81 when Mr.. Beecher did 60 to Mr..
Moullons about 8 o'clock and return about II.
This is such vital point Of the case that it is be-
ing much discussed by all the counsel, and will form
an important element i'll the summing up OH both
sides.
Much has been said also about "pointblank con-
tradictious' (which Mr.. BcccheI's testimony suffered
aud the summing up both sides will be devoted
largely 10 rectifying magnifying these. Many
misapprchcnsions by the newspapers arise from The
incompctencSs of the reports as published every
where except in THE TRIBUNE.
The testimony of Mr. Bell, for instance,
has been cited as contradcting that of
Mr.. Bcccler, but the fact appears to be
that on thc very point wherein the contradiction is
said 70 lic the testimony of Mr. Bcechcr and Mr..
Bell is in harmony. In regard TO The suppression of
the scanda,ois stories, Mr.. Bccchcr only testified
that he had advised against the bringing of any
ladies into the case and therein he cOrIOborated
by Mr. Bc
A good deal has also been said about Mr. Bowen's
having cOntIadicted his pastor III regard to Mr..
Beechcr's alleged advice that Mr.. Tilton should be
discharged from Tie IadepfndeRt The counsel for the
defendant afirn-and preference to the reports seems
to sustain their view-that Mr. Bowen substantially
corroboratcd Mr. Beechers testimony on this point.
Mr. Beecher did not testify that he had ddcsed The
discharge of Mr. Tton, but only that he had re-
peated stories and made statements which, he
thought had confirmed Mr.. Bowen in his
intention to discharge Mr. Tilton. Mr.. Bowen
swore that that intention had been formed before
Mr.. Bcecher had spoken about the matter. but adj
mtted that Mr.. Beecher had afterwards convcrsed
with him and told him stories about Mr.. Tilton.
The testimony of Mary Caharnc Mcdonald was
introduced by the plaintiff to contradict that OF Miss
Bessie Turner in relation to certain incidents which
il was alleged by the latter occurred at Mr. Illtons
house in 1869 The contradiction of Miss Turner,
contained i'll the testimony OF Miss Melon
aid. was only partial, and on the main
point was 10 contradiction at all. Miss Mcdonald
did not swear that she saw Miss Turner at Keyport
on the Monday following Mrs. Tton's departure for
Monticello. On the other hand, she swore that on
that day Mis- Turner was not in KeypOrt. She had
gone from Mr. TiltOns, but Miss Mcdonald did not
know where she was. Miss Mcdonald went to Key
port on Monday. but Miss Turner did not come
there until Tuesday, and the witness was not posi-
lively sure that Miss Turner came even on Tuesday.
Miss Mcdonald confirms the testimony of Miss Turner
in reference to the time of the lat;es return from
KeypOrt.