Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1875-06-22


Then, Mr.. Beecher says, he crossed over
to the CsTiStida Union office,
and the question is, where was
Beecher between this interview
and leaving for the Office Of the
Christian UaiOn. in New York? An in
teTview Of two hours under such circum-
stances as had occurred might well have
I led Mrs. Noulton to believe that il had
lasted three or four hours. Where was
Mr. Pcecher between nine and eleven
| o'clock ard twelve? One hour, he says,
was spent in conversation with Kinsel-
Ia. Mrs. MOulton says he was in her
house under the circumstances she
details. Kinsella was in this city; editor
OF paper; be was a reliable witness,
and was accessible, but he was not pro-
/ duced az q witness to sustain the abb,
/ and the Jury would remember that the
/ presumption OF the law In regard TO this
was against Beecher. Mr.. Evarts, in
stead Of producing Kinsella, read an edi-
tOrial article from the Eagle in support
Of his proposition, and tried to blind the
| iury with this cloak which he threw
/ over their heads. The evidence Of Mr.
/ James In regard to this was conclusive.
/ He saw Beecher on that day coming
! from Columbia Hights, aud going to-
ward No, 49 Remsen street shortly be-
/ fore nine o'clock. Counsel cited the
! evidence given by Mr.. James in regard
to this matter, after which the cour
| took recess.
AFTER RECESS
/ Mr., Beach continued his argument in
support of the proposition that the de-
| fense had failed to prove an abb, and
| said Mrs. MOultOn's story was true, and
that he was not guilty Of presumption
| in saying that every honest juror felt 1t
| in his heart to bs true. He did not
mean by this the juror who had said
| that Mr.. Beecher was too great man to
fall; who shut his heart and ears to the
! evidence, and looking only to the gran
deur Of Mr., BeecheT's character, be-
lieved that he was upholding christian
ity 10 the'puIpit and temple he defiled.
Mr.. Beach urged that Mrs. MOultOn
should not be branded by the verdict of
this jury TO save any man or church
from the consequences Of the truth.
Rather, he said, let every stone of Ply
mouth church be raZed than permit a
lady, respected as this lady was, 10 be
dishOnored by an unjust verdict, the ef
feet of which would also disgrace her
child. He knew the influences to whicn
some Of this jury were exposed, but they
should not be permitted to weigh for
moment against the considerations
which he had urged. The counsel then
said that the fact that Tilton had con-
doned his wife fault had been made the
text OF severe reprObstion by the other
side, who argued from this that the
charge of seduction was untrue. But il
TiltOn believed that his wife was guilt
less in spirit, and had been deceived by
Bsecher's sophistTy SO as to believe that
she had only done her duty, it was as
much his duty to forgive as il she had
been forced by bodily violence. In any
event, said Mr.. Beach, it was chris
tian's duty toward guilty wife who re-
peuted and confessed, in view of the eX-
ample set by our Savior TO the Magdslen,
whstever might be the first repulsive
emotions OF the husband. Ii was not in
the nature Of manhood to reject
the wife's appeal for herself
and her children. To condone
there must first be sin. Conformation
meant forgiveness Of sin. When Mr..
Beecher said that Tilton had condoned
his wife's fault, he made a substan-
tial confession. 1t was q somewhat no.
table event, said the counsel, when Til
ton appeared in Plymouth church on an
occasion in which s question arose as to |
whether he had slandered the pastor,
and in the face of Plymouth church and |
its members, challenged an investiga- |
ton. One would suppose that when |
this church was convulsed with this diff |
ficulty, it would seem that when the |
judiciaries of the church had Tilton be- |
fore them, that was the time when in |
juTei innocence would have stood up IN |
the person of H.W. .Reecher and cleared |
himself. Would he not have done so !
had he been innocent? But Mr.. Beech |
er, who was so proud to-day when con- |
fronted by Tilton, then skunk from the |
issue. have no charge to make, said |
Mr.. Beecher. Why was it that this |
matter was not then examined, when |
the circumstances were favorable for |
settling it? The counsel then quoted |
from TiltOn's testimony in regard to |
Beecher telling him of Mrs. Hook
er desiriug to tell the men,
bars of Plymouth church, from
the pulpit, of his relations with |
Mrs. Tilton, and in which Mr.. Beecher
did not contradict the story. Were we
to disregard such evidence, and refuse
to hear such an appeal as this from Til
ton? II the jury believe that Beecher
approached this woman, and he denies
it, then his evidence went for nought on
the proposition OF his learned friend,
Mr.. Evarts, "false in one thing, false in |
all" When theWest charges were pend
ing, and Mrs. Bradshaw was witness,
on the fourth of October, 1873, she was
then 8 member of Plymouth church.
The counsel then read letter written to
Beecher by her about this time, and
said that this was written by woman
who wished to protect Mr.. Beecher, and
who would give her right hand rather
than any harm should happen to him.
The answer to this note from Beecher
asked the jury il they believed that
there was not the slightest shadow of
offense on the part Of Beecher, or that
he had not been guilty of the slightest
impropriety toward this lady. 1t was
admitted that Beecher had prepared q
resignation, and in his letter he declared
his willingness to sacrifice himself for
TiltOn-to step down and out. What
spectacle this was, and what situation
for an innocent man to place himself in!
This was a proposition advanced by
two intelligent and honest men, that
Beecher had not the slightest taint of
guilt about him. This was in Beecher's
letter, and he could not deny 1T; he was
willing to sacrifice himself and his in
terests. II he was innocent, why should
he forsske his pulpit and duties? By
any penitent act could Beecher more
earnestly declare his guilt of this sin?
This was fact which could not consci-
eDtiOusly be removed, as it was down
on the record, and it could not be pushed
aside. The jury must deal with it hon.
estly and logically; and if they did it to
the advantage Of Beecher, the jury would
have an inconceivable power of logic.
Mr.. Beach then read the letter of
Beecher to Mrs. Tilton, written in 1870,
wherein he says that "God was kinder
to him than his own thoughts" This
was written after Mr.. Beecher had writ
ten in another letter that he could not
visit TiltOn's house without his consent,
and he did not think it would be safe to
do it without that. After he found he
In \ 10 IL - |