The Rutland daily globe. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1873-1877, 1875-06-17
BY TELEGRAPH.
The Tilton-B eecher Trial.

|
gan, occupied seat among the plaintiffs
counsel. Tilton occupied his usual place.
Beach continued his address. He said he
had assumed that the retraction letter was
obtained by Beecher's influence and dlcta-
ted by him, and that the letter itself in
ferred so. The word "inculpating," used
in the letter, was not woman's word, and
did not belong to the phraseology of the
household. Beecher says in the ''letter of
contrltion," that he would die before any
person but himself should be inculpated,
and certain parties could be distinguished
by their style of rhetoric, and counsel had
already shown them the popularity in that
respect exhibited by Beecher. Now he
testifies that che wrote the letter, but it
was written at his dictation. AS she says,
Beecher wrote the letter and she copied it.
When Beecher returned to Moultons that
night he told no one that he had received
the letter of retraction, and Tilton did not
know of it until he had returned to his
home when he was told by his wife, and
there was no source therefore by which
Tilton could learn of the existence of this
paper, except through his wife or
Beecher. Was it not perfectly clear that
Mrs. Tilton had given her husband on his
return an explanation of the circumstances
attending the giving of the letter to Mr..
Beecher. After he had sought this inter-
view and gained this retracton, if he was
innocent, how gladly and cbeerfully he
would have gone into the presence of Til
ton and told him of it. Was there any
doubt, if Beecher had been the character
he is represented to be, that this would
have been the prompt and ready response
which Beecher would have made that night
to Theodore Tilton. Counsel had referred
the jury to the evidence of Tilton and
Moulton, without dwelling on the charac-
ter of the offense. In regard to an inter.
view between Moulton and Beecher, he
(Moulton) was told by Beecher that Tilton
had read to him the confession of Mrs.
Tilton charging him (Beecher) with having
had sexual intercourse with her in 1871
and by Mrs Tilton to her husband stating
that she hoped her husband would never
be misled by a good woman as she had
been by a good man, and this, said Mr..
Beach, was said by this man Bcecher,
whom the jury were now asked to
believe to be all that was noble and good
Counsel then quoted an extract from the
Catherine Gaunt letter, 10 (which Mrs sTil-
ton referred TO her sin, and added that this
woman could not have written this unless
she knew that she had been guilty of some
grievous offense. She thought there was
no sin in this trinity and that these three
persons could be united and indulge in all
their spontaneous desires without any
thought or regard for the law of God or of
man. The sentiments of her mind, i'm
| planted in her breast by Beecher, were
surely working their effects, and she
| hastens to inform her husband of the state
of the circumstances, as she did in the
Catherine Gaunt letter. In this letter she
says "Bless God with me for Catherine
Gaunt, and now am prepared to renew
my marriage vow and keepi as my Savior
| desired, in heart" Mr.. Beach then alluded
to the fact that Beecher not only denied
that he had committed adultery, nor had
he made any improper proposals to her, but
he denied that he has been guilty of the
slightest improperly toward her. Counsel
then read the statement read to her by DR..
Storrs, that Mr.. Beecher, her friend and
pastor, had made improper proposals to
her, and solicited her to become wife
to him with all that name implied,
and that her retraction of the charges had
been prepared by Beecher, thus placing her
in direct antagonsm to her long suffering
husband. There was another denial from
Beecher about the same time in which he
said that he had always the high esteem
and respect for Mrs. Tilton, and denying
that he had ever had improper intercourse
or had made any improper proposals to
her that Tilton had always spoken of the
purity of his wife and always exhibited the
greatest friendship for him (Beecher).
This letter, said the counsel, was written
on December Goth, 1872. The jury would
perceive these denials were written only
ten days after the statement made to Dr.
Storrs. Nociferous complaints had been
made that the original confession of Mrs.
Tilton had been destroyed, and the gentle
man said that if it had been produced il
would have thrown an immense amount of
light on the subject. But how would il
have thrown light on the subject of the
charge if adultery was not in? Would II
throw any more light on the evidence than
they already have upon it? 1t only
made the charge that Beecher was guilty Of
improper proposals, why did she wish it tc
be destroyed as she wrote to Moul
ton, if she rejected the proposals
What harm did the destruction of thi.
paper do to Beechcr? Moulton kept thu
retraction and confession papers together
until after the execution of the tripartit'
agreement, when the clouds which hunl
over their heads appeared to be scattering
and yielding to Mrs. Tilton's importunitie
that the occasion for their safe keeping
was over what harm was there in destroy
ing them Did Moulton act unfairly il
keeping the retraction which Beecher sal,
he got for his defence, and which Moultol
produced here in evidence. Vests charge
alleged that Titon had accused Beeche
with infidelities committed with hi
CTilton's) wife as early as August 8
1870, and ever since that time, there hat
been no peace in that church down to til
present Every effort at investigation in
to the matter was suppressed by Beecher
with the great power which he exercised
in that community. He never prosecute
inquiry into it, but stamped it under hi
= foot. 1t required great stretch of imagl