The New York herald., 1875-09-15
THE BEECHER SCANDAL.
Mr.. Beecher Consents to Withdraw the
Suit Against MOuItOn.
The Defendant Indignantly
Objects.
HE DEMANDS A TRIAL


hanging over the head of Mr.. Francis D. Mouton,
which was found by the Grand Jury of Kings county
upon the complaint and testimony OF the
Rev. Henry Ward Beccher This indictment is
in the Office of District Attorney Brit
ton, Of Kings county. It seems 20 have
troubled the mind Of Mr. Britton so much that last
month he determined 10 make effort to quash 1t
quietly, but formally and legally The motives Of the
official will be found in the rst of the following letters
which he addressed 10 Mr.. Beecher the 2lst ut 1t
will be seen from the other letters TO and from Mr.
Moulton that Mr. Beecher agreed with the District At
torney that it would be we'll under the circumstances
noted by Mr. Brtton to quash the Indictment but that
Mr. Moulton refused to arrive at that conclusion The
letters are interesting reading and will doubt
vve much of the talk about the scandal, which has
tagged greatly since July
BRlrToN TO BEEcHER
OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY, KINGS COUNTY !
Room 3, COUNTY COURT House,
BROOKLYN, August Il, 1875
Rev HENRY WARD BEEcHER:-
DEAR sH-There is in this Office an indictment
found upon your complaint and testimony, against Mr.
Francis D. Mouton for libel, based upon publications by
him regarding yourself 1t not at once disposed
of awaiting the result of civil action in the same
court brought by Mr. Theodore Tlton against your
self, involving substantially the question The
trial of that case continued six months Terminating in
July last by disagreement of the jury. At it's con
cusion in accordance with custom pending the
heat the court adjourned its jury term civil and crim
1t is incumbent on me TO make some disposition of this
Indictment AS n public officer representing to the
best of my ability the interest OF the people only am
and can be- no party to the personal controversy
nected with these matters On behalf Of the people
only am called upon TO act.
have, therefore, given the subject serious and
scentious reflection and the following Considerations
present themselves suggestive that the public interests
would be best served by moving for nolle prosequi in
this case
Substantially the issue herein involved was tried in
the civil action and after protracted and most ex
On trial
of this ndictmentunlike that of the civil case-the
well established principle that the accused is entitled
the benefit of reasonable doubt will apply and the
probability of an agreement for conviction will be
thereby essened and it is but reasonable to assume
that in the absence of additional evidenceof the
istence OF which | am not lnformed-a jury will be no
favorable 10 the of the people in the criminal
proceedings than TO that of the defendant in the civil
LIKELY TO CONVICT
nor probably to agree.
The trial will involve much valuable time OF Judge
of the Court TO the exclusion of other business press
ing for disposition and will also be OF great expense to
the county
1t will be very difficult If not impractcable to obtain
in this county jury qualified by law to sit
have omitted including among these considerations
the effect upon public morals Of another trial of the
issues involved in this matter perhaps this may
be proper subject to influence my action.
Not intending to express or intimate any personal
opinion upon the merits ofthis controversy, am
strained by these facts TO invite the views of yourself
and Mr. Moulton upon this subject, and to submit
your judgment whether 1t will not be better that the
trial of this indictment should nottake place
Any suggestions which you may think proper to
make will receive careful consideration. l am very
respectfully,
WINCHESTER BRITToN, District Attorney.
MouLroN.
OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY KINGS COUNTY
Room 3 COUNTY CouRr House,
BROOKLYN, Sept II, 1875
CRY CouRr OF BRooKLYN-ThA People, &C. VS.
Francis ID. Moulton.
FRANCIS ID. MoULToN:-
DEAR SIR herewith enclose copy of letter for
warded by to the Rev. Henry Ward Beecher l
Mr. Beecher.
in the disposition OF this case as suggested by me
submit TO you whether for the reasons stated Won
should not also acquiesce in the action proposed.
Before determining the matter await the expression
of your views Very respectfully,
WINCHESTER BRTTrON, District Attorney.
MoULToN's FIERCE REPLY.
BROOKLYN, Sept IS, 1875
DEAR SIR-Your favor Of the 11th enclosing copy
of your letter TO the Rev. Henry Ward Beecher was
duly received and in reply beg to declare once that
l cannot ''acquicsce in the action proposed"
With this polite but peremPtory protest against the
terminate our correspondence, but your note
invites expression of my views, and more
the ''suflciency of the reasons stated" to justify
your contemplated action, and as an omission to
spond to your suggestion might be imputed to some
motive of studied incivity, proceed with candor but
in all courtesy, to comply with your request.
In discussing the considerations that determine You
to abandon the prosecution, you and contemplate the
subject in different aspects and relations As a
officer of the government you permitted to look
only at the public interests and to be controlled excu
sivey by sense Of official duty; whereas l. private
citizen, indicted Of criminal offence will be pardoned
if pursue the course best calculated
TO vINDICATE OWN INNOCENCE.
1t will not be surprising, therefore, will IL imply
any disparagement OF your understandings if your rea
sons' fail 10 impress me as decisvey as they appear
affect yourself tI
l. You correct no doubt in your calculation Of
the chances OF verdict for the prosecuton but is not
the acquttal Of the innocent much an object of your
duty and your solctude the conviction of the guilty.
] am no lawyer, and, therefore, you will excuse my
error if have supposed the spirit of our jurspru
/ IN hn cprht haf A unnFn alun fu
in signazing the innocence than the crminality of the
citizen and that the most grateful duty of the public
prosecutor is to be Instrumental in making reparation
TO the unjusty accused. In my lac ignorance had
imagined tnat the District Attorney represents woll
the defendant the people, and with this impression
I have rested sdfe in the assurance that he would
not suffer the machinery of the law to be employed for
my destruction but would, when he found me the vic
tim of false and malicious prosecution, hasten TO give
me the vndication of a public acknowledgment of my
innocence else of formal acquitta by jury of my
countrvmen Less than this not the full measure of
nv rights: less than this dsdain to accept
IL That the trial Of the indictment against me will
involve heavy public expense and obstruct other
exigent business of the courts Is objection that
should have been considered at earlier stage of the
proceeding, and have ava,ed to prevent your prede
permitting the powers of the District Attorneys
Office TO be prostituted TO the purposes Of the Rev.
Henry Ward Beeoher in his controversy with Mr.
Tilton. have been accused Of crime in the name of
the people; have been compelled to plead a cuprt;
! have been held to bail for nearly year; and
surely too late for the representative Of the people
in the prosecution to decline to yield to my
DEMAND FOR TRIAL,
the ground that the trial would be vexatous and
oppressive burden upon the peopel What other
penditure can be more legitimate and audabe than
that incurred in vindcatng the innocence OF a man
against whom the people have been betrayed TO inst
tute unfounded prosecutionf What supremer in
terest engage the attention and the time Of the
than the duty Of absoving from unjust
citizen against whom hitherto has not been heard
n whisper Of suspicion or Teproach2 To me II seems
scarcely consistent with the magnanimty of great
people TO plead poverty and the pressure of other
gagements an excuse for denying trial TO one
whom they have falsely arraigned and oppressvey
pursued.
III. The mpossibilty Of empanelling jury in this
community is difficulty, am advised, that may easily
be evaded by changing the venue TO another county
~. Although you do not formally enumerate among
the that may determine your action consider
alton Of the efect epon public morals of another trial
OF the issues involved In this matter yet your refer
TO the topic plainly reveals its influence on your
judgment But why should this effect such there
may be, operate TO deprive me or my constitutional
right TO speedy and impartial triap II is not but
D. Ward ChQr VIII m.