Litchfield enquirer., 1875-07-08
Religious PaTtisanship and the
 Beechor Case.

task for not standing by Mir. Beecher in his misfortune" There is a tendency, says that paper, among the better and stricter church members to shake the head at the mention of the great Pastors name. The News is especially wroth with an anti-Beecher deacon who edits paper in his vicinity and to whom he speaks much in tone of the political fugleman addressing the voter whom he suspects of desire to ''go back on the party" at an impending election. No wonder the wick ed revile Plymouth church, says the News.
 but for the righteous. and especially the Congregationally righteous. to ''weaken" at this juncture, is breach of discipline that makes it fairly blaspheme, or at least come as near blaspheming as the Congre- gationally righteous editor can. It does not seem to have occurred to our COnnec- ticut Western friend that it may not all
 be mere cussedness, and spirit of insub- ordination, that moves prominent Con- gregationalists to act in this unaccounta-
 ble way, but the conviction that Mir.
 Beecher is really guilty. The net result of the trial has been, we think, decidedly
 to Mir. Beecher's disadvantage so de- cisively as to weaken the faith of firm
 friends, but enough to deepen the dis
 trust of those who doubted before. With
 out attempting any resume of the volumes
 of testimony adduced, we call the atten- tion of our. Salisbury friend to a few sa- lient points in the new evidence in the case, especially as developed by the able and impartial charge of Judge Nelson:
 One of the strongest points in Mir. Beecher's original defence was his repu- diation of the confession" apology" or "letter of contrition." as it is variously termed. He claimed that Moulton played a trick upon him in obtaining his authen- tication of document that entirely mis- his words. It now appears, however, that he was informed by MT. Tracy, late in 1872, of the nature of that letter, and that he nevertheless continued to place the fullest confidence in Moulton for year and half thereafter. More over, as Judge Nelson suggests, Moulton could hardly have been foolish enough to intentionally misrepresent Mir. Beecher in 8 document he expected him to sign, and which he would naturally expec. him to read before signing. The judge, there fore, was of opinion that although Moul- ton might not have reproduced MT. Beecher's language with absolute accura- cy. there was no intentional misrepresen- tation of it in this most important letter.
 Another strong additional piece of tes- timony, against MT. Beechcr is found in the evidence of Mrs. Moulton. This is positive, precise, and full as to his own acknowledgements and those of Mrs. Til ton. The witness is lady of high char acter, and commended in the highest terms by MT. Beecher himself. Neverthe- less, in a matter in which the reputation of an husband is as deeply involved as that of either of the parties to the suit, the wife's testimony must be taken with much the same allowance as that of the husband himself.
 It will be recoilected that in Mir. Beech CTS statement of last summer his frequent allusions to an expectation of immediate death were referred, not to any design of committing suicide, but to certain physi- cal symptoms that led him to fear apo- plexy or some similar danger. In his tes- timony before the court, he acknowledg- ed that this fear of apoplectic attack had been removed before the date of the let ters in question. Thus what might have seemed a sufficient explanation of the very remarkable expressions in his letters with which our readers are familiar, is abandoned and the defendant is only left the ordinary uncertainty of life as an ex- planation.
 Another and vital feature of the origi- nal defense was the charge of blackmail. Judge Nelson speaks thus conclusively of the utter failure of this charge:
 MT. Beecher's advances of money which. through Mir. Moulton. went to the benefit of MT. Hilton and family. appear to have been mere acts of generosity. That money was not extorted by MT. Moulton, nor does it appear to have been the fruit of any improper artifces. Although it is of no special moment, think it proper to say that the uncontradicted evidence shows that MT. Hilton did not know that he was thus benefited by Mir. Beecher. l said, early in my remarks, that, except on points of slight importance I was not in the habit of expressing opinions to iu- TOTS upon controverted questions of fact points of slight importance being the regard the conspiracy and attempts to blackmail suggested as of that character and feel therefore at liberty to indicate to you what my opinion is.
 A very important incident of the trial was the refusal of the defense to offer Mrs. Tilton's testimony, although the plaintiff alllegal objection. Undoubtedly the occasion of this refusal was the fact that Mrs. Hilton had made reported con- fessions of guilt to unimpeachable wit nesses.
 On the other hand the new evidence offered by the defendant in this case has tended rather to the lowering of MT. Til tons personal character than to the refu. tation of the charge he makes against MT. Beecher. Indeed, Mir. Beecher's warmest friends must admit that there is an awful weight of evidence against him. Three unimpeached witnesses testify to his di- rect confessions, and the explosion of the theory leaves no motive for their making false charge of such a na- ture. Then we have the ''letter of con- triton" obviously incompatible with the theory of innocence, yet authenticated by Mir. Beecher's signature. taken down from his words. if not actually dictated by him. In addition come numerous letters all in