The Portland daily press., 1875-05-26

Beecher except rejected addresses andsunre-
Quilted love. This man then broke friendshlp
with Beecher, who never wronged MN anu
goes to Narragansett and rerfects his libel.
On his return be finds another letter from
Beecher demanding the papers that belonged
to him and to this Mouton sends an answer
purportipg to be written by him, but who die
tated it?
He refuses still to give up, the papers OF
which he was only trustee, and of which no
copies were kept, although Beecherr adversary
had seen them and given copies to his lawyers.
81 haven't given Tilton any copies he says.
but if he did not who did? What was the
sense of honor which permitted one man to
have copies and refuse them to the other
man? Mohlton talks of his regret at having
to refuse. Whose regret was it? Buffers, the
discarded lawyer, or Moulton's, the mutual
friend? But he says, "You know all the facts
confirm you" That was the style of argument
adopted by the mutual friend at the very time
they were contemplating bringing this SUIT
against Beecher. Up to that moment Beecher
trusted Moulton. but on receiving That letter
this man whom Judge Morris called coward,
who had been threatened with an accusation
that would blast him, wrote at once to express
his astonishment at Moulton's violating conn
dence and fidelity in refusing him access to
letters of his brother and sister, and con-
fidential notes from himself. "These letters,
he wrote, "were never PLAYER placed in your
hands for two parties but for me. You were
only friendly trustee. ,lding papers for me-
Beecber did not 60 to Narragansett and con-
suit Butler, but instantly,os finding himself IN
the tolls of the serpent, wrote this letter OF
which he kept no copy. Did Beecher imagine
he was corresponding with one OF tne aoles1
publicists of the age who never spared au en9-
my however he might serve frlen1-Ben]: r;
Butler of Mass, and Tilton, who hated nim!
The moment he finds he was deceived he
writes, Il have trusted you as a friend ana
you have deceived me-" Was that the Ian.
guage of innocence or guilt? If it were true
that Tilton had paper proving MS guilt' ana
that Mrs Moulton a respectable communication
his church, would that be the tone OF his let
ter? That letter needed an answer to be used
in court of justice. MOulton was not the
man to write and Tilton is sent for The hand
is the hand of Tilton, but the voice is the voice
of Moulton. 49,,
The counsel here read the answer, i'll which
Moulton repeats that he refused Tilton access
to papers and had to rely On whatever notes ne
had taken from time to time for the prepara,,
tion OF his sworn statement Ihese S, men, men,.
continued the counsel, "were two blackmallers.
1t was Beecher disavowed it, but no man who
ever knew the facts doubted it was blackmail."
When VIM. o. Bartlett, one OF the abest law
yers at the New Yolk bar, heard this case
stated to him, he at once pronounced 1t case
of blackmail, and he was right, and counsel
only regretted that his other engagements pre-
vented that gentleman from coming to state
his reasons more ably than he tPorter> could
do, As long as the money was forthcoming
the blow was withheld.
When il ceased the accusation was made,
but all through threat of conspiracy ran from
the time Tilton stood before Bowen and was
threatened with discharge Beecher was de-
ceiyed by that plausible Moulton, who decelVes
every one who cemes in contact with nlin; ;aho anu
who for many days deceived the jury. She
loves your little finger" said Moulton 10 hlIn'
"more than Tlton's whole body" lie was per.
suaded it was best for Mrs. Tilton and hlmself
to keep silent, leave the matter to Moulton
aud take all the blame on himself and trust to
Tilt0n's generosity.
Regarding blackmail in its moral sense, theIe
is no room for doubt that MOulton was Dlack-
mailer. He admits he told Beecher OF Tlltons
threats and obtained money and gave 1t TO III
ton. he refused to take check for S5OOo TO
his order, for that would expose his agency,
and he insisted on getting it in bills, and ne
concealed the facts in entering it on the books
of his firm, and was furious when he learned
that his partner (Woodruff) had impaired this
fact to Gen. Tracy, and Woodruff came to re-
proach Tracy for telling Mouiton. Why was
all that wasted rage if there was no blackmall-
ing? Why did Mouton tell Tracy Beecher
must deny giving the $4,000? Inyiew OF black
mailing Moulton thought it would be prefera-
BILE to make short statement that Beecher
had committed an offence, thus endeavoring
still to entrap Beecher, and that Illton, VINO
didn't know where the money came from, made
his way to Beechers church the Sunday after
the $1,000 was. given, and put his arm within
Beecher's and the Sunday after sent Beecher
the little note, 'Grace. Mercy, Peace."
OF course he didn't know where the money
came from. especially if he knew it was bed
money for the use of his wife, or il he knew 1t
came from warm hearted man who thought
he was repairing wrong which he had uncon-
sciously wrought. If it was not blackmall,
why were they dismayed at the fact being
known? Why did they make no record OF
where it came from, land why did it never occur
to them to this hour to return that money OBJ
tanned by false pretence.
Tilton is ready to receive money from Schultz
and from Plymouth, but has an alternative in
the action against Beecher and he must keep
bis record. He accordingly wrote to Beecher,
'Henry Ward Beecher, SIR The world would
have thought it was Rev. Henry Ward Beech
er, but this was concession the Dlackmaller
would not make.
Counsel read letter refusing to receive any
pecuniary favor directly or indirectly from
some other channel, Claflin. Storrs or Schultz.
Having read Storrs' testimony that Tilton, hav-
ing learned that Clatiin was unfavoraole to his
newspaper project. said "Clafiin had better
look OUT know something about hum, too
counsel remarked that if Tilton should bring
suit against Cafin, and Butler should volun-
teer to defend him, he had no doubt he would,
after the experience of this trial, prefer Tracy
and Evarts.
Mr.. Porter next commented on the fact that
Carpenter, who was in court and who, it was
stated in Mr.. Morris opening, would be able TO
prove Beecher confessed adultery to him, was
never called, and how Mrs Bradshaw, who was
stated to have received the confession of Mrs.
Tilton, was never asked question, but pro-
duced her letter to Beecher, II do not believe
the infamous stories of Tilton against you and
Mrs Tilton has never made confession to
me-"
1t being O clock at this point and one of the
Jurors, Mr.. Jeffreys, somewhat unwell, the
iudpe did NOT insist ON prOlOnging the session
beyoud the usual hour and the court was ad-
iourpod to WadnaSdav morninp