New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-12-28
THE PROCEEDINGS.

which only half-fled the lecture room last night
seemed far smaller by contrast TwO-thrds OF those
present were ladies. Before the meeting, con-
sultaton was held between some of the church
officers in the church parlors. 1t was nearly
o'clock when Mr.. Bcccher came in, accompanied by
several leading members Of the church. Mr. Edger-
ton Immediately took the chair and the meeting
was opened with prayer. The clerk not
being present Mr. Beecher moved that they
wait for his arrival. The congregation were just
getting ready to sing hymn, when Mr.. Shearman
suddenly made his appearance and began to read the
minutes of the last meeting. The reports OF com
mttees next called for, and Mr. Sherman pre-
sented the report of the Examining Committee This
he said was accompanied by a document which he
would read first. He then in clear voice and with
careful enunciation read Mrs. Moulton's letter of
Dec. % as follows: , ,o-
DEAR STR: I have been very reluctant TO write any
further to the members OF plymouth Church az my last
letter WAS refused reading before them, the motion
OF Mr. Beecher after the clerk had told them publicly
that was in his hands and as much violent feeling was
very much and still WISH TO have the proposal contained
in the Enclosed memorandum considered ny the Church
the Committee, and to know If they VIII not agree
TO :.
for me- and TO INFORM me of their answer Yours very
M THOMAS J. TLSEY, clerk Of the Plymouth Church
MEMORANDUM
know very WELL and have known from the beginning,
that can only justify myself for my long and inten
tona absence from the services OF the church by show
ing fully the which moved me TO it. This there
fore proposed to do my first letter TO the church. in
which asked for council, chosen by both parties
before which the church should state the reasons for Its
action and should state the reasons for NINE ana when
should judge impartiay OF both ,.., 49,
The church appeared 10 agree to this proposal but At
the same meeting, without the slightest conference win
me- and with haste wcn Gns mist me as on a%na
presented tO such council. nave cOisdered THESE
questions ana as show Was ' sS ns tey n from
the church do not see how they could well have been
Yet this is the most important thing i'll my whole case
St did not object to these questions but asked tnat
wby had done AZ had and could Justify myself II
my reasons were found sufficient This request the
recommended that it he refused Tho church accord
ingly refused Il with good deal OF yeheinence ana
seem be allowed voice whatever in framing Inc
questions which 10 be submitted Tor my sell, ~ wen
know what my rights in such matter. but this
really seems to me Oppressive ana Wholly ohsSlaon
cannot even tell the Council what IL IL on winch "ant
sill desire however II possible TO state my ease and
to have the church state before such body
chosen by both parties large in number and
spectacle character that 1t will secure public conf
dence As then the questions arranged by the ehurch
are not satisfactory to me- giving me no opportunity o
the for my course, and as the Questions
proposed by not acceptable 10 the church, pro
pose the council he convened with no distinct ques
lions before il except these two which are botn con
tanned fret letter. TO which the church was under
stood Ia agree: ,.
action OF the cInrcn In dropping me
bership didare It's reasons Tor this valid and SUI
1cicntf -, ,.. ,
sacrament. OF the chnrch while did not wish TO with
draw from its inrmbership-wero NY reasons ior tAiS
Eher tho one or the other Of these questions might be
considered first by the council a. should deem best
Observation-Disclosures 10 be made by council either party
as It should fit. II the church willing, IA at st
such a council, SHALL BE- glad. Int is not suppose |
must other for that yndication OF my cell,
,frl iu ffl.p
think ought TO add that the latest attack made on
me in the letter OF the church. declaring tnat hsu Dos
"a Irregular and uncareful IN my cnurcn attendance
before Is II since is wholly without ioundalOh Ill
TO have been mere afierthOugt, as the previous
letter of the church made no menuon OF any suc Charge
But II the Committee think tncy have any poor OF it
shall lie perfectly ready w have 1t presented TO the
desire to add also that my that had long
ago declared to n leading member and officer OF the
church, that Mr. Beechers CRIME was adultery ana tat
both he and Tton bad confessed IL to mo- is strictly
t1Ie and has been confirmed than by the gen
tleulen TO whom referred EMMA Y. MotLioN'
As Mr. Shearman read the letter with strong en-
phasis on the more important parts, and OCCASION
ally with shade of irony in his voice, the hearers
listened ntenty. and incredulous smiles crept over
the lips Of the staunch friends of Mr. Beecber
When Mrs. Moulton's reassertion that Mr.. Beechcr
had confessed adultery 10 her read Mrs. Beecher
watched the reader with half cOntemptuous smile
Mr. Shearman Immediately read the following report
The Examining Committee hereby respectfully reports
That in pursuance Of the order Of the church at the last
session OF its annual meeting meolanduin made ny
c. Moulton. aud received by the clerk OF the
church at late hour on Christmas Day, mas Decn ila
before the Committee. In tins memorandum Mrs M0u
ton that the questions extracted by the church
from st letter Of Nov II are ulsaeiacloy 10 her
and asserts that they give her no ece Al All W snow
why she so long absent from the church. The
church. on its part, having declined To accept the onf
questions framed Mr Moulton III her later letter. she
proposes that all the questions heretofore sSseslcI
dc Withdrawn, aud that two questions only be submitted
10 the council which are IN substance:
First: Whether the OF the church for dropping
her sufficient and
Second whether her reasons Tor abandoning inc ser
vices OF the church were sufficient
The Committee from the first been nxious 10 Sc
cure tic call mutual council upon Mrs. Molptons
case For purpose the church adopted NIL The issues
which could possibly extracted from Mrs Monllon's
first letter and iair-mndrd person OF ordinary lnte
gcnce and accustomed Ia Judge ~ the meaning OF IAN
guage fail 10 that the SIX Questions when te
church agr.ed submit 10 the mutual council covered
Mrs Moulton has now selected for sub
acceptance of those questions, did 50 win full knowl
edge that they did and with deliberate intention ihat
they should put 1t In the power o the mutual council
when called to open broad field OF investigation I'D
When Mrs. nonton sought to add to these questions
four this committee was extremely desirous OF
% np VS. essed hy the earnest attempt TO recon-
Gle the acceptance Of Mrs Moutons questions wltn the
dignity and erespeot Of the church. The Committee
finally advised against the acceptance OF these questions
not because they broadened the Issue but because they
tended TO narrow IT, and to limit the council by the us
sumption Of certain statements facts which the Com
mttee and the church agree in believing were not facts
The church has suggested any questions OF Its
own deyising. Ii has simply attempted to put into
proper form issues presented by Mrs Monon In her
avn alter. The present NIs. MoultOn In with
all heretofore suggested by her, and
III proposing questions which free from the OBJ
lection of assuming the In her former
proposal offers opportunity to secure mutual coun
ell OF which TINS eoinnl,,s gI s'"i, esht I on
jectionabe In form, II not In substance, yet
The commjttee unanimously recommend that these
objections should bc overlooked, and that. for tho