The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1875-06-03
BEECHER TRIAL.

NEW York, June 1.-The attraction oi
the Masonic procession materially re-
duced the attendance to-day at the TiIton'
Bcecher trial.
Mr., Eyarts continued his address and
said they would consider the probable at
liudc, tone and reception Of the accusa'
ton which marked the first interview be-
tween the husband and the adultcrcr
Was adultery to he treated like u cut
finger or bruised brow? When the in
iured husband met the dcliler Of his mar
riagc bed and the shame Of his children,
the jury might imagine, ii there was at
the bottom the opinion on the part oil the
aCcuser and consciousness on the part OF
the accused, they would have an inter
view Tor which no previous knowledge
beforehand could have warned them.
Counsel would show that the plaintiff :
story oi that interview was Il self
exposed and self.Convicted invention.
This plaintiff understood perfectly that
the wiic's confession could not be made
the subject OF u ease against Beecher.
The counsel would show that the plaintiff
had covered his story with such inconsis'
tcnCics rs to make il appear incrcdlb bic.
lie knew the law would not permit Il
statement OF what occurred between him.
sell and wife, and he wOvC ii in nara.
tive which he should tell the jury he had
related to Becchcr. lie said he would
giId this story so that it would be believed,
and he was, rs has been shown, the victim
Of his own shadowy philosophy. The
Jury had been shown how Bowen saw the
folly Of his attack on licGCher.
Mr.. Evarts quoted from the testimony
OF MouIton rs to his calling on lIcecher
and telling him 'TlltOn wished to see him.
This friend wanted to pr0pitiatc Bccchcr
in advance toward 'rillOn. Mouton
weighed his words aud chose his topics
for this object. lIccchcr said when Bowen
brought the letter to him he pledged his
friends to him (lIecCherl. TiltOn finds
that Bowen had been using that interview
with Iiecchcr for his own purpose, and
Ilcecher found that lIOwen's stories had
acted on Tltons mind and had driven his
mind astray. Moulton had told Bccchcr
he would show him how u heather would
act in such n ease, and proilercd him n
hcathcn's friendship. In the old days OF
the apostles the heather delighted in tor.
turing and burning Christians, and yet
Moulton said to lIccchcr he would lot
him see what Il heather would do il sim.
ilarly circumstNnCcd,
Then came the interview between the
husband and the alleged paramOur. How
would all the passions and anger and griel
Of the injured man pour forth in flood at
such an interview. Yet Tillon's nara
tive was entirely inconsistent with such
situation. lie began, he said, by telling
IIeechcr that he wished him to blot 0ut
his memory Of the letter he had written
to him, and that he wished to ascertain
how Bcccher fGt towards him. Evart'
considered the testimony Of Tilton in re-
gard to this interview in detail, Nrguiug
that the whole conversation was abslirdll
inconsistent with the charge Of adultery
under such circumstances. A consider
able part OF the interview was taken "
in talking, not about BcCcccrs relations
with Mrs Tilton, but about the Nccusa
tions made against him by Bowen. II,
said that Bowen inspired the letter Of the
2Gth and that Bowen wished to desrOS
the editor OF the Christian Union, and tha
Bowen said that IceChcr was n wolf it
sleeps clothing. Bowen said that HI
could not initiate the proceedings he
cause nt the settlement Of their dill
cultics he had forgiven lIccchcr. NOv
these crimes, according to Bowen, lal
been gong on for q years, and where OF
earth did Bowen get the power to forgive
them. Tit0n spoke then about EliMbGtl
aud her spouse, lIccchcr, and asked wha
he meant. Triton went on to declare
that his wife had made the charge agains
lIccchCr.
Mr.. Evarts then discussed the ALLEGED
written confession Of Mrs. 'TltOn, the or
iginal of which was destroyed by MOultOl
after the tripNrtite agreement while tn
copy used by TiltOn on December sol
was destroyed in the same interview. H.
called attention to the fact that on th
question Of law ii was maintained by tn
plaintiffs counsel, Beach and Fullerton
that this copy was pttrpOscly dcstroyCO
byTiltOn with lIccchcr's consent, yet III
very next time the plaintiff went npO
the stand he threw the counsel over III
board and said the paper was accident
destroyed by his twisting II on hs finger
during the heat Of the conversation.
The counsel then urged the jury to re
member the fact that riltOn told lIccche
his wife had said certain things whic
: was no proof that she did say them. n
evidence OF what she did say could bc in
troduccd in any other way, and Tiltor
while he could he CrOss.Cxamined as I
whether he told lIcCchcr all this rigmu
role could not bC CcrOss.cxnmincd as To hi
conversations with his wife.
Mr.. Ev0rts read the testimony Of Tito
as to his wtles statement to him in lS7C
and commented upon the alleged confc'
sion as contrary to all nature, and IN al
probability 'l'iltOn could invent spcCChC
: for himself, but he could not invent thcl
for this woman. Those alleged coniC.
siOns bctray no consciousness Of sin o
guilt on the part Of the woman who's
eyes flashed fire when they looked upO
Victoria W0mlhull. ~ Improbable wa
all this alleged conversation that il wa
not to he regarded for moment when
witness like lICCchcr declared that moth
ing like il was ever brought to his ear
After calm and deliberate introduction
according tO 'riltOn, lis wife told hit
that the secret she had referred tn wa