, 1875-06-22

Rzed by Dsschor In his ,et.ers; and tho ques-
ton Ia. Was nhn to bo belisyad7 This WurDan
bud beeu charged bv Porter, In his dofonso, an 4

R!zed by Descher In his ,et.ers; and tho ques-
ton 10. Was shn to bo beliesad7 This wurnan
hAd beeu charged by Porter in Ills dufcnse, hH 4
conspirAsreEs, md with conaorting with proetl.
sutea, making l'cr houao rondozvous aud esloH.
eunnRh 10 include Triton and htonlton in thin
category, but tlioy would not stop nntl they hhl
included the mother also. His friend Porter
charged that AfEh. Moutton WAS perjurer, and
not. 10 DO be'icved. aud haa sho other hide mol
endosvored to ahor, by Witnesses, that Mrs.
Moultou Mas not 10 he cred!te,1?
yEAY SERIOUS CHARGE
Wae brought In thu oulset axainht Mrs, Moulton,
and Iatsod BY air. shesstn.n. that whon on tho
atabd rho did not oncn 1ouk In tito faco Of Ev-
arts aiM Evarte hEmeef said her ganccs
waro fartlye; .bu. sue had not. that
st .@noa. oi dramatic ss"ro. eest ossesas4 In
tho hearts. Of Plymouth Church and their aa'
liant ue',srs. Porhara Mrs. Mo,ilton aaw noth-
Ing very attractive in tho face OF Ey.rts to look
a. Laughter, which vas rotuaed by Judge
1ir. Beach thon ctcd passagou from ths ,cttcsa
Of Deccher In which ho spoto In tho highest
tcrna Of hfs counsel and quolod from Mrs.
Mnuiton's Testimony In respect 10 tue advico
which Hlle gRvo Deochor when lie came to hof
and confcBsed lita hn. Slle
FAVORED CONFESSION
not In sccrot, Dut IN public aud 10 his church.
This advice Appealed to the Judgment Of
1tStH9F III uld EUblIE lDUHCnkns In ~ AHuHu D9
aomo Of hls lettcrs. slr. Beach quoted further
from Mrs. Moulson's testimony with regard to
Deccher'n opinion Of hor when 10 eaid sfo al
ways Heen,cl to him like Hcction Of tho Day
Of JnaSmo1nt' .nl;, =, when sho eontenlod :hat
confession made 10 la church. Tlia WAS
tie only way, said counsel. Of obtaining forgive
neaR fos h!s an and A reconciliation. AID this is
what Any Christian Hotnan would hayo Rat1
YOU arc combating will! tho world. Mr.. Doecl,-
CT. you arc giyng cal.Ho Of otfenso nnd scandal
izing your pulpit. Your only crcape yolr oniy
way 10 redeem yourself from this trouble. In to
confeas yonr siu. plead forgiveness Of yo,lr uod,
aud your sincerity s1!t be beloved" THIS was
THE ONLY METHOD
by which fair settlement was to DO obtained.
1t hhd boon argued in this case that it vas very
Improbable that Ucechor, an aJulterer. elould
AdviAe separation between aIrA. 'riIton aud her
to the night OF tue 30th Of December, 1870,
l'eechcr was not aware that lfrH Tiltun tlal con-
fessod 70 her husband III tho previous july, aud
4 was therefore In ignorance Of this disclosure.
vico? Dir. Beach then quoted from tho testi-
mony Of Mrs. Moultun iu regard to
I'll alleged conversation with Mrs. Triton, In
which she salt that Decchcr WAS good man, and
aud truth to aaro Deocller and that aha thought
that uadet tho circumstances sho Nonlu bo
JUSTIFIED IN TELLING 4 LIE;
but said tho bpenkor. this had beHn denied by
OSGEACf ~ Ill GHtl[b IRQIlChtiGn. A4TH. 1l0u3lCn
epcakn this without any heaitatlon, aud with =
consciousness Of tile truth Of tho story which
should 1mpress tho jury. Did Mrs, 3foulton
coin tho oppression, " 4 section OF tho Dny of
Judgment r. And who doubted but that ii was
an utterance OF Mr. Bcccler. entirely consistent
with ha modoa OF exprcsslon aud thought, and
was lot the production Of this lady?
THE ALLEGED ALIDI.
Tho whole crcdi1,ility of the etatcmont Of th|a
Judy waa placed on the date At which this
interview WRH GxHf] liz bcr- and Hnnchpr
shys he una not at her houao on that day.
Counsel quoted from tho opinion OF Chicf-Juh-
tice SllaW, III tho Webster case, rs to tho prov
ing OF an alibt, and also from MI article III one
counsel pronounced to bo round aud Hagncioua
Boechnr Bwcara. said oonnnct, that on tho morn
Ing OF the I'd Of Jnno, botwecu Q aud 10 o'clock,
llo WAS in consultation with K,nsel!A NJ to the
form Of tho card which wAH published that day;
hut tho drawing up OF q card nf tiftern or twonty
lluca would not occupy yory much time on tho
part Of two such learned minds. Then 1lr.
Daccher snys that l,o csossed over to tho Chris
was was BoccLor between thiB iDtorvlow md Lis
leaving for tho Office Of tho Christian Union In
Nov fork : An interview Of two hours, under
such circumstances ~ had occurred. might
lad lastod three Or four hours. Where waa Mr.
Beochet between nud IL o'clock or IL Ono
llour he HAYS. MIA Buont III conversation with
Kinaolla. Mrs. MoElton RayH that she WAS In her
HGud0 uQQCr ElfGQQlbLAHCQA WHICH 6uO Q9tH4l&,
KinsellA MAS in this city. tho odisor Of b paper.
lio was 4 rellnb!o witness, md was accoaalble.
but
wAa NOT PRODUCED
a. witness to sustain tlo alIbl, and the Jury
would remember that tho presumption Ut tho
and Mt. Eysrta, inHtoad ut producing kilssa,
1oad ali editorial article from tho Eagle In sup-
port Of hiH proposition. and triol to hllnd tic
jury by this cloak. which ho throw over their
T.. H.. 3.,u
to this waa conclusive. llo Bav Deecher, on
that day, coming from Columbia Heights. aud
going towArds No. ~ Itemnon etFeet, shortly be-
foro o'clock. Counsel Citod the evidence given
by Mr. James III rogaTsl to this matter; after
which tho Court took the uBunl reccsa.
After tho receHs, 13cach continued lila argu-
nent In support Of tue proposition that the de-
tense had failed to prove Ru alibt aud Baid Mrs.
Moustona story was true. and he was not guilty
Of prosumption, in saving that avery houeDt
juror tolt IT In h!s hoars to 10 true. llo did not
inral, by this tho juror who had said that Mr.
Doocher was
TOO CHEAT HAN TO FALL.
who shut his heart and cars to the evidence, nnd+
looking only to tile grandeur Of kl1; Doccl,er's
character, believed that hs w&s upnoldinE ChsiH-
tianisy In the pulpit aud tho somple ho had
detilod.
be branded BY tic verdict Of this jury in order
to sayo Any man or any Church frotn thu conse-
quonces Of tho truth. FATHER. 10 said, lot every
stone Ut plymouth Church DO razed, than permit
Indy, supported ~ this Indy waH, to BIS diss,osl
orcd by All unjust verdict, tho effect Of which.
would kiAo disgrace ller child. lilo know tho in-
Guoncos to whiol, Soma of this Jury woro ex-
posed. but thoy should not DO permitted TO weigh
for moment against tho considerations Which
ho jlal urged.
The COUNSEL thon said that tho fact that Til
ton had condoned his wlfo's fault bad been
lnado tho to1t Of soyero repruhatfon by tho
other so who argued fron, tl.ts that tho charge
of seduction waa untrae. hut # Tlton believed
that his wlfo waa gu.s1oss ~ npirit mud bad been
deceived by l,eechers *opAtstiy 10 10 to bsliove
That she had only dono her duty, 1t Waa ~ much
her husbands duty to forgive her - II sho lad
boen forced BY bodily violence. But III any oYens.
tl1. Beach said,
WHAT WAS cHRIsrIAN'e DuTT
towards guilty wife who had repeuted aud con.
feBsed In yiow OF tue example aet by our Savior
In tho case Of Mary alaydaiens Whatever might
bo tho tirs. ropulays emotions Of the husband 1t
WAS not in tho nature Of manhood to finally re-
1ccs tile w.fes appeal for Aersaf aud fof hoF
| children. 10 condone tAero must itrss TO sln.
| Condonasiou meant forgIyeneHH Of guilt. When
sir. lsupcl,et Ha!d that bIr. T1tton had coudoued