Rutland weekly herald. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1859-1877, 1875-06-08

The telegraph on Friday noon brought
us the news that the jury in the Beecher
case have failed to agree, aud have been
discharged. 1t is announced that Mr.. Til
ton will pursue the case no further, and
therefore, as we said yesterday, the re :
Mr. Beecher II is SO in the legal sense,
and will, we think, in the end be so ac-
cepted by the public. This is what diss-
greement usually amounts to in the pub
lie estimation. 1t shows, at least, that
there was not sufficient evidence TO con-
vict, aud failure to convict is equiya-
lent to saying iherewas really no case for
the plaintiff We believe when the peo-
pie who have followed this trial most
carefully have reflected longer upon it,
they will generally hnd that the theory
of Beecher's innocence harmonizes
best with the various complications of
the case 1t Is very curious to see how
people have been divided in reference to
this subject. With many honorable ex-
ceptions those who sympathized with
Mr. Tilton politically in the last presi-
dental campaign, have sympathized
with him in this trial There are many
exceptions on the other side also, more,
perhaps, than on this But generally
speaking the supporters of Mr.. Tilton
were those who voted with him three
years ago. Again as far as we have known
the women generally have believed in Mr..
Beecher This may be accounted for
by their natural sympathy for one of
their own sex who has been the greatest
sufferer in this long agony. Then, too,
there has been, as it has seemed to us,
judging from the expressions'ef opinion
on either side, disclosure ofbelief or dis
belief of the Woodruff tenet, that man
and woman could not be associated as
Mr. Beeeber and Mrs 1iltan. .s's-e .liiha''t
such things happening as were charged /
against them. This is an abominable
doctrine which we repudiate most
thoroughly, and we do not intend to i'm
pute the holding of it to others. But
we commend 1t as question deserving
a moments thought to those who be-
lieve that Mr.. Beecher is guilty, wheth-
er they are not more or less secretly in
fiuenced by this tenet whether this
does not make it so hard for them to ac-
cept the other explanation OF Mr..
Beecher's letters upon which their con-
yiction of bis guilt rests. We do not
mean that belief in DIR. Beecher's in
nocence is evidence of itself of purity,
nor on the other hand that belief OF
his guilt is evidence of impurity. There
may be a latent and unconscious adop-
tion of the Woodruff tenet, without any
faint of impurity. We can only say
further with reference to this point that
q moments consideration of it may oper-
ate as a salutary check upon the ten
dency which may exist in the minds OF
those persons who would spurn the ina
putation of it, if openly made, with
righteous indignation. The report an
nounces that the jury stand nine to
three in favor of acquittal. The tele-
graph to which we referred in an edi-
torial yesterday, and which by some
mistake failed to appear in the telegraph
column, represented the jury as stand
ing eleven to one in favor of Mr.. Beech
er. The proportion of nine to three
more fairly represents, we are apt to
think. the intelligent public sentiment