New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-06-23
MIR. BEECHER'S TESTIMONY.

MR.. BEECHER'S TESTIMONY.
Mr.. Beecher remains with his evidence to be
examined and cannot pass it lightly IL was mat
ter Of deep and speculation when 1t was obvious
that this to bo tried What would be the atti
tude assumed by Bccchcr What explanation would
he give to extraordinary productions OF hist How
would lie reconcile his letters consistently with his limo
cence To rejecting and especially to legal minds there
was but conclusion 1t was necessity forced upon
Mr. Beecher the instant that this issue pressed to an
investigation IL the necessity Of denial No matter
what might be tho proof against hnno matter now hard
and heavily the circumstances might encompass him until
he seemed like Byrons Scorpion gir with fire, yet there
was no alternative for him but denial u brave and
denial fortified by his character and the supports
OF his church and congrega Is 1t naked case of
perjuryf Can IL DO possible that Henry Ward Bcccher
only denies the 0ense imputed to him. but IN court
OF Justice, and before the world, ssans that denial
with false oath Now, gentlemen, that IS tho hor-
that ia pressing upon some OF your minds
the difficulty OF believing that such a man with
such character, with such noble qualities no
matter how pushed, no matter what may be the
catastrophe before him. that such man can outrage his
own consciousness the law OF his God and or MS follow
by committing perjury. That no has done IT, IN
FORM seeming, is just certain as the force OF human
evidence The issue cannot be avoided The proof on
the part of this plantif-hree witnesses must be con-
vcted of deliberate perjury not OF simple denial but OF
nyenting and accusation against pure man. and sup
porting it by false oath, else Mr. Beecher by some
means quoted his conscience consistently with the denial
upon the form of an oath in this court
propose gentlemen TO suggest to you. IL can, some
theory upon which Mr. eecher has reached that deter
minaon, because find, very much to my own surprise,
i'm looking at teachings of philosophers and writer's OF
the highest repute, of all denominations. Protestant and
Catholic that there singular principle, or doctrine or
casustry prevailing among these gentlemen, that 1t Is
taught avowcd that under certain circumstances 1t
Ia onIv the nrv
that the commandment does not apply to any msstate-
mcn or fasehood except that which operates to the in
Jury OF Others and that every fasehoOd mnocuOus in its
and tending to the preservation and to the aiyan
tage Of others is sinful was led to this line Of In
qury by letter received from gentleman obviously OF
culture and intelligence it being however without sigma
turc in which he says to me;
All admit that the code OF honor held by Of the
world imperatiyely demands that II gentleman has
committed adultery or fornication with lady, he Is
bound to protect her character by perjury II necessary
The colonel OF an Austrian regiment had carried on an
mared an officer in the colone regiment After the
marriage the husband first learned what had been
asked him If the story was true The colonel denied
his word Of honor az an officer and gentleman Having
and told them what he had done. They unani-
mously justified his action Among no class
than among the officers OF the Austrian service SO much
for the sentiment OF honor among men OF the world
What the Christian code under similar circumstances
To this question we must consult the casusts
The question not so simple as may seem at first Tho
casuists hold that the essence OF lie Is malice when
malice Is absent deviation from the strct truth Is not
duty: Here comes in the doctrine Of probabilities st.
Alphonsus IIguOri teaches that woman VINO mas com
saye ber reputation that Of her family and the peace
OF mind Of her husband, Is justified In denying her quit
nay that is her duty to deny It, St. Aphonsus Liquor
il In had repute as mOrast among Professionals but IL
held in the highest esteem among Roman Catholics, anu
his works used as q textbook In their Summaries
And then he proceeds consider the Protestant writer's
profea nd
will read an extract from the references which
he makes This the book In hand you will remember is
work issued in his defense by Father Newman, who
was once member Of the Church OF England but con-
nectcd himself with tho Catholic Church some 20 odd
years ago aud very bitterly assaed considerable
public controversy growing out OF his detection from the
Church of England and among other things, Mr.. Kings
lev accused him Of lying which led Dr. Newman to ex-
anime the teachings OF writers upon the subject After
referring to the Catholic teachers he says
Now TO come to Anglican authorities. Taylor.
whether it in any case be lawful to tell lie To
this answer that the Holy Scriptures OF tho Old and
referring to Proverbs and Psalms. Beyond these
things nothing can be said In condemnation OF lying;
or written the hurt OF neghbor which cannot be
understood otherwise than to differ from the mind OF MIN
o sa b Psams to say one thing OF or from to s
1t by GESTURE, and to think another thing SO Maanthon
In this sense lie is naturally or ntrnscay evil-that
Is to speak lie to neghbor is naturally evil not be-
jury neighbor. IL lie be UNJUST 1t can never be-
come lawful But II 1t can be separate from injustice,
then IL may be innocent"
And he further quotes from Taylor:
Thus, he says, Milton says, yeracty IL virtue by
which speak true things TO him To whom II IL eqpa-
be and concerning what things 1t Is suitable for the good
of our neighbor All discrimination Is not wrong for 1t
not necessary for always openly to bring out the truth
That only is blamed which is malicious. do not why
that cannot be said OF lying which may be sad Of homi-
eide and other matters which not weighed much by
the deed by the object and end OF acting" And he
considers Paley who says There are fasehoods which
not lies; that U.s. which not criminal when
is 10 be deceived, dc"
And Dr. johnson is also cited sustaining the
philosophy the doctrine OF casustry that there
circumstances and difficulties where It Ia admissible for
lie and not only admissible but whore
his imperative duty to do It. He refers also to Bishop
Butler sustaining the same doctrine:
There Is another authority: PERJURY, for good
Is, with advanced thinkers, sin" tits very
emphatic sentment very clear In its declaration.
That written November 5, 1872, by Thomas X.
Beecher the brother OF the defendant.
Mr. Shearm Ind with reference 10 TiltOn