New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1888-05-23

for several years after this quarrel the responspe
editor of The Independent" Mr. Bowens motives
in secretly traducipg the man whose genius was
making that journal highly profitable TO him are
inexplcablc. stronger case is presented wnen
Mr. Beecher's conduct in ceasing to be contrib
utor to The independent and in starting The
Christian Union is related. With Mr.. Tilton's
challenge to Mr. Bccchcr to resign his pastorate
and to leave Brooklyn Mr.. Bowen is dismissed
from the ranks of the conspirators. lie had APP
parently obtained important evidence against
the man who was running the prospects Of his
journal, and yet Immediately discredited it, since
soon after delivering the letter to Mr.. Beecher,
he discharged Mr.. Tilton from the two journals
then under his control. Instead Of using the
weapon against Mr.. Beecher, he converted it into
a boomerang against Mr.. Tilton, whose conduct
had proved embarrassing to his business interests
With the conspiracy proper from this time OUT
it is stated, Mr.. Bowen seems to have had
nothing to do" When another chapter OF the
scandal was suppressed by the signing OF the
tripartite agreement and the settlement OF Mr.
Tiltons arrears of pay, Mr. Bowen again took
Mr.. Beecher's side. Indeed, so slender case is
made out in this volume against Mr.. Bowen as
a conspirator that one is at loss to understand
why the dry-goods transaction is mentioned at
all or why SO lavish use is made of innuendo
against him and of acrd structures upon his con-
duct.
The arch-conspirators are represented to have
been Mr. Tilton and Mr. MoutoD, with DR.. Storrs
as credulous dupe and Mrs. Moulton as re-
sponsive echo. MIR. Bowen was prompter IN the
first scene and then disappeared from the stage
The remaining figures remained in sight and IN
trigued against Mr.. Beecher. Mr.. Tilton is de-
scribed as the victim Of uncomfortable egotism
oi+v In
prosperity he had looked down upon his old friend
adviser and patron. In his adversely he leagued
with the Mutual Friend in desperate effort to
retrieve his fortunes by running Mr. Beechers repu
tation. Precisely how Mr.. Tfton was to profit
by the great preachers degradation, the bographers
neglect to state unless their reference to the imam
cial contribution to " Tho Golden Age which
Mr.. Beecher made of his own motlon, De
regarded as an adequate explanation. Nor DO they
make any attempt to account for Mr.. M0ultoh
participation in the plot, for the support whcn
he received from Mrs. Moulton. This has always
been one of the most difficult questions Tor MT.
Beechcr's defenders to answer: Why should uhe
Moultons, who enjoyed Mr.. Beechers intimate
friendship have turned against him in MS hour
Of direst need? The present advocates oher no
new proof of their charges against these two con-
spirators-man and wife-and have nothing more
Ineligible to say respecting Mr.. Tiltons strange
partnership with Mr.. Moulton than this feeble
passage: s. At the first it is highly improbable
that either had any very definite plan Of opera
tons against Mr.. Beecher and certainly not the
fantest idea of the desperate step they would
finally be driven to by the logic OF Their own
fasehoods Little by little, deeper and deeper,
they worked themselves intoFthe mud and mire,
until MS a last desperate venture they were COM
flo fro r1un in
forcing through to a solid footing" Equally in
conclusive are the comments on the motives which
induced the two conspirators to raise the original
charge preferred against Mr. Beecher: Indeed,
he (Tilton) and Moulton were cOrnered, and must
resort to some desperate measures, or surrender
themselves to everlasting infamy. Had they been
left to themselves, it is perhaps doubtful if they
would have attempted so desperate remedy, even
in self-defence; but there were those, not few,
who egged them on, contributing to the expense
of the suit glad to keep up the attack on Mr..
Beecher, provided only their names were not
brought out" The biographers should either have
named these allies and instigators or have kept
silent altogether.
No attempt is made in these chapters to deal
with the chief witness against Mr.. Beecher, be-
yond quoting his first formal statement and his
speeches before the councils at Plymouth Church.
his Witness, IL is needless 10 explain, WAS MI
Beecher himself whose letters staggered the faith
Of many Of his closest friends and constituted the
most formidable body of evidence against him.
Many Of these letters, and among them those that
were most damaging to his case, are suppressed,
and no new light is thrown upon the darkest side
of the old argument against him. Furthermore.
an incautious use is made of alleged declarations
by Mr. TltOns chief counsel after the trial to the
effect that he had been convinced Of Mr.. Beech
er's innocence, and had felt that they had been
a pack of hounds trying to pull down a noble
stag and also of information from one Of the
jurors to the effect that several times they had
stood eleven to in his favor, and that all
had agreed on a verdict for him, when one of them
unfortunately remarked that his son had wagcred
a large sum on that reSult-an assertion that pre-
vented unanimous vote for acquittal Gossip
of this sort should have been excluded from these
chapters this controversial subject; and equally
out of place arc the insinuations respecting the
motives Of DR.. Storrs and DIR. Burlington in dis
trusting Mr. Beecher. The hypothesis that DR..
Storrs took the stand he did from pique injured
feeling in receiving no reply from his old friend,
to whom he had offered aid and sympathy, is
clearly untenable Equally fatuous is the pro-
fession of unwilingness to believe the commonly
accepted theory of jealousy and clearly insult
ing to the intelligence of the reader is the state
ment that while DR.. Storrs gave his ear to tale
bearers, listening to all that was brought to him
by Mr. Beecher's enemies he himself refused to
take counsel with his defenders. The only eX-
PLANTATION that be offered for Dr. Storrss
is his presumption Of guilt on Mr. Beechers part.
While his judgment may have been improperly
influenced by the statements made to him by Mr..
Tilton and the Moultons, he undoubtedly acted
from high motives and with honesty of purpose ;
and the silence with which his former friend had
received his offers Of counsel and aid presumably
had strengthened his opinion of the case. The
references to him in this volume are in the worst
possible TASTE and will be deprecated by Mr. |
Beecher's wisest and most loyal supporters and
friends
These criticisms are not written in a caviing
spirit for the purpose Of exciting scepticism |
In infn ifu Of cLor re-