THE BEECH ER-TILTON SCANDAL.

Evening Star, Issue 3612, 19 September 1874, Page 2

THE BEECH ER-TILTON SCANDAL.

The charges made by Mr Tilton against the Rev. Henry Ward Beecher are exciting great interest in America, and the matter has been placed in the hands of a committee for investigation. The following letter from Mr Beecher is from the ‘ Alta California ’ of 25th July

Kev. Henry Ward Beeclier returned to Brooklyn last night from Peekshill, when he saw for the first time the statement presented to the Investigation Committee by Tilton. He has promptly met the charges in the following card:— I de not propose at this time a detailed examination of the remarkable statement of Mr Theodore Tilton, made befoie the Committee of Investigation and which appears in the ‘Brooklyn Argus ’ of July 21, 1874. I recognise the many reasons which make it of transcendent importance to myself, the church, and the cause of public morality, that I shall give a full answer to the charges against me, but having requested the Committee of Investigation to search this matter to the bottom, it is. to them that I must look to for my vindication. But I cannot delay for an hour to defend the reputation of Mrs Elizabeth R. Tilton, upon whose name in connection with mine, her husband has attempted to pour shame. One less deserving of such disgrace I never knew. From childhood she has been under my eye, and since reaching womanhood she has had my sincere admiration and affection. I cherish for er a pure feeling, such as a gentleman might honorably offer to a Christian woman, and which she might receive and reciprocate without her morals being corrupted. I reject with indignation every imputation which reflects

upon her honor or my own. My regard for Mrs Tilton was perfectly well known to my family. When the serious difficulty sprang up in her household it was to my wife that she resorted for counsel, and both of us acting from sympathy, and, as it subsequently appeared, without full knowledge, gave unadvised counsel, which tended to harm. I have no doubt that Mr Tilton found that his wife s confidence and reliance upon my judgment had greatly increased, while his influence had diminished, in consequence of a marked change in his religious and social views which were taking place during those years. Her mind was greatly exercised lest her children should be harmed by the views which she deemed vitally false and dangerous. I was suddenly and rudely aroused to the reality of the impending danger by the disclosure of domestic stress of sickness, perhaps unto death, and likelihood of separation and scattering of a’family, every member of which 1 had tenderly loved. The effect u P° n me °f the discovery of the state of Mr Tilton’s feelings and condition of his family surpassed in sorrow and excitement anything that I had ever experienced in my life. That my presence, influence, and counsel had brought to a beloved family sorrow and alienation, gave in my then state of mind a poignancy to my suffering which X hope no other man may ever feel. Even to be suspected of having offered, under privileges of a peculiarly sacred relation, an indecorum to a wife and mother, could not but deeply wound anyone who is sensitive to the honor of womanhood. There are peculiar reasons for alarm in this case on other grounds, inasmuch as I was then subject to certain malignant rumors, and a flagrant outbreak in this family would bring upon them an added injury derom these shameless falsehoods. Believing, at the time, that my presence and counsels had tended, however unconsciously, to produce a social catastrophe represented as imminent, I gave expression to my feelings in an interview with a mutual friend, not in cold and cautions self-defending words, but eagerly taking the blame upon myself, and pouring out ray very heart to my friend in the strongest language. Overburdened with exaggerations of impassioned sorrow, had I been the evil man Mr Tilton represents me, I should have been calmer and more prudent. It was .my borrow of the evil imputed that filled me with morbid intensity at the very shadow of it. Not only was my friend affected, but he assured me that such expressions, if conveyed to Mr Tilton, would soothe his wounded feelings, allay anger, and allay the whole trouble. He took down sentences and fragments of what I had been saying, to use them as a mediator. A full statement of the circumstances under which this memorandum was made, I shall give to the Investigating Committee. That these apologies were more than ample to meet the facts of the case is evident, in that they were accepted ; that intercourse resumed its friendliness; that Mr Tilton subsequently ratified it in writing, and that he has continued for four years, and until within two weeks, to live with his wife. Is it conceivable, if the original charge had been what it is now alleged, that he would have condoned the offence, not only with the mother of his children, but with him whom he believed to have wronged him ? The absurdity as well as the falsity of the story is apparent, when it is considered that Mr Tilton now alleges that he carried his guilty secret of his wife’s infidelity for six months locked up in his own breast, and that he then divulged it to me onh that there might be a reconciliation with me. Mr Tilton has since, in every form of language, and to a multitude of witnesses, orally and in written statements, and in printed documents, declared his faith in his wife’s purity. After the reconciliation of Mr Tilton with me, every consideration of propriety and honor demanded that the family trouble should be kept in that seclusion which domestic affairs have a right to claim as a sanctuary, and to that seclusion it was determined that it should be confined. Every line and word of my private and confidential letters which have been published are in harmony with the statement which I now make. My public correspondence on this subject comprises but two elements of the expression of my grief, and that of my desire to shield the honor of a pure and innocent woman. Ido not propose to analyse and contest at this time the extraordinary paper of Mr Tilton, but there are two allegations which I cannot permit to pass without special notice. They refer to only two incidents, which Mr Tilton pretends to have witnessed personally. One an alleged scene in my house while looking over engravings, and the other a chamber scene in his own house. His statements concerning these are absolutely false. Nothing of the kind ever occurred, or any semblance of any such thing. They are now brought to my notice for the first time. To every statement whieh connects me dishonorably with Mrs Elizabeth K. 'I ilton, or whieh in anywise would impugn the honor and purity of this beloved Christian woman, I give the most explicit, comprehensive, and solemn denial. Signed, Henry W ard Beecher. Brooklyn, July 22, 1874.’’

MR O’RORKE’S RETIREMENT FROM THE MINISTRY. We make the followirg extract from Sir J. 0. Wilson’s speech to the Heathcote electors :

As soon as Mr Vogel sat down after the speech with which he introduced these resolutions, Mr O’Rorke who was supposed to be Minister of Justice it is very incomprehensible to me how he ever became a Minister at all; I have in vain tried to find, either from his antecedents or anything connected with him, how he was ever put on the Ministerial bench ; the only conclusion I can come to is that he was a member of the Auckland Province, and they did not know who to put in, and they said, “ Oh, let O’Rorke get it.”— (Laughter,) It is no fiction of my own, it is a fact that if the Ministerial seats are not fairly divided among the Provinces there is sure to be a row, and I piesume that Mr O’Rorke was put in as a sort of buffer or make weight for the Auckland Province. Well, he got up, and made a speech, which is reported in the same volume of ‘ Hansard ’ to which I have referred, and of all the extraordinary proceedings that ever took place in a deliberative Assembly, I think the exhibition that was made by Mr O’Rorke was the most extraordinary. Perhaps, after all I am wrong. If you remember the debate in the House of Lords on the Corn Laws, you will call to mind that Lord Brougham, after making a great speech in favor of the abolition ot the Corn Laws, went down on his knees and entreated his brother lords to pass the Bill, in the most fervent terms ever uttered in a deliberative Assembly. I may be. wrong, therefore, in saying that Mr O’Rorke’s speech was the most extraordinary that was ever uttered ; it certainly was the most extraordinary that I had ever witnessed, although not, perhaps, that I had read of. That a man, after being in conference with his colleagues, and not having declared* “I must resign if you insist on introducing these resolutions,” by having merely said, “ Vogel, you cannot expect me to acquiesce in these resolutions of yours,”—that a man who only says this in the Ministerial conference, and waits until the resolutions have been introduced, and then, from his seat as a Minister, turns round and says that he will no longer stand this, and that if he did so, he should deem himself a traitor to his constituents. [Mr Nairn : “ Hear, hear.”] Yes ; 1 will say to my friend who applauds, but he little thought of the treachery he was at that moment exhibiting—that ho was a traitor to his chief. (Loud cheers.) He was personally a traitor to his chief at the very same time that he was parading to the world his innocence of treachery to his constituents. The man who would betray his chief in that way is not to be trusted by any constituency in the world. (Cheers.) Why should he not do that to the constituency, when he does it to the chief under whom he has served for months, and perhaps years? He should have said, “ I must resign ; here is my resignation ; I leave your Ministry; fill up my place.” I could understand that, but I cannot understand a man waiting until the very last moment, and when the resolutions had been introduced, getting up in his place and making a theatrical display of the absence of treachery to his constituents, and the presence of treachery to his chief. (Applause ) It was a funny little scene, and I am going to give you some of it. An envelope was brought in by a messenger and given to Mr 0 Rorke—my informant was a member of the Legislative Council who was sitting in the gallery immediately over the Ministerial benches. This envelope came while Mr Vogel was speaking with reference to the resolution; it was opened, and the enclosure taken out, and from it that speech was read by Mr O’Rorke. Who wrote that speech and enclosed it I cannot tell, but those are the facts connected with the case. I daresay I may hear something of this from Auckland; I hope I shall. I don’t know what course I should have adopted if I had been in Mr O’Rorke’s place, under similar circumstances. Thank God, I have never been treacherous, and I can’t imagine that part of the business, but, at anyrate I would rest on my own bottom.— (Cheers.) After this he took up his hat, walked down the Chamber, and took his seat on the cross-benches. I understand that he has been glorified in Auckland. They have not burned him in effigy as they have burned Mr Vogel. lam a great advocate for cremation—(laughter)—and all I can say is, so long as they don’t burn me while I am alive, I don’t care; they may do as they like afterwards. Bub don’t ask me to do a dirty act, or tell what I know to be a lie and a falsehood ; and don’t ask me to be guilty of treachery to a man who is trusting me, and who believes that I am acting in unison with him.