Chicago daily tribune. [volume], August 23, 1874, Page 8, Image 8

About Chicago daily tribune. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1872-1963

Image provided by: Library of Congress, Washington, DC

                
8
terms of the tribune.
M.TK or TCBSCTimoS (FATiHt* IS aetasct).
partaoi ayearattbe unerMa. .
To prevent delay And mistake.. ba ewn> and elt. FMt
Otco.cdfOMmO.il. toclodiM St»t« and Con a 1 1.
Remittance* may be made either hr draft, ex press. Fort
Ot.ce eider, or in registered letter*. »t our n
TXSKB TO CITY fcOBSCIUBEKS.
iftilT, delivered. Sunday excepted ho cent?
delivered, Sunday Included. 30 cents per woelt.
Addresa THE TRIBUNE COMPANY,
Comer Madlaow and Ueaiboro-.w- chu>«o. m.
TO MORROW’S AMUSEMENTS.
ACADEMY OF MUSlC—Halfted ' t ” el ’ b '*T
Uoa and Monroe. Kneaisment ol OUyer Don !
•*l>oa*id McKay.”
h.t'vtpk kR'S THEATRE—Madison street, between
D “ fiuS. Element o, Edwin Adam..
*■* Hamlet-’* -
SOCIETY MEETINGS.
now ready to receive i early a day
di-illy Inritod to make tbeir on brother,
as posable. Too jirorldon* »ni •“«» I “provision*
*h»tew bis circumstances iWJ be. c-a n« P „ nitU
lor 8.0 comlorr M £”d taSuS In-lallmonta, will eceuro
amount annually. ,v* j.rilication* received aad
ibo loved ones aaramst an „ ffi c c of °Uj a Soclsty’s Local
information Riven at tbo o&cc otww' w
Aeunt, 96 CAIJEREV, Agent.
▼ ivivrrrß CHAPTER. NO. 2. R. A. M.--HaU, 73
attendance reaoe»t«d.by order Soc,
I. O. O. E.-Brethren
hold
* xJStwXSRSSU&IiS. Soc.
business notices.
t»tt XfcOHESNEY, CORNER OF CLARK AND
TlSirolnL-st* warrant* the anil bust fall »t-t
lor W. SalMfeCtloP gircn ormunej rcfonJeJ.__
Zhz ©nbitnt.
Sunday Morning, August 23, 1874.
ME. MOULTON'S EVIDENCE.
So far as the public is concerned, the Beecher-
Tilton case is all made up. There baa been no
trial, not even an investigation; for the case
long since passed out of the hands of the Com
mittee which Mr. Beecher called together. They
mav make a report to Plymouth Church or not;
it will not affect the public verdict one way or
the other. Their conduct of the case and their
treatment of the evidence before them have
been such as to deprive them of the right to
render judgment. By a curious combination of
circumstances, the case is public property, and
every mas must make up his own verdict.
It is unfortunate that it is so. It would have
been better if wc could have had a thorough and
impartial investigation, it will be well, per
haps, for Mr. Tilton to carry the case
into tlie courts, as he seems determined
to do. We may then again suspend judg
ment, with a charity that every fair-minded
man would be glad to accord to this terrible ac
cusation, until the courts decide it. But, if the
case be rested here, the public must pass judg
ment. We have had the accusation, the answer,
and, in Mr. Moulton's statement, the only evi
dence to which either the prosecution or the de
fense has referred. That evidence sustains the
prosecution.
Without trying to follow the labyrinth of doc
uments, conferences, letters, agreements, etc.,
which Mr. Moulton found it necessary to pro
duce, his statement may be comprehended in
three points.
1. Mr. Moulton and Mr. Fceche?. —Hr. Moul
ton 'produces the originals of the Beecher
letters quoted by Hr. Tilton. He tes
tifies that Beecher “ admitted, with grief
and sorrow, the fact of bis sexual relations
with Mrs. Tilton.” Ho testifies that Beecher
dictated the “apology,” after expressing great
grief at the wrong be had done Tilton. He
testifies that this “apology” hod reference to
nothing else than the sexual intercourse be
tween Beecher and Hts. Tilton. He testifies
that, in subsequent interviews, Beecher “un
qualifiedly confessed that he had been guilty of
adultery with Mrs. Tilton.” Facsimiles of the
Beecher letters which Shearman, Beecher’s coun
sel, denounced as forgeries, ore a part of Moul
ton's statement, having been reproduced from
the originals by the process of photo-lithog
raphy. Hr. Moulton produces letters from
Beecher to him even ae late as March i and July
13 of this year. In the former, referring to a
charge of Hr. Shearman’s that Mr. and Mrs.
Tilton were both insane, Beecher says:
“I would rather have had a javelin launched
against me a hundred times toon against those
that have suffered so much ”; and, also: “I am
sick, head, heart, and body, but must move on.
I feel this morning like letting things go by
the run.” In a letter of July 13, but a httle
more than one mouth ago, Beecher said to
Moulton:
1 am ashamed to put a straw more upon you, and
have but a single consolation—that the matter cannot
distress you long, as It most soon end. That Is, there
will be no more anxiety about the future, whatever re
grets there may be in the past.
If these letters mean anything, they are an ad
mission on the part of Mr, Beecher, oven since
Tilton’s accusation, that Moulton was the pos
sessor of some great secret, and that he had
guarded it faithfully and at great sacrifice to
himself.
2. Mr, Moulton and Mrs. TUton.—Mx. Moul
ton testifies that he saw Mrs. Tilton’s confession
of adultery with Beecher. He testifies that
Beecher expressed astonishment and sor
row that Mrs. Tilton had made a con
fession without forewarning him. He shows
that ho is the possessor of Mrs. Tilton's recan
tation, and also of the retraction of that recan
tation, in which she recites that it was written at
Beecher’s dictation, and given to him for the
purpose of protecting him as against all others
save her husband. Mr. Moulton also produces
a letter from Mrs, Tilton to him, in which she
says: “ Bather than make others suffer as I
cow do, I must lie, for it is a physical impossi
bility for mo to tell the truth.” The vacillating
Colir 80 of Mrs. Tilton, and the contradictions of
her own letters, weaken the value of her evi
dence on either side; but Mr. Moulton says:
“Mra. Tilton has more than once admitted to
ae, and to another person whom I do not care to
nog into this controversy, the fact of her
«*usl relations witußeechor, and she hunover
denied them other .
* tannin written papers pro
pared for a pnrp oß e,--tbil purpose being to
bush up the eamdsL Moulton adds: “ The
tj'ff.” 11 “ tcrco "“ being well un
derstood by Beecher, Tilton, end Mrs. Tilton, to
bare taken place, my whole action in the matter
was based upon the existence of that fact, and
was an endeavor, faithfully carried out by me in
every way possible, to protect the families of
both parties from the consequences of public
disclosure of Ura. Taton’a infidelities to ber
husband.”
S. Mr. Moulton and Mr. TClon.—Mi. llonlton
Mr. I£lton'« charge in fall nod with
aytfifiotiioa. il« prodocu Ut« originate of all
the doc amenta and letters cited by Tilton, and
still others haying the same bearing ontbo case.
Among the latter are letters from Tilton to
Moulton which indicate that it was understood
between them throughout that the charge against
Mr. Beecher was that of adultery with Mrs. Til
ton. The letter written on the cars in 1871, when
Mrs. Beecher was sitting near Mr. Tilton, may bo
taken as a sample of these. In that letter, Til
ton writes:
lam unusually heavy-hearted this morning. My
sullen neighbor [lira, BeecberJ keeps the dark and
lurid past vividly before my mind. If she actually knew
the conduct which her priestly husband has been
guilty of, I believe she would shed his blood ; or, per
haps, sparing him, she would wreak her wrath on bis
victim. There is a look of desperation in her eye to
day, as if she were competent to anything bitter or re
vengeful ; but, perhaps, I misjudge her mind. I hope
1 do.
Mr. Moulton also sustains the explanation ad
vanced by Mr. Tilton as to hia relations with
Mrs-Woodhull, and cites letters and circumstances
to prove that Tilton’s association with this
woman was to the end that she might be silenced.
Mr. Moulton also testifies that Mr. Beecher’s
payment of $2,000 was for the support of
the girl who had become possessed of the secret,
and the $5,000 were given Moulton to put into
the Golden Age, with the understanding between
him and Beecher that Tilton should nnver know
the source whence it came. Moulton also says
that this money was given as a partial restitu
tion for the money which Beecher deprived Mr.
Tilton of by forcing him out of his positions, but
that Tilton would not have taken it had be
known that it came from Beecher. Moulton
further declares that, whenever he hinted to Til
ton that Beecher was willing to help him with
money, Tilton indignantly rejected the proposal.
These three points wo may take as the sum
and substance of Mr. Moulton's statement
strengthened by collateral evidence drawn from
various letters which ho produces from different
people, including members of Mr. Beecher’s
family. It is all the evidence there is in the case
as presented to the public. If tne case is closed
now—-and we must believe it to bo closed unless
it Is taken into the courts—Mr.Tilton may end it
where ho began it nearly four years ago, with the
following demand:
Brooklyn, Pec. 20,1370.
Henry Ward Beecher :
Sin : I demand that, for reasons which yon explic
itly understand, you immediately cease from the min
istry of Plymouth Church, and that you quit the city
of Brooklyn as a residence.
(&gued) Theodore Tilton.
FALSE LAND-CONVEYANCES,
TJie disclosures of the last few weeks show
the facility with which forged conveyances of
land may be executed in this city, and the suc
cess which may attend the commission of such
crimes. Our system of conveyances, and of re
cording the same, and our system of buying and
selling land by abstracts of recorded title, fur
nish an almost unlimited means of perpetrating
frauds. Thus, where Ais the owner of a block
of ground, and B places on hie in the
record office a conveyance thereof to
B, the record title, upon which property alone
is sold in this city, passes to B, and. in the case
of the death of A before the fraud is discov
ered, B or his assignees would have a titular
claim upon the property which it would bo diffi
cult to dislodge. Persona bolding property
rarely, if over, have their abstracts of title
brought down, except in case of a sale, and a
fraudulent conveyance of the property might bo
on record for ten years or more and the real
owner would not be aware of the fact. If
this kind of conveyance can be ex
ecuted in cases whore the owner resides
in this city, and the fraud successfully escape
detection for years, how much more readily can
the fraud be practiced in cases where the owner
is a non-resident ? Property thus fraudulently
conveyed may upon record pass through a doz
en fictitious names, or even through the bands
of several hona fide purchasers, without discov
ery. In case the owner, whether non-resident or
otherwise, die, the record exhibits at least a pri
ma facie title against the estate, audit may be
extremely difficult for the heirs to es
tablish their title, or to disprove the fraud
ulent one. In the particular case now brought
to light, the fraud was detected in the life-time
of the real owner; yet on the abstract of the
record the fraudulent conveyances appear, to all
intents and purposes as valid as if there wore no
question of their genuineness. When the matter
is looked at calmly and considerately the wonder
is, perhaps, not that such frauds have been per
petrated or attempted, but that they havo not
been more commonly practiced. As the gicat
majority of the land sales are made through
professional agents, and without any personal
intercourse between purchaser and seller, the
opportunities for making the sale upon a mere
exhibit of the abstract are ample.
To the success of such a scheme it la hardly
necessary that there should bo oven an accessory,
save those roquist© to personate the grantors in
the conveyance. These can possibly be hired for
& comparatively small sum, and may go through
their part of the performance without any par
ticular knowledge of the principals in the fraud.
The Notary Public, such is the universal loose
ness of the practice in taking acknowledg
ments, may certify to tho execution of tho
deed without the slightest suspicion of fraud, or
intention to share therein. The rest of tho
business is smooth sailing. The original of the
forged paper once on record is destroyed, and
the false title is supported by tho record.
Thenceforth, on the chain of title stands the
paper, to bo claimed as conclusive proof of ab
solute title, or as a cloud upon that title, to bo
removed only by purchase. While it stands,
there can be so* sale of the premises. It acts
like a prohibition, enabling tho holder of the
claim under the forged paper to dictate his own
terms.
The law—and wa believe the only law provid
ing penalties for an offense of this kind—is
found in Sec. 122 of the Criminal Code of this
Slate, which reads:
Every person who shall be a party to any fraudulent
converuncc of lands, tenements, or UercdiUtmenLs,
Roods, or chattels, or any right or interest issuing out
of the same, or to any bond, suit, judgment, or execu
tion, contract, or conveyance had. znc.dc, or contrived,
with intent to deceive and defraud others, or to de
feat, hinder, or delay creditors or others of their Just
debts, damages, or demands; or who, being & party
as aforesaid, at any time shall wittingly and willingly
put in, use, avow, maintain, justify, or defend the
name, or any of them, as true, and done, bad, or made
In good faith, or upon good consideration, or shall
sell, alien, or assign any of the lands, etc., to btm con
veyed as aforesaid, or any part thereof, shall be fined
not exceeding SI,OOO.
The next section provides for the imprisonment
in the Penitentiary, from one to five years, of
any officer who shall falsely certify to an ac
knowledgment of a deed “ with intent to injure
or defraud.”
We suppose tbe placing on record of a deed of
conveyance of real estate, tbe same falsely pur
porting to bare been executed by the persons
whose names are forged thereto, would fall un
der the definition of uttering and publishing a
false tad forged instrument, and hence he
THE CHICAGO DAILY TRIBUNE: SUNDAY, AUGUST 23, 1874.
forgery; for which crime the person convicted
may bo imprisoned from one to fourteen years.
The provisions of law for the punishment of this
crime are not as effective in its prevention
as would bo some provision to protect the public
records from the facilities with which they can
now be abused. As it is, a hundred forged pa
pers may be put on record every day; the orig
inal conveyances may be to men of straw, and
from these there can be conveyances to the real
criminals, who thus can claim to be " innocent
purchasers.” The title to all the land in the
city is thus at the hazard of successful forgeries,
am) there should bo some attention given to the
protection of titles against these forged instru
ments, which can be put on record without a
question as to thoir genuineness.
" GATH’S” INVESTIGATION.
Wo publish this morning the result of a full
and frank conversation between Mr, Moulton
and onr correspondent, Mr. Townsend, Two
weeks ago. wo published the facts elicited by Mr.
Townsend iu an interview the day previous with
Mr. Moulton, and 'every potty newspaper that
had been anticipated in tho facts denounced our
correspondent as a fabricator and liar. We were
satisfied that ho was right in his facts, though
perhaps he was not fully authorized to publish
them at that timo. Mr. Mouitou has since pub
lished tho whole statement, part of which was
sent to us by Mr. Townsend, and that
statement proves that "Gath” bod been ex
tremely careful and merciful to Mr. Beecher in
what he had forwarded.
On Friday, Mr. Moulton placed at our disposal,
to bo tolcgiaphcd here exclusively to Tub Chi
cago Tribune, a copy of his full statement, that
it might be issued by us in Chicago simultane
ously with its appearance in New York. Though
wo did not avail ourselves of this to issue an
extra, we were able to present our readers with
many more columns of the statement than the
Associated Press sent over the wires, and more
than appeared in any other paper west of New
Yoik.
Agreeably to appointment, as soon as the
statement bad gone to press in Now York, our
correspondent went to Mr. Moulton’s house in
Brooklyn, on Friday morning, and there, the two
men being together, was reduced to writing the
remarkable and fearless revelations which we
print this morning. In Hr. Moulton’s public
statement are given certain love-letters of Mrs.
Tilton, written after the grand trouble bad be
gun ; these letters Beecher bad handed over to
Moulton, pledging his word that be had not an
swered them. Mr. Moulton, in his statement,
expressed the conviction that Beecher had truth
fully asserted that bo bad bad no correspond
ence with her. It now appears that, after she
left her husband’s bouse, Tilton bad found, in a
presentation copy of the Life of Christ, several
letters from Beecher to Mrs. Tilton, written in
secret, and in the face of Beecher’s stern denial
that ho was having any correspondence with her.
Mr. lloulton, who feels no longer under any
restraint of secrecy to the man who has de
nounced him as a blackmailer, reveals not only
the fact of Beecher’s confession of adultery, but
bis explanation if not defence of it. Ho declares
that Beecher represented his own home as a
sort of hell, and Tilton's a bower of peace and
bliss. At homo there was jealousy and want of
appreciation ; at Tilton's admiration, apprecia
tion, and generous criticism. Ho fell madly in
love with Elizabeth, and, commending them
selves in prayerful appeal for guidance, they, in
the very exaltation of piety, abandoned them
selves to love, conscious of no sin and of no
offense against Heaven. Any one who reads
Beecher’s explanation and defense of bis rela
tions with Mrs. Tilton will understand much of
that inconsistency shown by the latter, who,
while confessing the physical adultery, refused
to understand or comprehend bow it could be
sinful
Mr. Moulton, freed from the relations of a
mutual friend, torus upon the accusing Beecher
with a vehemence hitherto unknown in his part
of tho transactions. He applies to Mr. Bcccher
epithets which fitly describe a person guilty of
what ho holds Beecher to bo convicted. Ho sup
plies the gap in the testimony so long open, and
that was, if the accusation from the beginning
was an adulterous relation, what explanation
or extenuation did the man of Plymouth Church
offer for his conduct? It now appears that at
jo time, between Beecher, Tilton, Moulton, and
Mrs. Tilton, was there any other crime mention
ed than tho one. Tho injury of having advised a
separation seems never to have been discussed
at all, and tho suggestion that the offense was
an improper overture to Mrs. Tilton was a simple
invention to satisfy the curiosity of other parties,
and, by diverting attention, enable the parties
the better to preserve the secret of tho great
and omy offense. Hereafter, it is not likely tbat
Mr. Townscpd’s interviews with Mr. Moulton
will-be questioned.
THE PEEFIDY OF BOWEN.
The tangled record of the Beecher scandal,
which Hr. Moulton has now so completely un
raveled, contains a history of personal perfidy
within itself, apart from the record of the
principal actors in the drama. However com
plicated this record has been, into whatever
devious paths it has led, however much doubt
may have arisen from time, to time in the public
mind, however many lies may bavo been told
(and their number seems to bavo been legion),
the story of one man’s perfidy has been clear
and unmistakable from the beginning.
Every letter and document points to
him. Mr. Tilton’s charges, Mrs. Tilton’s
statement, Mr. Beecher’s statement, and Mr.
Moulton’s statement; the letters of the various
parties ; the testimony of witnesses, however
much they may differ on other points, all bear
directly or indirectly on the conduct of this
man. Whatever doubts may bavo existed upon
the part of Tilton’s friends aa to Beecher, or of
Beecher’s friends as to Tilton, or of both as to
Moulton, there has never been a doubt on the
part of any of them as to tbe role which this
double-faced partner in tfie scandal played. HU
name is Henry C. Bowen, proprietor of tbe Now
York Independent —a name which henceforth,
should be tbe synonym for all that is mean,
treacherous, and contemptible in human nature.
ThU man Bowen set the scandal on foot, and
then commenced his infamous intrigues. At a
time when Mr. Tilton was aware of Hr. Beecher’s
improper advances to Mrs. Tilton, Bowen came
to him and poured into his ear certain other ac
cusations. He then brought to him a letter which
he had written, the purport of which was a de
mand that Beecher should quit preaching and
leave Plymouth Church, and induced Tilton to
sign it, giving his word that ho would sustain
and prove the accusations against Beecher,
being at the same time aware of Mr. Tilton’s
own charges against Beecher. This letter
Bowen took to Beecher. The latter was
alarmed, and said Tilton must be crazy; but the
crafty Bowes, who had jtut bean divulging car*
tain stories of Beecher’s intimacies to Tilton,
comforted him with the assurance that ho would
be a friend to him. His next move was to inform
Tilton, who was on hia way to see Beecher,
that, if he intimated to Beecher any
of tho stories which ho (Bowen) had told him,
he would dismiss him from tho Independent and
the Union. Tilton replied ho was not in tho
habit of being influenced by threats, and Bowen,
for once at least, kept his word, broke his con
tracts with Tilton and discharged him, and in
this action Beecher acquiesced; indeed, he wrote
to Bowou beforehand counseling it. Mr. Tilton
being out of the way, Bowen was profuse
in his sympathies with Beecher, and took
occasion to fill his not unwilling ears with
stories of Tilton’s amours—a confidence
which Beecher return ed by also telling Bowen
charges which he had heard, and which he sub
sequently, in a letter to Bowen, declared were
false. By and by, it became evident to Beecher
that Bowen had been busy with his reputation,
and this resulted in a conference, which led to
an affectionate reconciliation between them.
Bcccher was never to tell wrong stories about
Bowen, and Bowen was never to tell wrong
stories about Beecher. Bowou had already de
ceived and played false with Tilton. How did
be keep his contract with Beecher? In less
than fortv-eight hours after the reconciliation,
Bowen was closeted with Joe Howard, a gossip
ing Bohemian, and boasting to him that he
know of things against Beecher that would drive
him out of Brooklyn, if they were made public.
Meanwhile, Tilton bod commenced suit against
Bowen to recover the money that was rightfully
duo him. Moulton, fearing that such a course
would reopen all tho family troubles and mono
the scandal public, commenced negotiations
with Bowen for a private settlement. Bowen
mounted his high horse and would not listen to
anything of the sort, and tried intimidation.
Moulton, however, Is not one of the kind who
are intimidated. He boldly denounced Bowen
as perfidious to every one, and notified him he
was aware that ho (Bowen), within forty-eight
hours of his pretended reconciliation with
Beecher, had been retailing scandals about the
latter, not only to Howard, bnt also to Oliver
Johnson, and that Johnson bad come to him
(Moulton) with Bowen’s words: “ I cannot
stand it any longer. You and I owe a duty to
society in this matter. That man ought not to
stay another week in his pulpit. It is
not safe for our families to have
him in this city.” The result of Mr.
Moulton’s diplomacy was the" arbitration
of Tilton’s claim, its decision in his favor, the
prompt payment of the claim in full, and an edi
torial disclaimer on Bowen’s part that he had
ever known of anything affecting Tilton’s char
acter. Then followed the memorable tripartite
treaty signed by Beccber, Bowen, and Tilton,
and all was quiet for a time, until Bowen was
again at his game of retailing scandals, which
shortly led to the explosion in the columns of
Mrs. Woodhull’s paper, which in turn precipitat
ed the avalanche. Bowen had worked hia pur
pose. and, from the time the avalanche com
menced moving until now, ho has not opened
his mouth..
Henry C. Bowen now keeps himself in obscuri
ty, probably enjoying the ruin, he has caused.
Ho diligently prepared the way for this scandal,
and when the time wad ripe set it afloat. He baa
been unremitting in his determination to keep it
alive. Whenever the fire has burned low, he has
added fresh fuel and fanned it into a blaze
again. Ho has played false with both Mr.
Beecher and Mr. Tilton. Under the guise of
friendship and the cloak of religion, he has
craftily kept this scandal alive nntil it has
brought about the catastrophe; and he now
stops one side and from soma snug retreat writes
articles for the Independent, enjoining upon its
readers the duties and beauties of leading cor
rect lives. That catastrophe has broken np Mr.
Tilton's home, has clouded his whole life, has
exposed his wife as a weak, false woman, and has
stamped guilt upon Mr. Beecher's forehead.
The condition of either one of the three, piti
able as it is, is preferable to that of the Meph
istopholes of this scandaL
THE MUSICAL SEASOK.
The summer vacations are nearly over. The
musicians are returning to their duties again.
The managers are already busy over their pros
pectuses, and some have sent them out. The
preliminary work has been so far accomplished,
that we can now take a general outlook over the
held and see the character of the musical hosts
advancing to storm the public pocket. The in
dications are now that the musical season of
1874-5 will be fully up to the average of, and
perhaps more prolific in, attractions of all kinds
than last season. There will be at least as many
musical performances as people will find time to
attend or money to pay for.
g,Of opera there will bo four seasons, —one of
Italian, one of English, one of opera boufTein
Trench, and one of opera bonifo in English.
The Italian troupe is, of course, under the man
agement of Max Strakosch, and commences its
season in New York, Sept. 23, with ** La Travi
ata, w which has done duty so often at openings.
Tho troupe will comprise Mile. Albani, the ac
complished artiste of Mr. Gye’s Boyal Italian
Opera, London, who has successful in
Europe; Mile. Heilbron, who was tho prima
donna of tho last Paris season ; Mile. Potential
aud Mile. Mares!, prime donne soprani; Miss
Anna Louise Cary, prima donna contralto; MM.
Carlo Carpi, Bebassini, and Dovilller, primi
tenon; Signors Tagliapetra and Bel Puente,
primi b&ritooi; Signors Piarini and Scolara,
primi bassL The director of orchestra will
bo Signor Muzio, the able leader of last
season, assisted by Mr. Behrens. *•Aida” and
“Lohengrin” will be reproduced. In addition
to these, and the well-known standard operas,
“ The Star of the North,” “ The Plying Dutch
man,” “Buy Bias,” *• Borneo and Juliet*’
(Gounod), “William Tell,” and Verdi’s “ Requi
em H are announced—announcements, however,
which should be taken at tho customary operatic
discount. It is also promised that the chorus
and orchestra will be strengthened—which will
bo necessary if some of the last-named works
are to be given. We have not yet received the
prospectus of the English troupe, which will bo
under the management of Mr. C. D. Hess, and
commence its season in this city Oct. 5. It
will be a grateful announcement, however, to
the musical public that, in addition to Miss
Kellogg, who is still at the head of the troupe,
those old favorites, Mr. Campbell and Mr.
Castle, who have so long been absent
in Europe, have joined it. We have notyet been
apprised of the repertoire, but from the fact
that Miss Kellogg is now studying the role of
Edith Planiagenet in Balfe’s “Talisman.” we
may bo assured of at least oue novelty. The
opera bouffe seasons will bo two in num
ber. The Aimee (French) troupe has been
thoroughly and the selections from
|h« French theatres hare booh mads vilh tbs
view of having the ensemble as perfect as possi
ble. The new comers are Miles. Mindly, Gan
don, and Kid, and MM. Dnbouchet, Be Beer,
Genot. Gnyot, and Leonard, all of whom have
acquired local celebrity in Paris. Tho troupe
opens under the management of Messrs. Grau
& Chizzola, in New York, on Sept. 24, tho inau
gural opera being “La Timbale d'Argont,” to
be followed by “LaPrincess© de ”
and •* La Jolle Parfamease," all of which are
new here. The other troupe, under the same
management, is an English one, headed by Miss
Emily Soldcne, and known as the Soldcne
Troupe, but, as it has not yet finished its season
in England, no details of its plana have been
made public.
The concert attractions promise to be qniio as
strong as the operatic. Mr. Be Vivo has organ
ized a troupe which will begin operations in New
York on the 21st of September. It includes
Mile. Bi Monika, whom Mr. Mareczek did not
bring here last season; Signor Femmti, tho fa
vorite buffo; Signor Bella Bocca, tenor;
Signor Braga, ’cellist; M. Sauret, violin
ist, and Totcsa Careno (Mrao. Sauret), pianist.
Tins is one of the most effective concert com
binations ever made in the country. Three
Boston instrumental clubs will also favor us
with a as follows: Tho Mendelssohn
Quintette, William Scbultze, first violin ; Carl
Hamm, second; Thomas Byan, viola and clario
net ; Edward Heindl, flute and viola; and Bn
dolph Hcnnig, ’cello. The Philharmonic Club,
Bernhard Listomaun, first violin; Fritz Liste
mann, second violin; Emil Gramm, first viola;
M. Adolph Belz, second; Budolph Hartdegeu,
’cello; and Eugene "Weiner, flute; and the
Beethoven Quintette Club, who will bo accom
panied by Mrs. J. M. Osgood, one of the rising
young singers of Boston. In addition to these
clubs, Master Walker, the piano prodigy,.who
was in this country last winter with Mrs.
Scott-Siddona, will give concerts here in October.
As yet, it is too early to indicate the music that
will bo furnished by our home talent, but both
tho Apollo Club and the Beethoven Society will
be in tho Held again. Tho chinks in the season
we may expect will be filled up with the Turner
Hall and parlor and church concerts, whose
number, as usual, will be legion.
Tbe above enumeration comprises all the im
portant music wo shall have, and probably in
these bard and dull times most people will think
it amply sufficient. While we do not anticipate
that any of tbe managers will enrich themselves,
yet there is a prospect, if the attractions are as
strong as promised, that they will do a fair busi
ness. This is not only true of this city, but of
the whole country. It is not probable that the
season will prove a golden ono to managers.
MOULTON’S MOTIVES.
Now that Moulton has laid his statement be
fore the American people, and so, we suppose,
terminated fats connection with the Beecher-
Tilton scandal, it may not be inappropriate to
review his career since ho first became a party to
it. Moulton had been, as be states himself,
Tilton's friend for twenty years previous to the
time that he first heard of the scandal. Ho had
been personally acquainted with Mr. Beecher for
only one year. In 1870, he became acquainted
with the circumstances of Beecher’s criminal
relations with Mrs. Tilton, From the first, be
foresaw that there was great danger of the
scandal’s becoming public, and from the first ho
did everything to keep Tilton (over
whom, as his life-long friend, be had
very great influence), from making the re
volting history public. He saw that, while
Beecher's offense was a great injury to his
friend Tilton, the publication of it could effect
no pood end. It would bo a reflection on Til
ton’s children. It would be a reflection on Beech
er’s children. It would destroy Beecher’s in
fluence for good, and so assume the proportions
of a national calamity. Impelled by these con
siderations, ha assumed to act as a mediator
between his friend Tilton and the offender
Beecher. Without any motive but to save the
character of his friend and the good name of his
friend’s children, and to save the cause
of public morality, he has been to infinite
pains during four years, only to see his efforts
at the end unavailing, and to be stigmatised by
one whom be had done everything to serve as a
blackmailer. His course throughout has been
most honorable. Of all the parties to the con
troversy bo is the only one whose reputa
tion has not suffered by the investigation.
Beecher, and Mrs. Tilton, and Bowen do not
I stand as well in the eyes of the American
people as they did when the Committee began
its sittings. Moulton, on the other hand, who
until about that time was scarcely known to the
.country, has made a very pleasing and fav
orable impression upon public opinion.
He chocked for four long years the storm
which threatened Tilton, Beecher, and their
families. He begged Tilton not to make any
charges against Beecher, and, after they were
made, he besought the Committee who were in- |
vest!gating them not to proceed with their ex
amination. He has done everything to smother
up the affair, and uttered not one word that
might fan the flame. He has been true to Til
ton, but ho has been equally true to Beecher.
When he made his first statement ho presented
only just enough evidence to support the vo
racity of Tilton’s oath. Ho endeavored to in
jure Beecher jost as little as he could, and sup
pressed moat of the evidence which- ap
peared in his second statement be
cause it was not absolutely demanded. He has
known throughout how to keep his own coun
sel, and has not dropped a*word which was not
wrung from him by circumstances over which ho
hod no control. When finally he published bis
entire statement, it was only because his own
good name Imperatively demanded it, and be
cause the whole country cried out for it.
Beecher himself, till be discovered that Moulton
could not be influenced to serve him at Tilton’s
expense, expressed the highest regard for Moul
ton. He said that Moulton’s kindness to him
could never be repaid; that God had raised up
many friends to him, but that Moulton had
served Mm in a way that no other man ever
had an opportunity to serve him. He trusted
him implicitly. He had been a friend to all—to
Mr. Tilton, Mrs. Tilton, and to himself. The
public have now ample proof that the praise of
Beecher was not at all unmerited. When Moul
ton divulged the secrets confided to him, it was
only after the parties between* whom he had so
long acted is mediator forced him to do so.
Beecher now accuses him of blackmail, just as
ho accuses Tilton of slander. There are many
who mav believe Tilton capable of slander
who will not think Moulton capable of
blackmailing. Tilton might have possibly
soma inducement to slander Beecher; but what
Inducement can Moulton have to attack a giant
in influence to preserve a pigmy in influence ?
Were there any selfishness in Moulton’s nature,
he could have served his own cause by aiding with
Beecher, against £LUoa» Plymouth Ohuroh,
Beecher, and bis friends would have taken him
to their bosom. He would have shared their in
fluence and their protection. But we And him
Biding with Tilton rained in his home, his busi
ness, and bis prospects, with no possible motive
for his siding with him but the deair© to see
justice done to all. Moulton is the light in a
picture otherwise all darkness.
WOMEN AS VOTERS,
The friends of woman-suffrage are apt to
think that an enumeration of the legal and
social disabilities of women, with a few jingling
phrases about the tyrant sex, is sufficient proof
that tho ballot should be the freewoman’s, as
well as the freeman's, birthright. They are, or
they pretend to bo, unaware that the real ques
tion on which woman-suffrage hinges is: Will
good government be promoted by the admission
of woman to the franchise ? If not, the imagi
nary legal and the real social disabilites of the
sex will be no good reason for giving it anything
to do with government. We have in previous
articles shown that the effect of woman-suffrage
upon liquor legislation would be in the highest
degree prejudicial to the best interests of the
commonwealth. What would be the effect of
such an innovation in increasing the number of
ignorant voters? Our figures are taken from
the census of 1370.
There were, in 1870, 18,710.869 white and col
ored females in the States of the Union, The
general ratio of one adult to one-acd-three
fourths children would make 6,814,861 of these
persons over twenty-one. These figures, then,
represent tho number of new voters who would
be created by a woman-suffrage constitutional
amendment. Neatly one-third of them can
neither read nor write. By the census, 2,055,707
white and colored women over 21 years of age
are in this pitiable condition. It must be re
membered, too, that these illiterate women
would be, aa a class, far more apt to poll a full
vote than their better-educated sisters. It is so
with moo. The lowest classes vote iudefatig&biy.
It would be so with women. It is said that every
Southern negro must vote at every election or
be ostracised by his fellows. Thus the full
black vote is always polled; the full white vote,
never. The 935,436 illiterate negresses over 21
would present themselves at the polls with un
failing regularity. •
When such gross illiteracy has been allowed
for, the tale of ignorance has been by no means
fully told. Women who can read and write are not
rescued from utter political ignorance by those
accomplishments. The weaker sox does not
read tbe newspapers, does not read the books of
the day—unless they happen to be novels. It is
utterly ignorant of the topics of the time. There
are brilliant exceptions to this rule, no doubt.
We cannot too gladly recognize that fact. But
tbe brilliant exceptions only throw into deeper
darimpfis the political childishness of the average
woman. It is true that her exclusion from poli
tics has partly kept her ignorant of them. And it
may be true that that exclusion has been unjust.
But all this does not alter tbe fact of ignorance.
That remains. Until it can be removed, womau
suffrage will but carry on the debasing process
which the votes of illiterate men have begnn.
It must strike an observer as tbe height of folly
that 7,000,000 adult persons, not one in a hun
dred of whom can give an intelligible sketch of
the system of government under which most of
them have passed their whole lives, should
clamor for the power to help administer that
government.
This great objection to woman-suffrage can be
greatly weakened by education. Lot women get
knowledge. They will soon find that it is power.
While they remain in childish ignorance, they
must expect to be treated as children.
RITUALISM BEFORE PARLIAMENT.
Both Houses of the British Parliament have
agreed to a bill, which is best described, in the
words of Prime Minister Disraeli, as a bill to
pat down Ritualism. It baa been discovered,
however, by the Lords and Commons, that put
ting down Ritualism does not mean anything
whatever so long as there is not so much as a
definition of Bitaalism. And so it happens that
the bill is not to become a law nntil after an
other Parliament shall have met and defined
what Bitaalism is; what practices are included
under the name, and what are not; what cere
monies may be innocently indulged in in English
churches, and what it would be illegal and
heretical to tolerate. On the definition
which the next Parliament shall make of Bitual
ism, a great deal will depend. Should Bitaalism
be so defined a a to make offenses of wbat a large
portion of the English Church consider at
most essentials of their religion, a secession
from the Established Church may be looked for.
The Commons were disposed to be even more
stringent against the Ritualists than the Lords.
It is well known that several of the Bishops are
ritualistically inclined, while the two Archbishops
of the Kingdom are strictly Low Cb arch. Consid
ering their leanings, it was feared that the
Bishops might reject the complaints made
against ritualistic ministers by their parishion
ers. The Commons proposed os an
amendment to the original bill that,
in case of such refusal, the latter
should have an appeal to the Archbishops.
The bill came back to the Lords with the amend
ment ; but so great was the opposition of the
Bishops that the amendment was lost The
Bishops of Winchester and Lincoln were espe
cially violent in their opposition to it. The
former would not hear of an Archbishop’s usurp
ing authority in his diocese. There was, he
claimed, as strong scriptural authority for the
government of a Bishop in bis diocese aa there
was historical authority for the fact that Casar
governed Borne. The episcopacy, In assorted,
was a divine institution, and if bo did not be
lieve that it was he wonld trample his robe on
the ground. The foundation of the episcopacy
was that the Bishop was the ruler and
jndge of his diocese. Archbishops were not aa
ancient as Bishops. They were only the Presi
dents of Councils. Bishops were Bishops by
Divine ordinance. Archbishops or metropoli
tans were such by human ordinance. Chief-
Justice Holt has settled that matter in the case
of Long vs. Watson, in which ho held that
Bishops were Bishops jure divine not jure hu
mane. The Bishop of Lincoln was equally
laudatory of the rights of his order. He in
quired whether the Lords were going to estab
lish a Papacy in Canterbury* and whether they
were going to have an anti-Pope at York.
To avoid the Scylla of Puritanism and the
Charybdis of Romanism, it was necessary to
steer midway between the two and not
leave everything to the decision of a metropoli
tan, who might be incompetent or prejudiced.
Sir William Harconrt, the great Protestant lead
er, did not approve of the action of the Lords ou
the amendment to the bill. The Bishops, too,
received rather rough handling at his hands.
He could see nothing divine in the right by
which they held their officea. They van Biah*
ops. not by the grace of God, but by the f* TQt
of a Prince or Prims Minister. There was w
aa much to be said for the divine right of
ops as for the divine right of Kings, and just „
little. He thought that the axis of the wotli
was turned backward when tho Bishop of Win,
cheater quoted Lord Holt in support of
the proposition that jurisdiction of the
Bishops is jure dicino. There was no
divine right in tho occuoation by a reverend
gentleman of Pamham Palace. It was noth?
divins right that the Bishops had seats in the
House of Lords. They sat there by barony,
by divine right Tho richest part of the whole
discussion was that taken by Disraeli, which
the good Israelite showed so much solicitude for
the welfare of the Church of England, and
spoke of the Ritualists as a pernicious sect Ifc
ordinary minds Ritualism appears a rather harm
less thing. If there are men and women in
the Church of England so very fond of w«
candles, flowers, and incense, why should they
not be permitted to indulge their harmless
tastes ? The Church of England, if it is wise,
will allow the Ritualists to go their way, and not
endanger the peace and unity by oppoaitha to
candle-sticks and flower-pots.
THE GROWTH OF MOHAMMEDANISM.
The popular idea that the religion of
reached its climax long ago. and has since been
in a state of slow decay, is very unfounded.
The sway of this faith is not limited to Western
Asia and Northern Africa. It has mastered Tar
tary. It has spread from India into the Indian
Archipelago and over China. It proselytes
vigorously in Africa, It has traveled up
the Nile. Tribes from Sierra Leono to
Zanzibar profess it. It has gained a
footing in South America. Thousands
of persons in Trinidad and Guiana adhere to it.
It is giving battle along the whole line. It ia
growing along tho whole line.
To a few people the growth of any religion
other than Christianity is matter of grief. But
most persons will see a substantial gain in the
replacement of bloody and barbarous faiths bj
lalanusm. The religion of Mohammed has been
corrupted. So, for that matter, has Christianity.
“Islam” is from a root that signifies “submis
sion to God and faith in Him.” It is connected
with “Salam”—“peace,” and “Saiym”—
healthy. The original creed contained three
central truths, —the unity of God. His comolete
righteousness and mercy, and the true mission
of Mohammed. The old faiths which Islamism
has supplanted hare endowed it with some of
their dogmas, good sod bad. The Moslem has
come in ibis way to believe in the resurrection,
the future life, the existence of angels, and the
duties of almsgiving, fasting, and pilgrim
age. The fatalism usually attributed to
him belongs to his natnre rather than his faith.
It is taught but indirectly in the Koran, as it
is in the Epistles of Paul. Mohammed allowed
polygamy and slavery, because he found them
already existing. So did Christianity. The
sensual Paradise of the Moslem is the invention
of later days. The Prophet wrote in Oriental
hyperbole. His followers interpreted literally.
Such a religion, despite its shortcomings, brings
its votaries nearer to civilization than the de
grading forma of faith once current ,in their
countries. The fact that it has overcome these
creeds shows that it is better adapted than
they for the Oriental mind. Religion is
apt to be a matter of the survival of
the fittest. The corrupt Christianity of the
Eastern Empire yielded at once before the al
ternative of the Koran or the sword. Its cor
ruption had destroyed the fervor of its believers.
It was bat a form when Mohammedanism sup- i
planted it. A recent writer—Mr. B. Bosworth
Smith—argues that Islamism should be consid
ered rather as Christianity’s weaker sister than
as its enemy. He believes that It embodies as
much truth as the Orient can grasp now, and
that Christianity cannot expel it. This may bo
an extreme view; but the fact remains that one
of the great causes of civilization now at work
in the world is tbe faith which we aro wont to
consider dying and almost dead.
Boring the post week the word blackmail has
been bandied about with unwarrantable freedom.
A story of blackmail comes from Toledo which
is of doable interest as a contrast with that
which called out the word in Brooklyn. The
story is this: A week or two ago, while an
anxious public was awaiting a “ defense,” the
widow of ox-Senator Hall, of Toledo, received a
dirty letter, written in’ a’dirty mixture ol bad
English and worse German. The writer
threatened to burn down her bouse if she did
not without delay deliver to him in a manner
* specified the sum of §5,000, Mrs. Hall did not
mortgage her boose to raise §5,000. She ought
perhaps to have done so, to prove her innocence.
On the contrary, she handed the letter to the
police, and a trap was immediately set for the
blackmailers. The letter directed her to drive
out alone to a secluded spot and deposit the money
in a little box, which she was instructed
to cover with dirt (Observe the parallel.) A
‘•mutual friend” would take the box, and the
blessing of Heaven would reward her. The trap
was set Mrs. Hall drove out, preceded by a
disguised detective. She deposited the money,
but nothing being developed, took it back again,
and returned to the city. Then came another
blackmailing letter, threatening to kidnap her
eon if she did not instantly obey the directions
of the writer She instantly obeyed as before,
and nothing came of it. A third letter threat
ened her with all aorta of torture, and again the
snare was laid. So far nothing has resulted-
Bv appealing to the police lire. Hall has been
spared the mortification of sitting on the rag
ged edge” of anything but adventure; tho
blackmailers have made nothing out of her.
The New Tork Sun claims to have irradiated
% spot m ihe enlightened Commonwealth of
Massachusetts heretofore obscured by the mists
of superstition. ItisknownastlpßailingSamimt
Lake, situated in Berkshire County. This
was long considered unfathomable, and the unit
ed wisdom of Berkshire County concluded that it
was the crater of an extinguished volcano. Nol
long ago this wonderful lake, so the stcry went,
was violently agitated with subterranean
It was suddenly transformed into » ,
saucepan, in which millions of eager pic cro
and nnsanced trout were prepared for the credo
loos people of Berkshire County amid o-onds
of steam and parboiled vegetation. •
story continues that after the boiling had con
tinued for some time the water disappeared and
then reappeared minus the fish, all of which the
people of Berkshire County believed and relish
ed. The Sun sent .reporter to thm lase and
the plenipotentiary found the hoilrf Picterel
swimming unconcernedly about, and the trout
leaping after astonished flies in the maimer of
ordinary fishes. And now the Sun, which pub
lished the original story, concludes that it was
alia hoax, especially amce the lake is 25
deep in the deepest part. Suspicion was averted
by the fact that the people who corroborated me
atory were people of Massachusetts, whose repu
tation for wisdom and veracity has bssn mf
equaled eioept by their credulity.
Mr.S. T. Eiloy, of Mineral, DL, and party
were traveling a year ago on the road to Prince
ton. The party decided to pay only “legalfar*,
with the exception of Mr. Eiloy, who, being aw
sod anxious to amid a dlttnrhonco sonasqaea
knot*
tl
*ff Pan
Jiio bat
aariog
teen.
®J that
»aoia v
“P C«8
■ I»U a