Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1824-07-17

uOneu.
q Can you remember in what part of Mrs
QUEENS house he then had his room?
A do not rrcolrct.
q. Did General Noble then board there
A. 1 think il was about the time Genera
Noble came 'here-probably Within day q
two before or after. or this, however, I an
not certain.
q. Do you remember having any couvpr
saton with General Noble about that aniel,
in the Richmond Enquirer, before the prssen
tation OF Mr.. Edwards's memorial
A. No. might have had, but do not iecol
ltct any.
q. Had you the Richmond Enquirr, ir
which this article was contained. then in youI
possession? So
A. II is impossible for me to recollect. The
Enquirer was taken by Mr.. >Lock, a ,nttnte
Of Congress from Massachusetts,, VIII, then
lodged at Mrs. Queens.
q. Did You, at or about that time, hnd or
shew that paper tn Gen. Noble?
A. l do not remember. Such thingmighi
have occurred without my recolleciins u.
OILS that the only conversation y,h evSr
had with Governor Edwards ON the sIhjrct
A. | do not recollect any other.
JEREMIAH ELMNS.
FITNESS again called.
q. by Dir. Cook. Did Dir. Edwrds, in
making the denial YOU have referred to- use the
words" A plot" or A publications ~
A. knew of no difference hrtween the two,
and therefore do not rpcoect.
JEREMIAH ELEINS.
William ". Seoion, s,oorn, on the pat Of Mr.
Crawford.
z. By Mr.. Forsyth. Did you evr have a
al. ~
the authorship of the A b publications?
a. Mr.. Edwards spoke of those Iapers to
me, incidentally. He came tn our Office, to
have, as he said, a fra. and frank cuu,rrsation.
1t was the first time he had been there, to nly
knowledge, for year. Il was ,!urn; the per
d-ncy Of his nomination before the Senate ms
Minister 10 Mexico. and some time h.fure Mr..
Crawford's report was made tp Cunges. He
wished to know, he said, il we WON'T publish
hrs defence. l asked him what dcence ? a
defence against whom He replied that he
expected TO be attacked, and wherever he
turned upon his enemies he general, got the
better oil them, Tor words to that efftet.) He
farther said, land this iemember dstipctiy,
Tor he twice or thrice repeated it'll thai, ~ hen
he commenced, he never stopped atthp line
OF just retributioD. answered him that. If
ne was attacked IN our paper, he shodd have
the free use Of it To defend himself; tiaf, If he
was attacked any where else, he should hav q
ii,e same rights extended to him as y+re ~x-
tended To all other ciiixens-but IL could
have no positive promise OF publication.
until We had read the matter which h, wished
published. Passing then from thatsubiret,
Govtrn Edwards said he knew lhl we had
Thought him for some time hostile d us, on
account OF that foolish business ri iasasession.
.or that A u affair Of last sess,n; Idn2t rscol-
Iect !" hich phrase he used, J bur he hadno,hiug
10 d" will, il. Mr.. Gales was preset during
the greater part, IL not the whole, Of dis con.
versation. II was ON the authority Of his con-
versation alone, that we expressed inthe pa
per our belief that Mr.. Edwards washot the
author of the A B publications?
!. z. by Mr.. Cook. Had you not, pevious
to this conversation, said to others that Won
did not believe 1Ir. Edwards was thesuibnr
of the A publications.?
A. At the time the A B papers appeir.d i,
did not strike me that Mr.. Edwards vas The
author, and when the subject was onlnued
in the Franklin Gazette after Congress- b,d I'D
journed, and Mr.. Edwards gone TO IlJi,n;s
believed that another member of Co,orsss
was the author. Such being my impression
lmay have stated IL, hut l do not r,e,ll.c,
having done go. But the cony ersa tionw,th
Mr.. Edwards was the only authority hes ond
conjecture, we had. for stating that he WIS moi
the author-nor shO1ld we have published The
hut for that conversation.
Z. Can you sag distinctly, that, in that con-
versatIon, Mr. Edwards did not speak It an
imputed plot; and, in saying he had noting
to do with II, that he did not refer 70 a ,Iut
and not to the publications?
A. do not distinctly recollert Goysno,
Edwards's language, except so far rs tht il
'st strong impression on my mind, tina ne
having any thing to do with the
b business. He spoke OF il generalIy. md
| do not recoIlrct that he made The dislinc;ou
referred to in the question now nut.
@. BY Mr.. Livingston. When Won auak
Of the A b business, the A b plot, and m, A
b publications, do you not mean the sane
thing?
A. In applying some of those terms. hive
used the language commonly applied TO then i:
and understand them all to mean the sans
thing.
@. by Mr.. Cook. Was not the word /" nlo, ,,
as applied To this subject, first used in n.
National lnteIligeucer?
A. / cannot tell. 1t has freauen,lv bsso
used in the National lnteliigencpr Bit n.
lieve that epthet was applied to il by the ,ul.
lie rs early as 1t was by the National In,,ll-
gencer.
q. BY Mr.. Edwards. Ds you no, recol
lect that in the conversation which | had viii
you and MIR. Gales, stated that. in c,nss
quence Of certain rumors about the nnhl;cs
tons Of A Il, and what had been stated !,
your paper about an A o plot, that / m;yh
find it necessary tn say something about vo,,,
selves, and shew that there was No A n ni',
in the case, at aI-or words 10 that ,ff,c,
Add did not Mr.. Gales repIys
A. Such remark may have been made
bnt cannot call II 10 my recollection. A.i