Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1827-02-20

answered promptly, no: aad A;r. Calhoun looking
scrny, first at Vaudev enlcr and then at Mix said he
knew nothing Of II. On examining the three copies
they all found 10 agree ulerahy wecl in subtauce
but differ both in The arrangement and construction o
the sentences and i'll the words used express the
idea The composition is evucmii, that of !tetate
man. WHO docs understand e rules grammatical
, cUusti ten.
! Maipi Saudcvontcr denies uucGuivccaIly tina; he
ever wrote such letter 81 Mr.. Calhoun, and also
states, ;hat the alluded 10 bv Mix, when he
states the oos OF the letter in the Department of War
lc had nothing further 10 do with the bundle of papers
ihan to take them from Mr. Cabout's table, in
ilance with his order, deliver them 20 the eager
AT the door, PC handed by him TO MIR. Mix. lie also
states, that the bundle appeared no; 20 hare been open
cd al all ana Captain Smith as says Sat MIR. Calhoun
was engaged Ia "TCiai business ria him during the
whole time the papers remained there
! Tie ConG,ittcc have isal!on il prCnouncing
these ailcdgel copies Of confidential letter from Van
devcncr To MIR. Calhoun, Ia be gtos' fabrication,
and that the whole story about receiving such letter
from Nanieyenter and losing in The Department OF
| War, is tissue of taisehoOd throughout.
70 say noting of Mix's character, and The positive
denial OF Yais!cyGntcr both 20 the fact OF writing
such letter and the nj taIirg IL out of the
bundle ia tcpcpattnen oil War, the story in itself.
Improbable, and contains n'sny internal e, licences
Of fjrca0us, that the committee feel bound 10 eject
tho pa"eI5 presented as lo!seEcs
l. appears tia; Major Vowleveu;er had gone New
York prevail un0n Mix transfer
GodSborcu and had succeeded ia that object by pels
nal coamiuncaan II quite likely, i!ercnle, that
the tic could
nc had with nix ON the subject previous 10 obtaining his
and it Is particularly presumed,
thing confidential, me wuuid have communicated il
| 20. bal.y ans! not in Whiting.
Nothing be natural and inprobatIc, ,cn the
face o; IT, than 'at he would have formerly reduced
writing aud Scnt to who the city with
'' c"miHntiai matter, which he have previously
stated ia conversations If the whole ha fabrication.
|" addition tn the imrrobaby of TIN, stony itself, pa
pcrS presented copies of letter. have in
teual evidences OF their havi. been fabricated by Mix
IN his possession If he had mrreiv taken copies from the
original, II would have hGcn much easier take true
copy tan an Incorrect one, and all the objects copying
would he defeated by not making the copy accurate
Now II is found, that all the three copies taken, he
7ysiIon The original differ from other, in the
construction, coNroGn and arrangement of the
COS BUithc conclusive badge forgery slammed
upon the papers themselves, is their compositions They
are evidently composed Ivy eratn man, nor
understand the art Il! writing gnnd English and
III 5 respect with the general character of Alxs compo-
ston On the contrary from the letters Major Vame-
vrn"r u IS Obvious that he writes correctly aud gramna-
ncair. Moreover 1t Is highly iMpr0hHblc. in the
OF things that Mix should have taken srpra.. cnies
unless suppose he bad foresight loss; ven
il that had the he would have taken ore rn,rect
cnny instead OF three incorrect The story relative
to The loss Of the original, equally Improbable, and
companed ny paahe contradictions. lie inst stated
he lost it previous to the 18Th Of April, 1921; ard
wards, that it five six munIs or Il wear, before
Mr. Calhoun left the Department of War. That he
should have left the papers with nIr. Calhoun TO he
deliberately examined and returned and asked for them
/
suppoSiton that his object from the beginning, 20 give
, 4 plausible face 20 the story ne inycurius.
The whole o his evidence relative tas letter * con
Trajectory an" suspicious He stated IN the FIRST instance.
that Of the copies nearly correct bit, that the
one 'ic RAD then with him would
present it. The next day when he producci II three
OF the copicS,he could I'll wich mast arc,i-
rate whether the which refused 10 ,ive I'D.
rs being too inaccurate, less accurate the rest
That caHy, in fact, couaS 0Ihat others contain and
/ at least equally as fA as 'hcy
The "ext portion Of tie testimony Of Mix which the
Committee think proper TO notice iaaciv letter ol
MAJOR ande'cEtGr. Of thu 1 Cci,:tr 100 which
he produced his r.Irua ton. with the accorua-
nyng testimony given hy him. to The execution of the
second bond. Majot Vandevca;yr had stated that the
second bond was executed short time after the first 10
somG'l" N me early part {" i3n fall of 1915
MIX produced this letter o ;e Tia Of Oct 1920 writ
;en ~ '"r'eT.n'r i" ';'' at NsU ork in whi, Mis-
IS requested 20 ''aend 10 the bond. Sn,zing upon this
expression in Vandevc"!v letter to give ou!o,.r to hi.
story he that the bond executed in New rI
about t. date OF the letter, 5ud that The reference !,
That letter was to the executing of the boui. After re
rratcd!y swearing this fact answer TO several cues
ons ne asked If he distinctly rscolecicd To Ina 81
signed the bond and to have seem tine suetics sign it, il
the latter part ct 1870 To this hr answered, he
ncy recoicCed signing the bond, but in the Fall @
-J>o lie HEN admitted that tie second exccu
ted short time the first At,;or handkerchief sta cs
that the request in the letter Of the 1;h OF Oc 1920
ah"" ia" bond referred 10 the procurement the cerii
cate OF the RecoTdC suiIcicucy Of the securi
t'es and ('cr' "wh swears that the second bond was
lodged IN the Engineer Department. the FIl Gf IG1 . he
fore he lei; tie Office of Chief Engineer.
evident, therefore, ,a; the hole Of Mix tcaon,
relative 20 tie execution Of the second Loni, in 1890
wanlouiy and aacouS'y false, land Intended to dcreii
Vapdcvc enter.
The last piece Of Tic testimony of Elijah Mix uror
which the Committee deem it necessary to pronounce Sc
paFate ard specific opinion IS the letter Of Major Vaue
vcue'' Of the 81 of August, 1918, with ;r cccmranyin
explanations This letter produced tic close %
his second examination, acr hc had repeatedly stated tina
nc nad $50 other letters Of NanCvcnrr in his possession
The letter mUtilaed in places hv cutting on
"s ana as hfsc mu'i!dii"ns render he rr uiuclii
sipic 4" certain extent, Tie Committee feel their duty
10 express theT "Pn'"n, both the person who r,a
'H' aud as to the object for lrn:cl ihry were made
h"y have no hesitation in saying they ~ Nix
Tor tic rose Of exciting suspicion AUST Nh Calhoun
ard That he not 70 nc credited when nc SAYS was dom
- anderen'cr That the House may Save he means O.
estimating the character Of this witness, the Cnr,i,,.,
nave thought cpeGIcni to stale briefly and distinctly hc
circumstances connected with this part his tcstigo,
Nrr ire close OF ms last T'nrnation he voluntarily sta
"" 10 the Committee, that, since MS examinations Ma
j"i 'andr"ener had come TO him. and requested TO know
""e'hrr ne could find the letter of tive 81 Of August s-
ting that he dusred permission to cu out OF erase ccsir