Phenix gazette. [volume] (Alexandria [D.C.]) 1825-1833, 1828-07-07

closure of the mortgage sAhd that he had
frequently understood that Gen. Jackson ana
!. Wbi,esides, had recommended persons to
purchase lands in that claim, as there was no
doubt vi the ti.le
Col. James Arnold sanswereth and satin mat
he purchased Of William Knou, Sep, 2, 1918
- lo2 acres 40 polls OF lan6, and being par.
of grant No. 2aa, for which he gave $500,
'Thal previous 10 his purchase, ne haa h'a'a
of Gen. Jackson's claim-bu! from eonversa-
ton with Col. Beniamln Bradford he was IN
duced TO believe thai Gen. Jackson's claim was
Sc, IN for the purpose ofcx,oring compro-
mise from the settlers, or Col. Erwin. FOR
Col. Bradford .old him that Gen, Jackson hat.
repeatedly assured him in the most solemn
manner, that the little 10 those lands Tor
merly the B!oun,'s, was undoubied, and that
he b. Bradford from these assurances had been
induced 10 purchase.
Then Richard Cunningham and James Al
mold, together with Edward Moseiy, James
Noryilie ser. Jeremiah Kimhro and John l..
Nellie all make joint answer anal Say: i hese
| Defendants further answering say, that they
know nothing Of their own knowledge OF The
history of the title IL said lands grained 10 the
Blounts previously 10 their said purchase; but
they have heard much on the subject, suostan-
TALLY conforming with the statement made
! thereof In the answer Of Pattcn and Erwin,
which they have seen and considered, and be-
lieve to be correct
Need add any more on this part OF my
subj ct? Surely not. Indeed such was the
CONSERVATION and alarm excited IN the State OF
| Tennessee, in consequence OF the combinations
among a certain class Of lawyers "a Large pros
portion Ct this profession ! esteem as honora-
| I, as. ,Et nd n hprS n
perry from the innocent purchasers, that the
Legislature thought it nee, ssarv in The fa! OF
the year 1921 to pass a severe Champery law
I'm This Bill il is enacted, That no praotIsing
attorney, or pei son who has been ,prat Using
attorney in this State, shall be permitted TO
| give testimony against client or person who
consulted them as attorney, with view to en-
ploy him or them, by disclosing any commune
cation made TO them as attorney, either during
The tendency Of the suit, or Afterwards 10
their injury. Nor shall any attorney, or
other person, under the prele1t OF having
transferred their interest to real estate, or oblI-
cations for the performance OF contracts, or
not, for money during tie tendency OF any
sui, at law, he permitted TO give testimony IN
favour Of those who held joint interest with
him, her or them, at the commencement Of
said suits, or by which they themselves could
be released from any liability 10 perform con-
tracts Or pay money This law was passed
almost unanimously, and although Mr.. Darby
ON behalf OF himself, Nh. Whitesides and Gen.
Jackson, attacked il most violently in his Con
stituliona! Ad, ocate, and although several
attempts have been since made 10 repeal it,
they could not succeed. In fact Mr.. Darby
alleges directly in his Advocate, that The law
was passed purposey 20 affect Gen. Jackson
! MI q
estate.
f ! cannot stop TO answer the bubble that has
been made upon my assertion, that discovery
, of a flaw in The title was made by Gen. Jack :
, son himself. 1t is sufficient for me 10 have
shown, that he knew Of the flaw and acted on
il for his own individual benefit; and TO The
contemplated destruction Of Prior, Anderson,
Erwin. and of all persons 10 whom they had
sold before they fouuc it our and that he Jack
sony was very careful to keep knowledge OF
the flaw from then, until he had made the pur-
chase from Allisons heirs
! am ashamed 10 SEE advocates struggling
10 pervtrt, and misrepresent The plainest mat
tiers Of fact for the purposes Of deception; using
the most himsy sophistry, 10 enable their hero
to pass for the moment. They could not
expect il would bear examination. Of this
kind is their A b & proposition, or suppose.
'oNy IL you pcdSt. l|tl as examine IL Il
moment, AID instead Of A b L, ! will use the
real names. IF Jackson then, be employed by
Anderson, 10 engage Overon to manage a
piece of property, aud O.erton acting in ODE
: dience TO the new direc,o Of Anderson,
manages it badly, is Jackson debarred from
urging any subsequent right 10 the properly he
may afterwards acquire? Yet this was General
jackson's case precisely. Now let us carry
this supposition little fArther.-lf Jackson
then, De- only employed by Anderson, to engage
OvcIton 20 manage piece Of property, ard
Overton not being at all assisted governed
by the advice Of Jackson, who is in no sense
responsible as agent or attorney; bu. Overton
acting in obedience 10 the instructions Of An.
derson, alone, manages it bady-wouId Jackson
in that case, either in law or conscience, be
entitled 10 receive the one-eigh,h par, of $4,000
acres Of good land, merely for handing over
:he title papers from Anderson to Ovrrton?-
Answer, We who strain so hard for an excuse,
But on my part there is no need of suDDosi