Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1828-01-30

g.
:ril ever pray, &c.
WASHINGTON, 26th January 1898
Dear Sir: Ihave TO day in the Z edmond I,, |
qurer OF the 2l'h instont, Mr.. Gooc's address To ,
fuohc on the subject o! my letter you published in
the Wing OF last Wednesday, As 10 The Information
which he has given 10 the public tia, am cIc, in
the Dept OF State and The brother of the noior sd
tor OF the Wing, baVe ohecrian To- being tIus do
signated, as there is nn3c CRIMINAL !, nv s,.ua 90
in that RELATION to either both But when nTt.
Gooe aiirms that the "iaiter of Mr. l.. S;n 10 tis
sue CT aisehood, !o,o fSe and misrepresentation he
himself asserts wl;ul and deliberate faisel,ood with
THE 'nentionf deceive; aud will remember mt 10
forget his expressions. He saws further of nv letter.
chat Gin all its material parts il is uuiruen low has
ne made Tins appear! Does he deny that my Brother
executed Inc noics or bonds tta requisite? Does
he deny that he offered his services to Mrs. Kernp,
Does he deny the statement il. relation 10 Sir
SON! Does he deny that he recaved the amount stated
by me- he says that she had agencv in tie sale of
MRS AS urniture' fact which did not mention ouor
IN the taking of the notes from Turen?n Th:sis mn.
material fact that | stated il from recollection and
from the belief tat, lac had offered his ssryces n
Mrs. Kemp, the performance OF that act was reo,,;
sifa also well remember tina: h,s ignorance CT The
forms OF proceeding was the subject of remark IIe
says that 'snir- McCraw nof The .ssstra;e ta,
discharged Turpin." Will he dare 20 depy that MIR
AcCraw was the Magistrate in whose rstodv rrrn;n
was when he arrived the S.ran Taverne did M,
state that Mir McCraw had distha ed Tay,,iu bu thai
he was impatient at the Gclay, that he had Tuipin in
custody, and remarked (as l now rccoEect) that he
would not hold bin much longer custody If the cyi
denca Of tie bill were exhibited /! Mr. Couch IN
tended TO miuTe ms cFedhiiiy by string that ano,I
er magistrate had discharged him, lie has reso,ea To
equyoke characteristic of lis rpeanness he s.rs
that Judge Parker had nothing do with the tsansac
iion." MIR. Kemp asserted that he had CHARGED geo
ior consultation IN addition 10 his fee and Judge
FARMER was the individual named by her. VIII Judge
L. say that Mr.. Gooch did consult with hump IF
he says that he did, but received no co,ppensa,n b
inference is not uncharabie that he kept tie addition
al fec Tor his pocket Sy recollection is as fresh
as If the event bad occurred day. that Mrs Ke,pn
told of the fact of the additional fee and utv nom,
almost distinct that she Irc Parker
AS TO the exe't,ons which Mr.. Gooch says ,at be made
N arresting Turpin they may hayo taken place but
| ii is the first time have heard them nenoucd tIr
Gocn states that he never sUe,y dat hrs Il.;np was
dissatisfied with him for taking compensation, II woud
have been indelIcate in Mrs. Kemp who was remar.
liable tor her hbsraiity iii all pacuniary transactions
to aye mentioned her dissatisfaction 10 Mr. Gonch hut
that she did SO to me, solernn!y aver
| Does MIR. Goo@b deny that be left Mrs Kemn,s
boarding house and that he assigned TO her The reasons
which stated? lie does not, for they express,
ed By Mrs. Il. las believe TO all her boa riders Mr.
Goocb says that he has never injured me- and t,, ,-e
never bad word of disagreement, Ib,ve not CHARGED
him with having injured me, and the very fact will ey
onerate me IN The opinion of all candid men from The
Suspicion ct having been prompted BIZ any feeling OF re
yenge. Though he never injured me- he well knows
that. after the transaction with Mrs. KEMP we pssse1
each other as strangers, that il | ever returned his
" was HOn mere courtesy and that had
association whatever With him. As for the ,narn II,
pued TO me, II passion unknown to my heart as all
my intimate friends testify The only emotion felt
me towards Mr. GooCh, that of con,eupt lor i,
my estimation, he was below the dignity of hatred -
: IL ever felt any emotion sRonper than that n
contempt, Ut was 10 consequence of his treatment n
Mrs Kemp, which excited in me nj That fine as il
did IN Others feelings of Indignation. lie further
OF himself that, ''Do perhaps Of ms are eve,
encountered more maligniy than l,ayep IIov Ina,
tbs occurred? Could this general and pervadino CON
timent ever have been felt towards man oocuny;po
SO small space in The public eye as MI Coocl, docs
without some acts on has part cause or TO usifv ii
ii is indeed, Illuminating confession on his mart ,,
u he bad substitute the word Conicnpf for thai or nm
lightly, he would have come nearer the truth in r.,
king his assertion. " ~
With regard 10 that part Of Mr.. Goocb,s address :,
the public, which says, she has kept Mrs Ken,,
bills" and chat he always 11id for what he had -
was an act OF sUpererogation if indeed he did no
state 1t for the purpose OF adding in relation IN ,rc
that ''he did not know that Mr. S. did no, TI;s -,
situation is mean and malicious or his part "a III
e direct assertion of it would have been f,lse + ~,
= not kept Mrs. Kernp's bills Mr. Gooch has d,,e
: for satisfied with having paid them when due an.
# sometimes before they became so, DESTROYED them
cannot therefore, "5ubnit them to bonorabIs ,n,,
Mr.. G. has promised; but demand of him or of am
person who boarded with Mrs. X she ever even hint
e cd that ] bad not regularly paid for my boarde I
there be any evidence of debt, Lei MIR. Chew 10 whom
size bequeathed her property, examine her books AM
at the same time, be may search for Mr.. Goocr,s hi
against Mrs. x fer his professional services or Oh