Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1829-08-18

truly the consequent violation which would be Of
that oath o answer by fictitious plea. He
replied that he answered according the advise his
and he could give other. In the course of
expressed his regret for having published
the letters as he thought il ndiscrce, although he
at the time of doing any thing improper.
resstns the preposterous that he believed the
disclosure of the of his correspondent might c-
himself aud the Court. being applied TO, deciding
that the witness the sole judge of the truth his
answer, the Soung was dismissed.
However indignantly the Jury might have felt towards
the publisher of the communicated calumues or the
ostensibe author Of the editorial their
against the witness would have been speedily dsarmed
by his conte expressions, and by the fact, which
obvious from the simpleness Of .:is his
manner, that he guitlsss least Of editorial
bels, and probably knew much abou, others
We will only add that he treated with respect md
kindness throughout his examinations; aud heef
Cor the honor of human natuie hope that he has had
sency in the of ST. GUESS filth with which we
understand the Grand Jury has been despatched by
Republican since his home
Whle the subject Of Grand Jury proceedings and as
it is perhaps especially Incumbent repe the cal
umnies with which that body has been assailed we will
use the occasion tn notice another poiut which the
cenncs oil the Jury has been pprehcndcd, possibly,
by some, and msrepresented by meal i'm re
gard refusal of Jury to find an iudictnen
against I. WATKINS for FORGERY, or the phra Sc
finding the offence but refusing fad
ties We cauno effect object hy submit
ting the assigned by the Jury for its course
in answer to letter addressed to by prosecuting
counsel For this purpose have borrowed the pa
from the Giles OF the Court, and suhoin it.
GRAND Jury Room.
Jsly 81, 1929.
The Grand Jury in reply the letter addressed to
them by the Counsel for the United States, in refer
ence to the bill of indictment against Tobias
kins for forgery, respectfully state That they never
found and intended find iniiiatpry present
mem against the prisoner for the offence of forgery: THAI
the Grand Jury had, the eariy in the term
presented to their consider by United States At
toney, in person. and explained by him. decided after his
withdrawal and mature deiibera the non-ad
mission and suspension' al enst, if the rasure,
items of account presented to his office fr setcmeu, No
allowance, coming within legal con,peteu
of the 4th Auditor, aud ordinary and common
occurrence in the discharge of his official du,y That
therefore, the partial erasurc suspensions by the la
Fourth Auditor Watkins of certain IN the
of an accuunt CURRENT transmitted him sttleme Mt
though proa bly, done effect the of nae
vious fraudulent transaction, did nf cons, urs
the crime ct forgery as the cou! effect wrong
TO the Government the individual, iuasmuch as /;
would conclude neither party in the final settlement
the the said Auditor TO posses.
unusy frauulently, u the funds of Mr. Harris or
other person: That the allie ton "FaLsRLr ALTER
ING the abstract of account, (Which, aoug many otc
circumstances forth IN Indictment in which H.
allegation first introduced Of the chain of fact
oy which it intended establish chief charge M
object of the Indictment, namely, the dera nd t
treasury suffered by the Grand Jury pass in tina
form and for that purpose, although they would have re
fused to ftnd the altering of the abstract substantv,
offence IN distinct presentment believing they do
that 1t was not document in the of which th
offence OF forgery could he committed: That having,
ever, admitted the allegation of "FALsELY ALTERING
as an incidental and auxiliary point, in IT,
dctmen they did feel themselves authorized to re fs
Z" find the same charge, THE TERMS, in a sepa
rate and distinct bill, when, subsequently,
to them by the Counsel Of the United States; leaving
the Court to punish the offence If they s,ludge
To- be ane, ami the prisoner trial. he
but the Grand jury for the above briefly
euSed to find an indictment for forgery in the
alteration OF II. ID. Haris's Tnot, has bee
falsely ailedged, from unwingness find the tee
NIcAIITIEs necessary sustain presentaent bu
from conviction thnt forgery had not been committed
theyrl ,ta e,r,1,.
count of j. K Pauding, the time both ycr
personally submitted the Grand Jury by the Dis,ir
Attorney.
| By order of the Grand Jurv:
ANDREW WAY, Foreman.