The Rhode-Island Republican. [volume] (Newport, R.I.) 1809-1841, 1833-09-04
VOL. "a

conceded, is very intelligent man, and one
whoss'character for veracity, is above sus.
picion. This 10 true as far as common report
goes, and II is true in fact, is evident because
no attack was made on his character by A
very's Counsel. Mr.. Orswell swcars posi-.
lively, that .7cery is The man who gave him
the letter, aud We are bound to beheye lin,
until The contrary is made to appearo or some
thing invalida,cs the testimony as given in
Court In order TO do away the testimony Of
Mr.. Orswell, powerful effort was made,
not TO impeach his character for veracity, in
direct and open manner, but by showing 10
to be impossible that Mr.. Avery could have
boarded The Steamboat King Phillip. and
given Orswell the letter in question, during
the continuance ofthe Four Days Meeting IN
Provdencs, by proving his tine to have been
so fully taken up as to have precluded the
possibility oft. Let US how examine tins
conflicting testimony, and then decide.
Orswell swears to the fact that he received
the lelte, IN Providence, and that Avery is
the man that gave il to him. But Messrs.
Horton, Jil.son, Boyd, Fuller, Holloway, and
one or two others, by their testimony, .under-
take TO show, that ifMr. Avery did give the
letter toMr. Orswcll, during the continuance
oitho said meeting, it must have been on
Tuesday, November 9Th, 1882; aud as
Orswcll thinks, between s anG o O'Clock A.
NJ. or possibly, "a little past o. twill now
be rocolleeted, that Orswell does not pre-.
tend 10 swear 10 the day Of the week or
month, on which le received the letter. lie
says il was ain the latter part oflast Noyem.
ber-don't recoloct the day nor the day Of
the week-but heard there was at that time
a four days meeting atPrevidence."
You see then, that even though the entire
Testimony Of The opposing witnesses DO liter
ally correct, even to a letter, the testimony
of q. remains still untouched. They might
have kept T. X. Avery ougf,k or chained, on
.lthc 27lh a ,Nspouhn Z. .lcs,, he might.
|sci bi'nsolfahio difficulty; and they might,
all Of them. have stood guuldl over Hin, IL
prevent lis despatching a Iol,sr 10 Sarah
Maria Cornell, they might have exhibited him
to the public every moment VI The limo, ffola
morning 10 night Of that particular day, and
still, the testimony Of n respectable witness.
that this same Avery did deliver letter 10
, .Iim on board the Steamboat King Philip,
. some dsy "in the latter part Of November,
1882, between & o'clock, and little past o,
A. NJ" and when he "heard that there vas a
four days meeting in Providence" rumains
untouchcd.-Al their testimony may DO
strictly true, in every particular, and still on
some o,ker day than Tuesday the 9Th Of
Nov, Orswell may have received the letter
in question, from the hands OF Avery, for, It
must be borne in mind that others. not Ors-
well himself, have fred on that particular
day, and the supposed existenceo Of tho "iour
days meetlng"at the time Of his receiving
the letter.
Butsupposo he had fixed OF that particular
day, what evidence is there to invalidate his
testimony Ho appears to have noticed,
very particularly the features and appearance
Of the man who gave him the letter, and the
peculiar circumstances ofthe case were well
calculated to impress them on his memory.
lie even noticed the Appearance OF the mans
hands snd mentioned at the time, that he
supposed him to be minister. 1t ls mucl,
less likely, under the circumstances ofthe
case, that Orswsll nsistook the man, after
what he relates, than that the 1--WE or elk wit
nesses who undertake TO account for Avery,
during the forenoon Of that day, should bs
mista ken in their calculations OF minutes cf
time, more than q month afterwards, whcni
is acknowledge ged, that at the time the circum.
stances transpired, there coald have beer
no possible motive for making these calcula.
tons, or bearing the details in mind. Mr..
Horton acknowledged in the afternoon, on.
the trial at Newport, that wsat. hc swore to
in the forenoon, at least, a part Off, was in.
correct-in other wsrds, that no was mistak-
en.--Wby not os liable TO bo mistaken in
other points, where circumstances did not
exist to satisfy him Of error? Why wero
not the others as likely to err q few moments
in their calculations and thus give to Avery.
sufficient time for his purpose. AS his,
however, thore is little difficulty in the case.
Mr.. Jillson did not see Avery, from . few
minutes, as he "should Mink,"a very cquivo-
cal sort Of testimony by the wsy--"a Few
minutes after half psst g." MI. Boyd saw
h;., probahlu ahouf tho aAma Tina. {os M