Lynchburg Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1829-185?, 1836-08-08


he spoke moro sharply than usual, and excited
my feelings ioi the moment. | never heard him
say that he had seen vision. first heard that
circumstance mentioned at the former trial. q.
Did his conversation with YOU embrace the wrong
done him by Beverly Tucker IN CARRYING his
slaves to Missouri Ans. never heard linn spc.
city any complaint against Mr.. Il. Tucker; hut
he spoke of him, rs dissatisfied with his conduct.
We rode one day 10 the place formerly occupied
by Mr. b. T. aud Mr.. Il. spoke in discontinued
manner OF his having ganc away, aud d'sappo'n'-
ed his expectations. lie seemed dissatisfied AT
his leaving the State, and said he had taken the
trouble to bring hi, brother there, and wished to
have him rs neghbor hu, he had gone oil and
disappointed his expectations. The houses were
out of repair; aud Mr.. r. said no did not care
what became of the estate. q. Did he say any
thing of Henry 81. George Tucker during Your WIS.,
it 7 llc spoke OF him, perhaps, incidentally but
| think he said nothing nnlriendly. Questioned
hv Mr.. Johnson.-Dd you learn, at the time YOU
visited MIR. Il. II, Grorguown, that he bad reeeiv-
ed "A letter from Mrs. Morris Ans. llo did not
mention the correspondence to me. The letter
carried MIR. X. WAS from my L,thcr, and he AN
swcIcd il while | was in the room. =. Had yoir
father received copy "i the correspondence WIN
MI Morris before he wrote To Mr.. X. Ans. MY
father had received "A statement from Mrs. Morris
the time. q. Have YOU read the paper in court,
purporins to be the letter of Mrs. Morris To Mr..
H., and can YOU tell whether il is the same sent TO
your father Ans. | have not read the paper now
in court.
The letter of Mrs. Morris then handed TO
witness, and after having read II, he sad: he
date OF this htter IS posie'or In the time Wien
| read Mrs. Ms answer or defence. Some oi tho
contents Of this paper are new TO mo-,hcre
are other statements and expressions which re-
collect. On the whole do not remember 10 have
read exactly such letter formerly. Questioned
bv Mr. Jones. DO YOU rccOllect whether it was
statement made by her of the correspondence and
her defence, or a copy of her locr 10 MIR. H.,
which your father received Ans. do moi, but
recocct that il was written with much energy
and in an attractive STYLE. Questioned by Mr..
Cooke. DO you say that in February, 1919, he
was sane Ans. Yes, he was calm and placid
and as he appeared rs usual did not suspect that
he was othorw isc ihan sanc.-Wmlo w'ilin" ms
answer to the letter which delivered linn, (l'av-
ng been invited TO dine ou,) one of the gentlemen
viii, whom he was to dino called and proposed
thai they should co. lie said no WAS engaged
Writing letter which must no, he nlt open, and
must be finished before he went q, by Mr..
Cooke. You say the letter he then wrote CON
tanned expressions similar To those You hhd
from your la,he, in relation 10 that corrcspon-
dcnco!
This nicrrogatory was objected 10 by MIR.
Jones, who maintained that evidence could
be received in regard 10 the character and CON
tents of u written paper, unless the paper lscii
were produced. The objection was sustained by
the Court.
Questioned b, Mr. Johnson. Could the letter
in question be found Ans. do no, know. My
brother was the Executor OF my father, and 1t Is
out of the State.
BENJAMIN Watkins Leieh ,e-framined- Cues
toned by the Court whether there was letter
from Mrs. Morris to Mr. r., among the papers
left with witness says he cannot state positively
thai this letter from Mrs. NJ. was no, among the
papers left in his office but he did not SEQ II a
mone them or he should have remembered II.
There was no necessity for Witness reading the
correspondence; for it would be Observed, that,
50 far as he was concerned, II made not il iig's
worth of difference whether the charges made III
the letter were true or false-as the only qncS-
ton submitted to him was tho propriety OF printing
them Questioned by Mr.. johnson as 10 his
knowledge of the character of Jud TncheI-
says: knew him well from my early youth to
the time OF his death, Question. Is there man
in the whole circle of your acquaintance whose
general character would 90 further to rrpcl an
Ans should say, certainly not. had the high
est opinion Of Judge rs moral character, and OF
his sense of honor. He was remarkable for stern
Justice. lie might have been mistaken AS TO ms
own rights bu, had he been shown his error no
man would more promptly have corrected IT.
Questioned by Mr. Jones, whether MIR. X. com
planned to witness OF judge Us settlements with
his wardsl Ans. Mr.. Il. said he took the ac
count as it was given him, and he wished to have
il overhaulcd. Question. From Mr.. RS sensitive
ness, should you not suppose that any suspicion oil
Judge rs unfairly claiming title 10 the slaves,
and then sheltcring himself under the lapse oi time,
would have made "A strong impression upon MIR.
X. Ans. do not think the question was ever
presented to Judge r. | believe that Mr.. X. never
stated his claim to Judge II. IL he had done so,
and it had appeared that the claim was Il just one,
witness had no doubt that Judge /. would have
waived the advantage Of time, and acted rs ut
thought Justice would require. q. Ito" 90 YOU
come to the conclusion that Mr.. y. never ai,P'eu
to Judge y. on the subject! ans. because I'M
dcrs,ood he wrote letter the subject but did
No, send il. do no, taow that heard this from
him but was intimate with two individuals who
constantly associated with Mr.. r., and had such
communication ,aken place | sure l should
hay, bcen informed of it, Besides, think, had
Mr.. r. applied to Judge Il. the latter would have
mentioned it to me. He very sensitive, and
very confdng in his intercourse with those to
whom he was attached and had he been aware
of the imputation made by MI. Il. am sure he
would have mentioned it. Question. Did YOU
not hear Alr r. speak of the ubject olen-did he
make a secret of III Ans. do not know how
it happened that Judge Il. escaped a knowledge OF