Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1840-10-02
COMMUNICATED.

hope you Will pardon me Tor troubling you with a
communication of facts that within my own
knowledge In the Spring Of the year 1881, Mr. John
NJ Bolts had been from home some days. when he
returned, his servant Dick (Hho was his head nam
We nj 10 ms master and charged his "a white
mani with puTlo,nng 4 bag al meal. On receiving
this information from his slave, h ('otsl discharged
his ovcrsccr from his employ. The oversrer being
arnrCvcd that his reputation should he brought IN qGeS
ton by negro and wishing to establish his innocence,
and being ignorant of the law such case, applied to
Justice oil the Peace for warrant to bring the said
negro before himself or some other Justice, that the
false charge might be inquired INTO. The slave was
accordingly apprehcnd,d ana carried before sad JUS
lice Mr. Bolts also attended to what was to be
done with his slave When the ready for
hrarinp the slave was introduced witness state
what he had said 10 his master about the meal He
went on to several things he had SAID derogatory
his orcrsccrs rcpuaton, when gentleman present
incurred of the Justice whom he was ryingit he was
trying the negro he could not give evidence in his own
case-if he was trying the ovcrseer the negros es'-
m0nv was not admissible. The negro was then d.
reccd 10 stand aside and Mr. Bolts was introduced as
witness. He went on Ia STATE what his negro had
told Inn, for time, not stating any thing he knew
himse,-only what the negro had stated to him; when
the same gentleman observed that Mr. Bolts testimony
was no better than the negro Shat It was nrarsay
testimony and what he heard the negro say, and was
not LEGAL evidence. Mr.. Bolts testimony being OBJ
jected TO BY The gentleman, threw HIM INTO violent
PASSION and he made several remarks about The gentle
man 5 being political enemy of his, or h. would not
have iuirrrrrd He then asked for continuance Of
Tie case: which was granted.
The above Transaction was at the Yellow Tavern IN
The county Of irnrco, the presence ct consdern-
Die number Of gentlemen. And # IT is denied can be
proven BY those who were present.
Now, Sir, have given you tins plan statement OF
facts that YOU may how far Mr.. Bolts sanctions or
approves Of negro trstlmony-that YOU may contrast
il with his much ado about negro testimony IN Lieut..
lloocs case.
seotcmbcr 2S-I had interview with the magistrate
Yesterday about Mr. Bolts negro witness. He said he
well rpcoilcctcd that Mr.. Bolts insisted examining
the negro a witness against his oversecr And even
Mead that he ought to be allowed to do Aud when
the magistrate refused Mr. B. charged him with being
political enemy Of his. And Bolts has spoken of the
case 10 several persons since, and complained oil his
not being allowed 10 examine his negro.
TO THE EDITOR or rHE ENQUIRER
In replying TO certain enquiries made OF me through
your paper some time june BY one OF my const'tl-
cns signing himself 'Bnckskln, touching letter from
Mr. Rlves 10 Mr.. Garland, which was used BY me last
winter IN the eilor, TO elect Senator Of the U S,
designed to state explicitly and without reserve, every
fact that thought calculated 10 place the SUBJECT IN us
true point of view before the public.
Among other circumstances connected with the al
fair, said that had aPprtsed Mr. tontaine OF my m
ten,ion to apply to Mr. Garland for any evidence he
mrht have and be at liberty To use, showing that Mr.
Rves would support the election OF Gen llarrIs"n-
In making this statement 1t more than probable
was mistaken.
In passing through Charlottesville to this place lew
DAYS ago got from the post office letter from Mr.
F dated July 3D. in which he seems very conhdent
that am mistaken in surprising that communicated
10 him my intention of applying to Mr. Garland, ana
that he has no recollection Of my movement IN tins
matter until the receipt of Garands letter enclosing
Mr. Rivess.'
Nv impression a, the time | wrote the reply, was,
and is not yet entirely removed. that having written
the letter to Mr. Garland at my desk, IN the Senate
Chamber and ha opening observe Mr. F. sitting near
me- handed it to him read before sealing and delr
vering to the doorkeeper 1t IS possible, however
that in this am Mistaken and that have fallen into
the error BY cOninunjine my letter TO Mr. Garland
with his to mc-and that ii the last and not the
first that showed 10 Mr.. Fonaine This explanation
lis rendered the more probable, By the fact that Mr.
G.s letter contained an elaborate explanation OF Ms
votes in the election of Clerk and Speaker OF the House
of Representatives, which not being understood were
much complained of by of his friends Tins eSpla
nation as it was made in to enquiries PROFOUND
ed him By myself, felt but just to communicate
TO those who presumed took interest IN the matter
! But Sir, whether did or did not communicate t
Mr. F. my intention Of calling on Mr.. g. for the lnior
nation desired, is matter of the most perfect ndif
ference If communicated at all, il was for ne .trs
md onvy time, on the 10th of January, land IN ih
way have just mentioned, for that is the date OF n
letter. Before that time soemny aver that not On