The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1840-07-25

g9meary in the Capitol on Saturday, the 3oth Of May
Mr. Montgomery was passing from the direction Of
the post Office of the House OF Representatives Mr.
Kayner came through the middle door, and going to-
wards the post Office They met face 10 face
the water stand Mr. Rayner had cane in his left
hand He described the position Of the il was
held by the let hand near the head, which projected
from him. As they met, Mr.. Rayner, with his left
hand, which then held the cane, took hold Of Mr.
Montgomerys right arm, and AT the same time, with
ms own right hand, struck Mr.. Montgomery twice in
the checks. Cannot say certainly whether his hand
was or was not clenched; but from the sound, be-
lieyes his hand was open. Mr.. Montgomery olsen
gagged his tight hand, and, with stick, struck Mr.
Rayner. The stick broke with the blow. Mr.. Ray
ner, with his right hand, seized the cane which
still IN his left hand towards the small end and struck
Mr.. Montgomery, At the first blow, the sword,
which was at the large end flew out, and the blows
which followed were inflicted with the harrel-end of
the cane Could not distinguish particularly, the
blows which passed. Mr.. Montgomery had his hand
on Mr. Rayner's breast. Several persons rushed in
and the parties were separated Mr. Rayner did not
appear to wish to injure Mr.. Montgomery had he
been so disposed he might have done so,
The Hon. George H. Profit then sworn on
behalf Of defendant. He stated that he was in the
neighborhood Of the scene, and hearing noise
TO the place. Saw Mr. Rayner and Mr.. Montgomery
IN conflict. Mr.. Montgomery had his hand Mr..
Rayners breast. The latter had the scabbard bar
rel-end of n sword-cane in his hand, with which wit
blows, The parties speedily separated Mr.
Rayner appeared cool and composed and inquired for
the part Of the cane which he had dropped. In an
swer to remark made to him by witness that the
thing had occurred, and would probably make some
noise he wished that he had left his mark Mr. Ray
replied, that he did wish injure Montgome
ry, but only TO disgrace him. and had slapped his face
for having accused him of falsehood Witness thought
that Mr.. Rayner might have hurt Mr.. Montgomery,
had he been disposed Mr. Montgomery appeared 4
good deal agitated and alarmed.
Mr.. CoxE observed, that he had nothing further,
on behalf of defendant, to lay before the Court ex-
cepting publication made by Mr. Montgomery in
the Globe OF May 30h the evening after the occur
renee, which contained Mr. Montgomcry's statement
OF what had passed and the previous publication be-
tween the parties which exhibited the circumstances
OF provocaion which had led TO the rcnconter He
asked the Court in celebrating upon its judgment
examine this publication, and estimate the provocation
which had been offered
Mr. Key District Attorney, minated his intention
to wait until Mr. Montgomery, whom he had sent
for, should arrive when he might determine, after
sultation with him. whether or not he would lay be-
fore the Court any other testimony.
Some time after Mr.. Montgomery appeared and
after some conversation with the District Attorney
Mr.. Key announced to the Court that he did not de-
sign to offer any further evidence.
The foregoing statement, made by me, from
notes taken in Court Immediately after the examina-
ton OF the case, and is believe strictly accurate
RICHARD S. COKE.
WASHINGTON, June % 1910.
We hereby certify that we have examined the fore
gong statement of the evidence given by us respec-
lively, on the trial Of the Hon. K Rayner, and the
same is fair and full statement of our evidence as
given under our oath, before the Court.
GEORGE H. PROFIT,
PHILIP HAAS.
From the following certificate, from the Clerk
Of the Court, it will be seen that these were the
only witnesses sworn on the trial.
Criminal Court Of the District Of Columbia, sitting
for the County Of Washington
June Term, lSi0.-lndict-
ment for assault and
battery William Mont
The UNITED STATES gomery--1Gth June the
- against case submitted To the court
hENNETH RAYNER, 18th June, Judgment,
that the Defendent pay a
fine of $50, and costs of
prosecution
II appears from the Minutes of the Court in the
above cause, that Philip Haas was the only witness
sworn on the part Of the prosecution, and the Hon.
MIR. Profit the only in defence.
Test WILLIAM BRENT, Clerk
On this evidence which was uncontradicted
by Montgomery was sent for by f. s.
Key, prosecuting attorney, and refused to be
sworn, after a close and secret conversation with
him for some time--l was sentenced to pay
fine of fifty dollars.
The foregoing evidence speaks for itself 1t
proves that the aforesaid Montgomery quietly
submitted to personal chastisement, and then
attempted tocoyer his disgrace by using towards
me low and abusive epithets, and by publishing
statement which he knew to be false, and to
which he refused TO swear, when brought into
court. ! ask the public to compare the uncon-
tradicted evidence in the case, as given in a
court of justice, with Montgomery's account
both of the manner Of attack and of his orn he
roism, as contained in his letter of May 30 and
the only comment have to make is, that re-
greet exceedingly the necessity which compes
me to trouble the public further with this matter;
and regret still more the necessity which com
PEELED me, in the first instance, to lay my hands
on such wretch.
X. RAYNER.
WASHINGTON crry .July 90, lS40.