Daily Richmond Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1840-1842, 1841-02-06
To THE puruIJc

n WILL briefly notice MIR Goodies s,a.ement In
Il reply To my recent Address to the Public.
sha add nothing on the subject OF my transfer Of
business to my son. Mr. Carter aud his counsel are
probably the only persons in the word who eanno,
or will not see that such transfer, before any work
was done Tor the year covered by IL. and before Mf
Caters judgment was Obtained, could not be al
ieeted 10y the execution on that Judgment. The
assertion that the transfer made "eon sssediy IN
| secret" appears now for the first time-is not al
ludtd TO even in the certificate OF Mr. Jones-and is
clearly the offspring Of highly Stimulated faculty
OF invention. will simply refer the statements
Of witnesses said 10 be opposed to mine, and which,
II is said, did not deem advisable TO submit along
| with my address
| LIST. Mr. Joness siafement-Mr Goole calls this
the "bSst evidence the admits Of" and publishes
what he calls "a copy Of statement Ju nfshed Mr.
Phip NJ. Tab, sr. agteeahly 10 his request" Now
who would infer from this, that had asked MIR
Jones for statement, which Of his oicn unprorPt-
] ed recollection he had made for me, and which ]
would not publish, because it unpaatable, and
that the paper he has published is a correct copy Of
| that statement Yet "mark how plain tale shall
| put him down." did procure a statement written
by Of my counsel, after had conferred with MIR
| Jones' and ascer'aned what he would state. sub.
| mted il to Mr. Jones for him 10 sign Saturday,
the 23d ult. Mr. Jones substantially concurred in
its accuracy. IL was corrected in some paitieu lars
| at his instance, and in some in his hand.
| still hold the paper corrected. Ii accoIds with
MIR Robert Mayo's statement, already published,
and with his Jones) admissions, stated by MIR
Samuel IL. Myers, tstc Mr. Myers certificate be-
low, J shev ing that MIR Jones admits the correctness
of MIR Msyos certificate in every important particu-
lar; and farther, that did not agree TO surrender
| the ls, IL notice were waived-Gut that il was n
matter of controversy which was willing the Judge
should decide. MIR Jones declined TO sign the GER
tihcate presented by me, because he desired 10 10 be
IN his oion hand wriitng and language, but said he
| would prepare one, and send il to next morning
Sunday by II o'clock. He did not do so, and |
sent his Office for the statement after that hour on
mes adm ted A.
Jones informed him, the door, that he woud bring
me the desired statement by ~ or o'clock Of that
day. Mr. Seldom, the joint counsel and partner
| with MIR Goode, was then in Mr. Jones' Office, ond
MIR Jones was then preparing, unde, his sbperpis-
ion, and tcih his assistance, the ststement to be
FURNISHED me at my request, in Mr. Jones' otcn
Handwriting aud language" which designed 10
use in my defence to the joint proceedings of Messs.
Goode and Seldom against me. This fact can be
proved, if denied, by the admission OF Mr. Jones'
and by witnesses unimpeachei and vrTssmpsp cha BILE
The statement itself, the offspring of these Joint
councils, was sent 10 me ut from p to O'Clock,
p. Nj OF that day. Let the public compare it with
the admissions OF MIR Jones proved hy MIR NV
eTs, and the statement Of Dir Robert Mayo, which
MIR Myers proves Mr. Jones admitted TO I've true
Let them look at the statement itself, confirming all
MIR Goodies previous assertions, with trivial ex-
ception, and conflicting with his own admissions
and then decide whether acted properly or i'm
properly, under all the circumstances, disregard
ing MIR Jones' statement entirely.
driven to the present exposure 10y the folly which
could not conceive or appreciate the motives which
impelled me 10 silence upon the facts have lust de-
tailed, and has dragged this statement before the pub
lie To owe my injury. But this is not ILL.,
The paper so osientatiously paraded as n copy
! Is not true copy. Perhaps the paper furnished
me was found to be not quite strong enough TO an-
swer the eXigencies of Mr.. Goodies position. Per.
hsps that furnished 10 my adversary was little
varied IN the eoncoctcn, or perhaps il altered
alter It was furnished him-certain it is that in
my copy, an important sentence reads as follows
AT the like instance of Mr. Tabb, | would state
what further conversation, according to my recol-
lection, occurred IN the interview between Mr. Tahb
and MIR. Goode at his ofice"-whereas in the pa- =
per furnished 10 Mr. Gt ode and published by him
as correct copy, 1t reads thus-"At the like in
| stance of Mr. Tabb, would state what iurtherco
verSntIOn, besides that stated TN Mr. Goodies pubE
cation according my recollection, occurred in the
interview between Mr.. TaJb and Mr.. Goode at his
Office" (Sce Mr.. Myers certificate who has com.
pared the two) Passing by the circumstance that
the succeeding matter in Mr.. Jones' statement as
to what Mr.. Goode said to MIR. DRbb about the
| transfer since the judgment and execution in the
olse, and in anticipation Of Carriers Judgment and
that the records did not show such transfer never
| were stated nt my request, and never did occur
cal attention To the discrepancy just alluded to-
The words in italics, "beStdeS that stated in Mr.
Goodies publication" make me request Mr.. Jones TO
state Whatever conversation, besides that detailed in
Mr. Goodies publication ever occurred, thus making
LEGATION actually did occur, and moreover make MIR
Jones himself give wholesale certificate to the
conversation embraced in any of the previous pub
locations of MIR. Gocde, OF which he has made Sc
Ivetal-Under all these circumstances, he'd Mr.
Jones' statement been exactly what wanted, feel
should have been trnng with the public and with
my own character, had | made any use Of it what.
ever.
| 2jly. As to the Clerks statements | admit that
applied TO Mr. Robinson, but he stated he could
net iemember anything apart from :he record-that
became i'm very late ard present at all that
occurred, and desired for these reasons not TO give
onI statement-subsequently 10 my previous publ
catnn he has given one, which will he found below
WHICH from the vagueness OF its character, can
he lrtle relied on--whieh is opposed To MIR. Sands
statement below, and also to MIR. Ro A. Mayo's
already published, and in which he can be proved TO
DC entirely mistaken, by the testimony Of several
other gentlemen who were present at the time. IL
is true did apply 10 the Deputy Clerk, Mr.. Sands
who WIS present during the " hole proceeding, land
| ioho tosS about 10 administer the oath 10 me ipLen
| Mr.. Robinson came into The Court r0om) for his
statement. 1t differs from MIR. Ro. A. Mayo's in no
important particular, and establishes the essential
fact thatl might have taken the oath without Mr.
Goodies waiver OF notice-and farther goes to prove
that the Intention of Mr.. Goode to publish the no.
lice 10 my employers was not expressed to me- but
alter had left the room. This certificate was
not obtained upon my first application for il. be-
cause MIR. Sands did not then state what he now
does, hut simply from his aversion to come before
.
Goodies assertions warranted, that the Clerk Of
the SuperiU Court refused to give a statement
because Inc did not agIee with me rs to the facts,
and that ialed TO geta statement from the deputy
Clerk, because he could not give one materially va
rant from his MR.. Goode's.)
leave the public to judge Of Mr.. Goodies sin.
cerity IN his professions of moderation and silence
about matters upon which "Iegal measures" have
been adopted, from the very glowing picture he has
drawn OF a "Uicftn" (himself, nnmely,) eEdgslled
RHdesTrsSly aud unaieares. Was this an nvolun.
inry and imprisoned outbreak at the painful re-
uospeciion, or a deliberate design 10 heighlen da-
images in case where "Isgai MEASURES" have been
adopted
lie complains Of the epthets have applied 10
his conduct ard statements. ! nm not aware oi
any use of them by myself, which was not neces-
sary TO a faithful exposition of facts.
PHILIP NJ. TABB, SR.
February 4th, ls4l.
cERrIFTcATE or s. n. MYERS.