New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1842-06-11

corning my self moro than on ,ny other account
| am aware that if the charge "cfe used arsht it
81 ghi be turned to sustain an Indictment against
n elf. and regret exceedingly that it becomes
Il unpleasant duty notice the source irom which
these char--, emanale. Thi. il IN second time
they have been made and both u-rc in consec-
tiOn with my public duties,
An intimation appeared in this same PAPER some
time sinc-, which read IN the Congress of the
United States, of which 1 was member. and
while acting upon great public measure. tia,
the votes of the members bad been purch- .cd,-I
I'm now quoting the .cbsiency " an article in that
psper-at 100000 each repealed it in term,
which considered remarkably cool and remarka.
bly, moderate. An application was made to me
personally in writing 70 rc,ract what had said.
reviewed il and rouidn't retrnct il and never
nave. second application va. made Of which
took notice.
Th"re -tuc. the correspondence. and iere fol.
iors me rercnge. Nov do Mt know exactly
that | an good Judge of what 4 gentleman
ought Ia be-, as the man who wrote the article pub
li-hcd here but gentlemen. | assure You tia,
should have brought the matter before any other
court than tho one he has chosen Then a. to ihi.
part OF the subject | viii simply remark that in
Congress. at tse Bar before the Peoplc-in what
ever relation may sand with my fellow mem
consider all this merged in nv character 4, a gem
tleman; and never will seek. either here or else
where, TO protect myself hy any plea Of privilege.
rom the consequences Il any thing that | NAV
deem Il my duty to say or do: AMI in the whole
course Of my professional and public life. though
nave seldom, in the whole course of nv social ca.
tlon, been assailcd from QUARTER so entirely filthy
a this. have never in any way claimrd the
ur1s. fl.r .tt IL 4
any gentleman. he would have sought some other
mode and place--if he could have found them--to
get satisfaction than the column. Of a public news
paper ard b, DIGGING my client for the purpose
Of aveng;ng himself on me. When YOU consider
that this Is purely personal matter, you must OF.
tach what weight it YOU Fcasc-and will now
proceed 10 consideration of the case.
Whatever NAV 10 the result of vour sive.tga-
tioB-, there j. peculiarly about the testimony
and the origin Of tn" prosecution that ha. struck
me with surprise. 1t would be strange it the pros
ecuilon had not been able to make out plausible
case at the bar. The charge i. that the prisoner
forged letter purporting to be written at New
Orleans. and received on the 23d OF August.
The forgery va. detected on the Eth OF Sept.
Maun.c White CO.. reply to the answer TO the
letter charged to be- forge J, received Sept. II
The prisoner at the bar not arrested until the
"a of Oct. IL will bc contended that the prisoner
has been identified by all the persons who paid
him the face of the draft and Brown Brothers \
Co. had all the time between those two dates to
ascertain all the facts and circumstances which
nave been here developed ard so far a. appears it
would seem that none of this used, but that
the prisoner arrested the testimony OF some
body else. and all this testimony has been sought
since Within the knowledge of all the Witnesses
there Is no circumstance identifying the prisoner
with Caldwell. The prisoner in the meantime re-
mains tora whole month, walking about. even while
all these facts known and when he ia arrested
no proof whatever is brought against him. call
your attention tsen tn this pcculiarty-hat the
whole proof-though it be heavy enough II damn
the prisoner seems, | will not say got up, but
memGcred since tho arrest of the prisoner at the
bar and ak you to bssr in mind the difference
in the capacity of persons to know thing after
they have been told of it and before they have been
told of it how much easier il is to identify n
person after the full description ha. been made pub
nc than it Is 10 get a, it before this description has
been got hold Of And ask you to note the cir
cumstances under which these identifying witnesses
hacy offered their testimony
Now vsu must be satisfied that the prisoner
forged or uttered in New-York the letter OF Maun-
city. This IS the only part to be proved and it
NAV be proved either directly or BY circumstances
necessarily connected with the transaction. The
receipt Of letter here III the 23d OF August l.
proved pos,-markcd cwOrlenns. They prove al
80 the receipt OF letter from Alexandria acknow
cdgng the receipt of a letter enclosing drafts to
the amount of go 000-macd on the 26th. On
the Bis of August at Baltimore there were pre-
,cntcd and paid, endorsed by Jno. L. Caldwell. On
the I'd sept. the checks payable at Richmond were
presented there, paid and endorsed in the same
way. They have proved this handwriting of the
Alexandria letter and the endorsement of Jno. i.
Caldwell to be- all IN the same handwriting. They
say they have thus established an idcntit, between
the writer of the Alexandria letter and the person
referred To in the Maunsc White letter and ais.
that tins IL the same person who uttered the letter
Of Maunsel White at Nsw-lork who took out the
letter containing draft, at Alexandria. and who
presented and received payment of the drafts
Now all this must be proved By the testimony /;
lhI- l. the case the prosecution rely upon
We answer, that. when you come. IN a criminal
prosecution. Ia inquire On circumstantia evidence,
there Il one great presumption IN osr favor that
we are innocent until the contrary is clearly and
distinctly proved that no matter who or what b.
may 5e-ciiizcn, denIzcn or .trangcr-guilty OF
innocent Of all other crimes on earth the first
presumption OF the law j. that we are innocent I'M
I'll the commonwealth. by positive proof, establish
our guilt. We here then, far Acknowledge
that tie presumption II innocence. under the
weight OF testimony. IL 80 far DESTROYED that we
.hnll introduce opposing evidence II prove, not
that W. did not do it, bat, still stronger, that We
could not possibly have done H. |, is for YOU to
weigh not only what l. sworn to, but all the cir
cum,ianccs under which it i sworn toto weigh
testimony against testimony, and to decide, keep
ing in view the great principle have mentioned.
and the ether majestic principle of the majestic
avs uader which We live, that, IT YOU have doubts,
the prisoner must be acquitted
Now first the letter must be- shown - have been