American Republican and Baltimore daily clipper. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1844-1846, 1846-12-21
Correspondence of the Bslumsre Clipper J
W,sgINCroN, Dec. 10, 1874

fhe Yam Ness Case. The rebutting testimO-
ny of the defence was continued Messrs. Nor
veil, Hunt and Chapman, Representatives in
Congress from Michigan, deposed to having
known DIR. keichum, the former, first IN Her
kimer county, n. Y, and all of them subse-
quently III Michigan. Their testimony was
generally favorable to the fair character for We
racity and morality of the Doctor.
Mr. Kennedy ofthe city post office, Mr.. Ma
guire and Mr. Thr9op, were severally Gxam'n-
cd in confirmation OF points III their former tcs-
tim)ny.
Senator Woodbridge of Michigan, deposed
avOrably for the character OF DR.. Ketchum.-
At least he, as well as the Representatives who
all had known him as engaged in the removal
of the Indians in Michigan, said they had never
heard any thing affecting his reputation. Mr..
Hunt had never heard of his attempting the Sc
duction Of Mrs. Samuel Sasher.
DR.. Jones was examined at length as a s2ien-
tiC man in regard to the extraction of differ.
ent inks, with view of deriving at correct
conclusions about supposed tricks upon SEINE OF
the envelops in court.
Mr.. Benton ofNew York, deposed favorably
as to DR.. ketchum's character for yeraeity, so
far as he had heard. He had heard of some
differences he had with his church IL New
York
Mr.. J. Gaumer had kuown DR.. 4. in N. Y.
also, and had never heard any thing disreputa-
bic Of him till within the last two weeks, and
that he had traced to Mrs. Conner. He rela-
ted it liz substance, to be essuraAces that in two
letters Mrs. G. had from the Doctor, there was
matter which would brand him as an infamous
man.
Mr.. Bradley, Of counsel for defence, deposed
TO the substance of con ersation between him
and DR.. h. as to his feaIs of the production by
Mrs Common Of letters he had written to her,
with the design of showing that the DR., was'n
30 almighty scared abou5Ahe matter az he had
been represented. Mr.. B 'sstatement was much
to the same effect, howe yer, as that by the 9TH
er witnesses on this point. The DIR. he said,
had assured him that there was nothing, in
them which would affect his moral charac Ter
which induced Mr. Brent to insist. pom the in
PRODUCTION of the testimony ola witness who
read them, TO have the converse fact. But it
was not allo we'd
The counsel for defence had now gotten
through with their Tebutting proof, they said,
when Mir Brent made a statement about b Az
ing mad extraordinary efforts to get Doctor
Leon here in time from Philadelphia, but Isad
failed so to do, and now wished to examine him
10 prove an alibi in regard to Aid N. Braz'er's
testimony, who had SAID Mr. Shurburne was
the man who placed the brlbe of $1,000 in his
hand about the 10th of Sept. The Doctors
testimony wou Id show that Mr. S. was then
confined The counsel for defence wish ed
Adm Brazer to be present. at the giving in Of
this testimony, aad the Court granted that I he
matter should lay oveI till Monday, with til at
object, and shortly after adjourned.
So this wond, Irtul case, which has now benn
more than north or the taps, has prospect
Ofspeedi!y reach ing the jury, The counsel do
not intend und arstand, 10 consume time in
the discussion of points Of law. They declare
themselves to be ready for a fair jury light
Success to both parties say THAT will be
coming nearest tC, the fair thing. c.