The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1848-10-12
WAsHINGroN, October 10, 1848,
WAsHINGroN, Uctober To, 1915.
The ALLEGED Land Warrant Forgery Case.
The Justices Court met this morning at ten O'Clock,
and the ex animation WAS resumed

and the examination resumed.
THOMAS c. FARqUAHAR, q clerk In Stettiuiuss office
examined for the defence q former occasion, was
re- called and oross-exsmned by the counsel for
the United States, with regard to conversation he
had with Morgan and Hines after the night Of the
frat examination, three weeks ago AT the request OF
the counsel for the defence he made the following OK
PLANTATION IL taken sick Saturday after noon
after Phillips had made the purchase of the land
rant. came to thu office on Monday but obliged
to return home. again came to the Office on Tues
day. On Tuesday, or Wednesday, l met with Mr..
Hines he asted the nature Of tho charge agai
Phillips told him knew nothing about 1t he
laughed, and said that Phillips had been arrested and
held to bail informed Hines that had heard no.
thing Of the case; said, that If there had been
forgery 1t mutt have occurred by one stealing
papers from the Pension Office, and imposing them on
Phillips it was merely prophecy Of my own, Col
Edwards, the Commissioner, could not know every
body at sight my conversation with Morgan, was to
the effect | did not know whether Phillips or
Stettnus had b, zen charged with forgery heard Of
both will state how came to bear Of it.
Mr.. BRApLEY.--Do, If y please
Thursday morning. I asked Mr. Stettinius all about it.
and he told Either Mr.. Philips or Mr Saunders,
office on Thursday night and seh ng his warrant and
l stated what subsequently gave n evide nee.
The Counr.-The 6rst examination Monday
evening. How long after this vas 1t, that you had
the conversation with Mr.. Stettinius?
Mr. FARqUAHAR.-It was Wednesday evening or
Thursday MOI n,ng; think in the morning
Cross examined by Mr. RADcLIrre 1t might have
been on Tue.day, that had the conversation with
Morgan and Hines; was not at the Office after that,
Mr. Bn4rLrY.-And until that time you did not
know what 1t was?
Mr. FAKQUAHAR.-No, sir.
MIR RApcLIrrE.-You tell the Court, that you heard
of the case and made no inquiry
Mr. BRADLiY-On Monday morning.
MIR. RspcLrFFE.-Issy after the examination before
Justice Vap-Tyne.
Mr. FARQUAHAR-I have just stated the inquiry T
MIR. RADcLIrrE.-This occurred on Monday and you
had the conversation Tuesday On Monday morn
ing, did make an inquiry into the character Of the
care!
MIR FARauAHAn.-I think l asked Morgan If tho
charge was true
Mr.. RApcL,rrn Did you tell him about the case
Mr.. FARQUAHAR.-He told ne.
Mr.. RApcLIrFE What did he tell you It was?
Mr.. FARQUAHAR Forgery.
MI RADcLiFFF.-Then made no inquiry?
Mr. FAKQrAHAn.--It think asked Morgan about It. as
he passing up down the streets doing business
Messrs Morgan and Hines were not mined 1t
not permitted under decision made by the Court
yesterday.
There was here long pause in the proceedines-al
the witnesses summoned not being in attendance
Witnesses were called by the United States to i'm
peach the testimony Of those for the defence.
MIR BARucH HALL sworr.- Has known Samuel G.
Kneller FOR ten years principally in the district; those
who know him lay that his character truth
is not good; would not believe him on OATH this was
Cross Examined Had heard John A. Donoho and
George Stettnius, and Others express themselves
to the reputation of Kneller; had difficulty With
Kneller in lb4O 1912; he did threaten to whip
me- heard that his character for truth not good
Sner SsS OF OF
veracity of Kneller frequently beard of quarrel be-
tween George Stettinios and Kneller have spoken
Kneer openly and freely spoke of him yesterday, in
Psrksr's store; my hostility from the feeling
Kneller showed towards in business ira usaction
In reply to question Of Mr. Radcliffe, the witness
city, came to him after he had the transaction.
Mr. BRApLEY--.Did not the difficulty between you
and Kpper result from your writing letter to mem.
Ter f Mr. Kneller's family?
Mr.. EArcLIFrE objected to this question
DA>IEL ROWLAND took the stand. He said that he
had herd Kneer spoken Of frequently and his truth
A discussion arose as to question propounded by
Mr. Radcliffe; finally it was put BY the Court in this
putation?
Ais reputation, as far as have heard, is not
The Counr.-what is his reputation for truth and
At is rather unfavorable
The CouRr.-Whst is it where he is best known
Al don't know where he Is best known.
G. by MIR. RADcLIFFE.-Would you, on the reputa-
tion you heard concerning Kneler, believe him on
cath!
A-Taking what heard to be true, don't thiak
would
Cross-eramined - Can't say how often have been
in Virginia since Kneler has lived there Perhaps
may have been there three. four Ave times. During
my wits Virginia bis character for truth spoken
of; think DR.. Locke spoke of IL cannot re ember
any other person who spoke of it | account for my
being sum mo ned because ! stated to Mr. Radcliffe,
that / heard Kneller's character was bad.
T. M. Nc En- HANY affirmed He called by the
defence Resides in the city of Washington; has
sided in virginia. never heard body there say
thing against heller before this trial was surprised
and expressed a'topisbment that he was involved in
any difficulty; my father resides within few miles of
Kneers residence | have visited him and all his
negbbors in Clarke county, and never heard his cha
racer questioned.
Cross e1amined-Nev.r heard his veracity ques-
tioneo before If bad never would have darkened
his door; have heard Kneler spoken OF as kind
hearted neighbour the first gentlemen associate with
him.
JOHN RicHARDsoN, sworn said IL reside in Vir-
GINS in Clarke count, three miles from knsllers
He associates with all the respectable men in our
peigbborbood He tells some joking tales sometimes
but stands fair in the community.
SAMUEL BRowN testified as to the two land warran is
having been issued to the same person.
Judge YOUNG. Commiss ioner Of the Land Ofhce was
examined as to the mode Of trsnsactiug business In