The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1851-08-21
From The Philadelphia Sun Of yesterday.


UNITED STATES CoMMIssIoEERs' OrFIoE.-Bgors
Commissioner HeaSllt- Charged toih uttering as
true Assignment of a Land JpaiTant.-On Mon
day afternoon warrant issued by Commits
sioner HeaZit for the arrest of person concerned
in procuring land warrants under the late act OF
Congress. The arrest was made by deputy mar
shall H. l.. Smith, the same afternoon, who held the
defendant in custody until yesterday morning,
when hearing took place before Commissioner
Heazhtt.
John d. Davis testified that he applied for land
warrant, through defendant, in September, lS49.
Defendant prepared all the papers. He saw him
while the papers were progressing frequently, and
after their completion, and generally converted
with him; he said he would get the warrant in
three months; he called on him frequently, and de-
PENDANT said he had never received any answer as
to that warrant; he looked over his books when he
said this; things went on in this way for about
eighteen months, during all which time he assert
cd that he had never received the warrant.
Some time in June, 1851, the witness saw X. *
Scott, cap, who inquired If witness had ever re-
ceived the warrant. caveat was then fled at
Washington, and three days after witness received
letter, stating that the warrant was issued in
October, lS49; witness called defendant and
stated these things 10 him; defendant said 1t was
very strange, as he had never received the war
rant nor the three months extra pay; this was In
January, 1851; witness called often after that, but
still received no information; defendant said that
bis agent had never mentioned the thing to him.
Subsequently defendant acknowledged, In Mr..
Scott's office, that he had received the warrant,
but he did not know witnesses face, another per-
son who represented himself as witness had made
the assignment of the warrant Before this de-
fendant had always denied its receipt. The as
signment produced before the commissioner,
and the witness denied the signature. The name
of the defendant, subscribing witness, is in the
handwriting of the defendant.
The warrant and assignment was produced and
offered i'll evidence, which defendants counsel OBJ
jeced to. The objection was, that the forgery was
not shown to be by defendant. The objection was
overruled. The charge was not for forgery, but
for uttering true forged assignment, which
forgery was committed in the presence of defend
ant, he being a subscribing witness The warrant
is dated Nov. "a, 1919. The assignment was nade
on the 18th of January, 1850.
Captain r. X. Scott was called, and corroborated
the witness as to calling at his office, &c. The
captain wrote to Washington, and received an an
swer that the warrant had been issued. He then
filed caveat and served notice on defendant, re-
qucsting him to make affidavit, which he failed
to do, after promise. Defendant admitted the re-
cept of the warrant, but said that another person,
who now had gone away, had personated the wit
ness, Davis, and made an assignment OF the war
rant.
The testimony Of Davis was also corroborated by
another witness.
District Attorney ]. w. Ashmead appeared for
the United States, and Rister for defendant. An
| opinion will be given this morning.