The New York herald., 1851-08-07

putting Il in. and then the whole statement and
not merely part Of It, must be taken.
Mr.. Romeyn-If defendant is not 10 derive any
advantage from making consistent, probable
statement, then there would be use in the sta-
tute giving him the privilege. IL cannot compel
him. to make statement II is his privilege
to do So and then that statement is to be weighed
with the evidence, and all taken into account by
the magistrate.
Mr.. Eager-What object to is using Bradley's
statemt Mt to corroborate the witnesses.
Mr.. Romeyn-No, but these witnesses show
Bradleys statement to be true. Barber says the
SO 900 securities were given TO him by Bradley to
cover q debt-according to his own showing of only
$ll 500. Bradley says he gave it TO him for the
purpose Of purchasing bank stock. Barber is con-
fradicted, and Bradley sustained by Hobart and
Weymouth. The latter says it was to be dis
counted to carry out the operations. Why should
he give his own note for 1000. when he was al
ready indebted $1,000, and give, moreover the GER
ti6cstes of his.own bank! 1t is the widest story
ever heard. But there is written evidence as well
as testimony to- contradict it. 1t is in proof that
the WaggoDer letter Of credit was limited to the
purchase OF q bank; Bradley must have given il,
and Barber received it for this purpose or else both
are guilty Of fraud on Waggoner; and now we
see the reason why we could get hold Of that
letter during the progress of this investigation. al
though 1t has been repeatedly called for and as
often promised. Fortunately, We have evidence of
its contents. Weymouth's testimony and the
whole character of the transaction confirm the re-
presentation We have given Of this matter Again:
BARRIERS statement is entirely inconsistent with the
terms of the contract between Bradley and Barber,
of 18th Oct. This contract specifies that the funds
were not put in hands, but that they were to be
put in hands. To get rid Of this proof, Barber
swears that he never saw that contract. st. John
contradcts him. and says the contents were read to
him about the 18th Of October 1t may be said that
this is balance Of testimony, but Barber's own
h1s s gives $ ss Of S ssn.t rs s%
ring to o contract, and to money to be thereafter
advanced, and at the bottom of this letter, the
same page, Barber writes as follows:-
FRANKLIN HOUSE, New York, Oct IL, 1850
GEo. HoBAnr, ESQ.,. North Oxford Mass.-Dear Sir
| was at your place yesterday, and made memoran-
dun contract with Barton Es relative to the Bank
to csny out this matter you shall be beray rewarded
Yours truly, M. A. BRADLEY.
above matter promote interest my partner Mr.
Bradley and myself will be duly appreciated and for
which you shall be be libersy compensated ,n
New York, Oct II, 1850
ST. shall have nothing to do with any other par
How was the force of this to be avoided He
says that in so important matter as a contract
involving several thousand dollars, he mover asked
for its contents from one whom he styles his part
ner. lie goes into contract with man who was
comparatively stranger to him, and he never sees
the contract, nor asks as to its contents. Whom
do you believe, st. John or Barber All that
ask is, that you will take into considera-
Barber and Bradley differ, Bradley is supported
by other witnesses, and Barber is contradicted IL
you, therefore, hold Bradley, you will hold him on
the unsupported testimony of Barber; testimony in
which he contradicts himself in most important
matters. 1t is q maxim that if witness prove
false in one he shall be held false in all it is the
motto Of common sense as well as the rule of com
mon law. The general fairness of Bradley's deal
ings with Barber is not in the question if it were
it could be successfully vindicated. Barbers inter-
est in the contemplated purchase not concealed
from any OF the parties cognzant OF the operation.
He himself, constituted Brady the negotator.
Bradley's own name, he evidently approved Of
and in his postscript of the 18th October says to
Hobart that he will have nothing to do with any
other parties. His whole testimony shows that the
negotiations to be in Bradly's name, with his
consent. OF the money paid by him. Bradley put
IS 600 in Bartons hs nds. This all that Barton
required as will be seen by Bartons receipt of the
2sth October, set forth in Hobart's testimony. Its
as follows
WORCESTER, October q, 1850.
Received Of n. A. Bradley $4,000 (six thousaud dol
sr for the purpose Of carrying out contract signed
the event Of its requiring more than the amount fur
nshed by said Bradley, to furnish the same,
which sad Bradley is to refund to my making the
stock to him. In the event Of not being able to
carry the agreement out to refund said six thou
ssaS s dollars s 1.s the .d Bradley Tsny AK this
II was the duty Of Bradley, hcrhaps. to have left
in Barton's hands all the money he received. But
the contract says only 10000 were wanted. That
sum was put up, and it might have been as we'll
for him to have said that the other 800 not
put up; but on the same day he putuP in Horbart's
hands 900, securities, Of which 5000 were the
liabilities Of third persons and were according to
the evidence, good. Counsel may sneer at them,
but ST. John has sworn that these Memphis GER
tifcates are good, and that the Waggoner draft is
good. This 1000 in Horbart's hands, and the
5000 in Barton's hands, make up the $4,000
stated in the receipt 1t covered both his own por
tion and what he kept back Of Barber's THIS
have mentioned to show that Bradley acted per-
fectly fair and in good faith. But this is not the
issue. You only to try the fact whether he did
obtain "a 500 by stating that $3.50 had been put
up in Barton's hands, and by exhibiting false to-
ken, the receipt of Barton, for that purpose, and
whether he afterwards obtained $500 moro BY a
representation that he had paid 5000 In addition
In conclusion, We ask you to remark under what
circumstance this accusation was made; to scan
closely the original complaint; to note how frankly
and fully Bradley made his statement dangerous
proceeding for guilty man, but q safe and honor
able course for one conscious Of innocence; and,
finally to see which is most consistent and most
in accordance with probability and with the testi.
mohy.
The case was then adjourned.