The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1851-03-02

+ WASHINGTON. SUND
n~nt OF the ooers appointed BY law This is his duv
and he has no such power and dsnssou. inde~d would
will now proceed Ia revisw tho sack. that have been
made upon my interest in thi. claim After having been
driven lron every other position. my opponens' Hnsly
rested on the charg- that the power of attorney
which my interest In the claim paid gnod BY
the commissioners of the Chckasaw nation after they
| signed, Hla HH#a NIasg.tfs atN 5-er.
vii, first examine The evidence thar is produced to aus,
letter from Cyrus Harris describing himself the
subscribing Witnesses to this contract Now this letter
is altogether and unsatisfactory He hi.
preston, after lapse OF nearly five years, that
ed after the ish Of July but the only be gives
this is, that after election from Chiokasaw
district, which. no always takes place upon the
the almanac appears thai the second Wednesday Of July
isa5. came the 9Th day Of the month Mr. Ha'ris
states ~ do not know what day of tho month the second
Wednesday Of July, 1885, but from my recollection,
l ss s q a "a . h. s. s. have
Witnessed hr instrument before mentioned" This would
Cyrus Harris who would bring signing tho papsr.
according to his own impression, but little later than tho
the 9th the month, nine days the date Of
the resignao IL will he observed this letter is all in
Isri. wa. clerk oi council Of onioIa:aws iha, rspa
dated my claim IN l8A9 appears by his signature
made protest. and which bears his signature that he
did disclose 70 il what my opponents consider the i'm
purpose of council assa signed after the
signaon Of the commissioners Indeed from the date Of
1885, ia the midst all the opposition to it here and else
where, il is Incredible such objscIioa would have
| II bad been founded truth Again, Mr.. Cyrus Harris
was in this city when that letter wrtsn The counsel
defending rights wore the spot, but not invited to
hin, was hs sufficiently certain oi any
fac. put his into the form Of affidavit
The only other testimony is what purpors ,e the a
davt Of Charles Johnson, dated 2e January. 1885, stating
that this power vi attorney was signed weeks
nft The No
with hts Of the 18th of preceding In which he
.sa un ssp,smbsr @ I You s , ao~
1t proved by the documents and the parties
that the took place on the 18th OF July lsa5
This demonstrates that no reliance Whatever as regards
dates OF signature be placed the
impression this witness, admitting that
was intending the Fortunately however the
proof here conclusive Of fraudulent conspiracy. The
hrs proof thi, Mr. Johnson been guilty fraud
is this; the affidavit bears the following atiestation:
City Of Pailadelpha sworn and subscribed before me
this 18th OF January, A, 1850
alderman and ex-oficio justice the peace"
Attached % this at,esation is tho certificate under seal
mon pleas. certifying to the characisr Of this sder
and date OF this affidavit dated the 18th day Of Janu
fore the affidavit made and shows tho fraud upon the
face Of the papers Why this fraud @ was comml!,ed will
proceed 10 show On hs Ati January, 1850 Messrs
Corcoran Riggs received the following telegraphic des
| psichi ..0 .r.g
by telegraph, dated Philadelphia, 1919 Reed Wash.
ington, O'Clock, 10 minutes m To Corcoran 81 Riggs
Mr Johnson. of Chckasaw nation, Arkansas, Phil
ing Twin claim aganst them, which think be pro
"wM. LITTLE,
!" Attorney at Law"
Upon the call os an explanation Ms,srs Corcoran &
Riggs received the following paper.
RI. "PHII.ApKLPHIA, January Is. 1860.
Messrs. CoRcoRAS 81 Ri3osi Gentlem | received
your, Of Yesterday and examined the papers Ieleed to.
letter Of Mr. Armstrong in his possession would have
very impo,fa~t bsar'~S upon the claim Of DR. Gwn. Mr.
Johnson desires strict utray gard
The fnAtfR les
substantiAte the position OF the Chickassws whilst Arm
s IN wS%a Mr.
friendly DR.. Owns claim. | have reason suppose
ss ns
cure them. II you desire attendance In Washington,
let me know per letter or telegraph a. once % rr,v
| 3fice, "a South 9Th street"
We now clearly why the eerhoa,e TO the athdavl,
TO which IL is waered Is dared tho 2sh January. 1850
.vs h.s hs1s had been an ssd.y, Of ,h., date .sehe
to IL Where is that sihiavtf Why was suppressed,
paceI Rserence to Lirss rs~graphc despatch Of the
h. and hA o the 25sh January, viii unfave the
scheme Tho ,elegrap phe despatch shows that Johnson
did have paper, important Riggs case,
and which probably could be procured he letter OF the
Mr. Lule ,.ys the parer, viz thi. affidavit
and the letter o MI Armstrong !show,, secondly In the
ne a. would prove the validity The power OF attorney
your possession This being So that Armstrong; letter
/, il po.,ibis that any uuhiu affidavit could destroy
Here Is the proof He that oilers have been made
by opposing parties for these papers, and that their
torneys been here esiedy procure them Here
follows the proposition 10 Messrs Corcosn lsggs, in
words . II you desire attendance in Washing
ton let per telegraph or let,er at once" For
purpose Mr Litteto come 10 Washington His
letter cleady discoscs the purpose Bat there could
ain any doubt 1t made perfectly clear by his preceding
despatch. which !, IN these Words M John
sou Chickssaw nation, Arkansas, now In Philadelphia,
papers OF importance TO you regarding Owns
clam against them, which think os procwysd' Why
had Johnson shown these papers TO e Why had Little
sent this teegrapbic despatch and iet,st Gofooran
i Rigg.l Why the offer to com. 10 Warrington Why
that the papers could be pfocored1 Why
the that the opposite party had made oilers
for them, aud endesyoring 70 obtain them Why
the proposal to procure the psp.u WY the proposed
trend >bf Johnson Aud why the threatened adverse
affidavit There can be but one snswer 70 sh these
.tions and Will insult the understanding OF the
committee by supposng that zach sibisvit, given
der such could be regarded by them
thy OF any conside wbssver There point IN
IN. Johnson affidavit and Lle correspondence oi
i'm portance, which beg leave 10 call attention II is
this Lss despatch shows that "on the 2h January,
case" Ia his letter of the 2sh, lac stsest received
youfs Of yesterday, and beeve tnat the affidavit OF Mr.
Johnson ogsther with tn. letter OF Mr. Armstrong in his
possession would have ispotfdnf bear'nH upon The
es,m OF Df Gyn," Mr.. LATHE adds = 'ArmsuonR'si let
trr sure, woald prove the vaidy OF tns power OF at
,oruey IL will be observed that this
letter Armstrong then in Johnsons possession Now,
where Is that -rsr 1t Is the lcter OF the 2l Jubc,
lst5 first, b.cHu that letter was dated
b.ioe power OF attorney signed but for another
conclusive ssson, that the 18Th January, lsso
John had Byan copy OF II, whica
copy, the 18Th January Brian communicated TO the
by Luls ser, Of the 2sh January 1862 Johnson thcu
@uer from Armstrong proving the
vsiin power OF Attorney and that letter
pressed and The adverse affidavit hl.d IL wall be OBJ
A A. ~ .Yxfl t.l.,