Martinsburg gazette. [volume] (Martinsburg, Va. [W. Va.]) 1833-1855, 1852-05-19
TO THE PEOPLE OF
BERKELEY COUNTY.

VI YOU DJ Jill AAlkH4JQ ~. LtAab1Ai, " Hba~atf
under other circumstances, | should give no
response in the Papers, except TO state IN the
most emphatic terms, that it is not only un-
true but unjust and to invite bin. ifhe is really
dissatisfied With the condition Of the pecuni-
airy transactions between him and myself, to
appeal to the tribunal Of the Courts.
Having, however, chosen not only not to
SUE. but to seek to redress his supposed
grievances, by the unusual mode Of a resort
to the public prints having done so, on
the eve Of an election, in which ! am can
didate for most responsible ofiee--it will
be expected Of me that | shall give an answer
to his charges, through the same medium.
shall certainly take no pleasure in doing so.
Much as he has attempted to wrong me--ut-
terly unjustifable. as cannot doubt, all
right thinking persons will regard his attack
upon me aud the method Of it, particularly
when the facts are laid before them--it is,yet.
disacreeable to me, to be compelled to do
that which will expose any Of my fellow citi-
zcns to public condemnation. 1t is the more
disagreeable, as / incline TO think. that to
some extent, perhaps, be is laboring under
some Misrepresentation, merely, of the matters
| of business between us. | cannot disguise
| from myself, however, that other motives may
have Influenced him to SO extraordinary a
course.
As propose to make distinct and COM
plete statement of the transactions referred
10, shall be compelled to ask public atten-
ton to some details Of figures without which
a correct opinion cannot be formed.
Executions against Mr.. Seaman, for large
amounts, and taxes due by him for number
of years past, have been in my hands for col
lection. Various sums, from time to time, have
been paid upon these liabilities, but they re
here, that, until within the last few weeks,
have never advertised his property for sale,
although it was in my power, and strict duty
as an officer, would have compelled me to
have done So long since. My leniency and
indulgence have led to the present state of
things. 1t is no new thing. however, that the
adage, "Short settlements make long friends,
is reversed, when the settlements are deferred
and that those. most INDUCED, not unfre-
quently, become our most bitter assaiants.
My first settlement, on tie 14th Of January
1850, with Mr.. Seaman, included among
other things, taxes for the years, 1916, '47,
4S and 40, upon which the sum of $50, only,
during all that time was paid. After deduct
ing Sl151 IA, due to him, as trustee Ger
Ellen Conely, it left a balance due me Of
$36 121a, for which ] took bis note.
In this settlement was the balance of an
execution, Lucas, assignee, VS.. Tate, Seaman,
and myself as security il, the delivery bond.
This debt Mr. Seaman complains that com
PEELED him to pay-he being only security,
am not aware that he was merely sccuri
ty. He and Mr.. Tate were partners in the
mercantile business; it was borrowed money
and used by the firm. Mr. Tate was, as he
states perfectly solvent and able to pay, and
could therefore, have readily relieved him if
he was only a security, The business of the
firm, collections, payments. &c, were more
over made by Mr. Seaman On the 10Th Of
last month, made out statement Of the
claims, credits, &c. exhibiting u balance due
to me, of $1015.0l as he states. may re-
mark here, that short time previous, | had
made, ont, as he also states, a statement,
which Mr.. Seaman has in his possession,
showing the sum of $206S,7S due me. This
did not puport to show all his credits. 1t was
not SO designed, and ] so explicitly Informed
him gave it to him, telling him to look up
bis receipts, &c, and that we could, at anota-
err time, see what the correct balance was
1t will readily strike any man of business,
that if there were errors or omissions, even,
10 that statement they could be readily cor
rected, as he does not even charge or specify
any credit to which he was entitled and OF
which | sought to deprive him in it.
The statement on the 18th of last month,
referred to, shelving $l0l5.01 due me- was
liable to be reduced, as he says, to "a fraction
over $780," that is to say 500. 44--not by
payments however, but by four small execu-
tons i'll favor of Tate 4 Seaman, by County
Orders ard by Henshaw's Order--in an
1924 ST. These would have allowed in the
statement, but he had refused to receipt for
them AT best. it thus appears, that this sum
(allowing the deduction of the 1924 SD of
! $T90.44. was due, at the last Circuit Court,
commencing on the 9th of April, when ad-
vertised his property.
As to the charge of my advertising $4,000
worth of property have only to say, that
was careful as a prudent officer ought to be,
to advertise enough but am not aware, nor
do believe that all his loose property would
| bring half that amount at a Sheriff Sale |
ulu not, lhueeu, regaru Tue aiou1t auNeitiseu
as of much consequence, as well knew Mr.
| Seaman had the means of relieving me, by
paying the money, aud presumed he would do
so in preference to having his property brought
under the hammer. so advertised il. because
not only of the delay, but Of tue difficulties,
which he interposed in the way OF a settle
ment. Finding that it was advertised, he,
during that Court, paid $3.50 o3. This lett
$1o14l due me, allowing the S224 81, re-
ferred to, gave his attorney areccipt for the
S6S9.03, and in the receipt stated that the
/ S224.57 when reeepted by Mr. Seaman. was
to be regarded as settled, aud that the bal
ance stated of $l0l.4l was to be thereafter
settled This has not yet been done.
1t is proper to say here. that in making the
statement Of the Sl015.0l due me, COM
mitted an error against myself, on its face,
crediting Mr.. Seaman with two sums Of $50,
of the same date-making the balance real
ly due $l5l Al.
He complains 0. two other items, one Of
| ,rh,ab 7