Martinsburg gazette. [volume] (Martinsburg, Va. [W. Va.]) 1833-1855, 1852-05-26

dealing. than to sanction 80 uhprovckcd and
i,sidious a mode Of defaminR an individual
Who has sought to act fairly and kindly and
at the same time perform the stern duties Of
| bis Office.
Ishall not 20 into detail for time presses.
I shall dispose 10 few words Of ell that Is ma
terial in Nr. Seaman's last communication.
advertised his property on the first day
Of the Circuit Court. If be did not owe the
si015.0i Cor rather the $1065. 0l--as !
made mistake Of $50. against myself Ito
be reduced, by 32a4.57 to S790.44. when he
receipted for certain small executions &c.
which he had refused todo -uhy did he pay
by his attorney $3.50, 03 during that Court.
g The statement Of the S10f5.01 was
made out. on the 10Th Of April---after Mr..
Seaman had produced his receipts, shelving
that the previous statement given by me was
to be reduced to that amount.
had expressly told him. at the time, that
frs, statement was given him. that he should
look up his receipts---in order 70 correct It
was under the impression, and doubtless 50
stated as Alr Coates and others certify,
that the amount would be found to be In and
about that sum.
II was considerably less. as his receipts
showed. When made this second state
ment. Did | object to allow them !! v here
is the foundation. then, for the gratuitous
imputatian. that had counted upon his not
having preserved lis receipts? Would not
probably count upon directly the rererse.
with any business MANI and a merchant es
pecially
3. Mr. Seaman gave me no draft or ordsr on
Mr.. Rces. 1t was, merely a note to him to
arrange with me rs far as he could This Mr.
Rces' letter shows. know nothing of the
cmount. which Mr.. Seaman might have pre-
viously requested Mr. Rees to settle. | did
not believe that 800 would come near the
amount due. | therefore required $1,000.
This was not done
a. He still owes me---and he shows moth
log to the contrary $751; Al after deduct
ing the $3.50. oS. paid dujng Court to stop
the advertisement
5. The partnership debt to the Farmers
Bank (of Tate & Seaman) be alleges no
reason why should not have collected from
hm-hc being the acting partner The
Sl36 security debt collected also. as he
Clerk had so endorsed il, and that is the
Sherits guide. The Lucas debt was bor-
rowcd money land a note given by Tate &
Seaman irhen mr.. Seaman and Mr.. Tate
,rere partners. If net So however, It does
not appear that it was not so borrowed 10
aid in closing up the Partnership affairs Mr..
Seaman being the partner engaged in clos
Ing up the business. called on him conse
quently.
8. But one Of the executions collected BY
me from Mr. Seaman remains unsettled finally
-.-and that for good reasons, known to tic
creditor and myself
l will trouble you no more / care NJ
further for this assault than any one may be
supposed to be mortified, that his fellow. citi-
<ens should have erroneous opinions Of bis cen
duet. have no fears. however, that in a
brief period when the immediate purpose Of
it shall have been accomplished, or not have
been accomplished as the ease may be- -wher
the decisions Of one sided certificates ard o.
partial examinations. such as prejudiced oppo-
nepts will make in heated canvass, Shall
have passed away---tbat the hammer Of pub
lie condemnation win not fall upon the heads
of those. who have made this systematic and
as they hope. effective attack upon me. Time
viii show retrihutivc Justice will have its
course. JACOB VAN DOREN. JR.
May %, 1852.