Demoine courier., 1854-08-03
THE CASE OF THOMAS G, GIVEN.


ply of Mr.. Given TO the charges brought
against him in the communication signed
by Zone who knows" We publish
this communication eptire, with the ex
ce2iion of q paragraph relating TO some
private business between Mr.. Given qnt
Mr.. Street, (ihe author of The first com
municltion.) and which contains some
harsh and unii. words to appear in any
public print. We allow MIR. Given Il
give a full statement of his own in rela
lion 10 The matter at issue, This acts as (,
public olicer) but we cannot, under &c
consideration, permit tie use of our col,
umns for the purpose OF retailing per.
sonal matters and personal abuse.
Mr.. Given charges that this matter
was sprung upon him at too late a day
for him 10 reply 10 il, but the reader and
the voters of this county will see that
this is not the case, for by the same me,
dunn in which those charges were pub
lished, he, has the opportunity Of refut,
ine them. if he can. As to how far he
has cleared up This matter weshall take
the liberty of showing the public. as Mr..
Street has no opportunity for replying.
We regret that we have to do this, bu,
our duty to the public demands il, and
we shall shrink from no responsibility
rightly imposed upon US.
We stated last week that the charges
made in the communication by "One who
knows were true, and for confirmation
of those charges we referred them to the
county records. We now, for the bepe-
fit of those who canno. examine into
these matters. bring forward a disin,er-
es,ed witness 10 sustain those charges,
and are pc feclly willing that the case
should res, on this evidence, and that the
people should bring in a verdict on Mon
day next, according to The evidence pla.
ced before them. After we had received
and read the communication Of Mr..
Given, in which he says tina, neither the
Clerk nor Judge Osburn dare affirm the
truth Of the charges in the communion
ton of "ONE WHO KNOWS" we address.
ed the following note to Judge Osburn:
OrTUmwA, July 30th, 1854.
To JUDGE OsBURN: As a voter and tax pay
er of Wapello county, | deem it my privilege
to ask you for information in regard 10 county.
matters in which the public are generally inter-
ested. In the last issue Of the Courier there ap-
peared a communication under the signature of
'"One who knows" relating to the defalcation
of lhos. g. Given, and if you have read that
communication, | wish you to state whether the
statements as taken from the county records, and
the law quoted therein, are true or false? also
learn that Mr.. Given says the reason he has-nev-
er paid over the money he owes Wapello coun-
ty was because he never could prevail on YOU
to settle with him. Please answer whether this
is true or not? An early answer to these aues-
tons will oblige many Of your fellow-citizens.
as also Your ob't sery't.
r. II. WARDEN.
In reply to this we received The follow
ing from the Judge:
OTTUMwA, July 31st, 1854.
MI. WARDEN: Ireceived your note in which
you ask me TO say whether the communication
which appeared over the signature of "One
who knows" in relation to Il. G.. Given is true
or false. | have read the communication and
find the statements, as taken from the books and
papers on file Ia the Clerk's office, are true.
as TO your second inquiry in regard TO the
settlement with Given, he urged ne TO settle
with him, after making out his account of Sl9.-
80, which is correctly stated in the article re-
ferred TO. | refused to settle an the lcdy he pro-
posed, but Twas ready to settle At ANY TIME.
| asked him TO settle according TO the books in
the Clerks Office which showed that he had
receiped more money than he had accounted for;
he refused to settle until his account was made
out and put into the hands of the Prosecuting
Attorney for collection.
SILAS OsBURN, Co. Judge.
Now, fellow-cihzens, the case is fairly
before you. Who is there that can deny
Judge Osburn's word? He is q sworn
officer of your county, of the same po-
litical creed as NJ. Given. and he EN-
phatically endorses the charges in The
communication OF "One VINO Knows
Does this not nail Mr.. Given, and where
will he turn now for proof of his inno-
cence of the charges preferred agains,
him? Read the letter OF the Judges,
fellow citizens, and Judge for yourselves
whether we or Zone who knows has
lied, and have told anything but the facts
in regard TO Mr.. Given. The pathetic
appeal to the people OF this county about
The grand jury's not finding him guilty,
is dweli on by him with great force, but
this will no, deceive anybody! No per-
son ever dreamed of charging the grand
jury of perjury or direleclion Of duty.
bu, they Judge of causes by the evidence
produced before them, and if the Prose.
cutting Attorney did no, bring The evi
dence against Mr.. Given that might have
been produced, it is no fault of THEIRS
Indeed we have heard it reported that
this officer even attempted TO defend Mr.