The weekly Placer herald., 1854-09-02
A CARD.

The undersigned having seen card posted
about Auburn, entitled GA Defence over
the signature of Samuel G Astin. and which
we presume has been distributed in the more
distant regions of the County, where the
the character of the parties assailed are not
SO well known as here, we deem it a duty
which we owe ourselves and the dignity of
truth, to answer and correct the errors there
in perpetrated.
The undersigned were members of the
Grand Jury recently discharged, and which
jury were particularly directed by the pre-
siding judge of the Court of Sessions, among
other things to examine into certain facts, in
regard to the charge of non payment of
MONIES into the county treasury, by the
Sheriff of this County according to law.
whilst in discharge of his duties as tax col
lector.
Committees were appointed by this Jury
to whom was committed certain work, and
among them one was charged with the duty
OF examining into the books of the officers of
the County. and to report thereon; and the
undersigned were unlucky enough to compose
part of that committee. We visited the sher-
III office, and have made our report in rela-
ton to the matter 1t was made under the
sanction OF our solemn oath, and has gone
forth to the world.
Mr.. Astin in alluding to that report says:
stand charged with having accused the
Grand jury of your county with rascality
and vilalny," and this he makes himself quite
brave IN denouncing as 6 a base falsehood 3"
Now what we assert he said is this He
(Astin) said that the Grand Jury, or some of
them were damned scoundrels and villains,
and that he did not care God dam for any
of the Grand jury" This remark was made
to US whilst in his Office on our official busi
ness, and though he deny it until he exhaust
his last breath we here reiterate that he did
say so. and we charge it upon our oaths We
do not pretend to give all that was said by
him on that occasion it was one TRADE of
coarseness and abuse against certain mem
bers of the Jury, not then named by him,
and the undersigned were not able to say
whether h S abuse was intended for them or
the rest of the Jury
! lie further charges that this committee
8 arrogated to themselves the power also OF
examining the county Jail and by foul mis-
representati0ns to Mr.. Spell, obtained an
entrance into that buildng' The truth
about these 'JoUi miSrepreSentati0ns," is
just this whilst waiting about the sheriff s
Office for him to come in and assist us in the
examination Of any books he might have of a
| f@NAiN
remarked to Mr.. Spell that they would like to
see the Jail, having never seen it, and Mr..
Spell without further remark, took the KEYS
and showed it to them. We did not "arro-
gate to ourselves such right but asked it
MS matter Of courtesy, as individuals and
this we conceive was not such criminal out
rage, as Mr.. A would have one believe We
asked Mr.. Spell if he kept the committals of
the prisoners, and was answered by him that
he had until he was disa bled in his arm-
Nothing more was said about it, This is the
demand for his books, and on account of these
outrageS' he says we were justly entitled
to his animadversions, when the truth is Mr.
Spell had no opportunity of telling him of
these facts trivial rs they are, until after he
had relieved himself of his billingsgate clo-
quence
Mr. a. says that at the time we were in his
office waiting for him, he was in the discharge
of his duty, waiting on the Grand Jury This
is rather q strange fact, III is 0ne At that
time the Grand Jury was composed of i per-
sons. II Of whom were necessary to QUO
rum for the transaction of business and five
OF that Jury were on this committee, leaving
only fourteen at the jury room. Where, we
ask, was the grand jury he was waiting on at
that time |?
Now the truth is, this Jury adjourned be-
fore this committee left the court room, and
two Of this committee told the Sheriff that we
were about to visit his Office as committee,
and he remarked in answer, that he would
be at his office in short time
We are at loss to know what act or acts
of any one on this committee whilst in his of.
fee was so "distinctly marked with ungentle
manly conduct towards him." as to excite the
ire Of tn fnstdiously refined gentleman. If
his Indignation was aroused against as as in
dividuals, he did not name any one, all his
talk was at some of the Grand Jury "
Perhaps Mr.. A. might consider himself jus
tilted were he in our position, to use the op
portunity for political purposes, but the un-
dersigned have higher respect for their oath
than to permit personal or political differ
ences to govern them in the discharge of so sa-
cred trust
We do not 'hink that even bet of five hun
dred dollars, should be sufficient induce
ment for the crime of perjury and the insn
uation that any OF the undersigned have done
SO in this matter for any purpose whatever,
is as base and false as the mind that could
conceive it.
Mr. A. says that Mr.. Duck, one of the
committee did not hear the language which
we impute to him, and yet Mr. d, signed the
report, and this he thinks needs explanation
This we call lodging the the question Was
the language used or not that's the point
We have been induced to say thus much,
in answer to this famous prOnunciamento of