Daily American organ. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1856, 1856-09-19

Mr. EDITOR Sir: Your local reporter, Mr.
Fenton, having made your local co umn the source
of attack of personal matter upon me, / must
avail myself of the same source of correcting his
Misrepresentation. The article referred to in the
issue Of Saturday. 18th instant, under the caption
of"a hard cas-" is probably not 80 hard case ashe
Fenton, would have the public believe. The facts
are these: About tive weeks since, an order Of
distrain was placed in my hands by Galgan Son
against one j. @. Curry, and on going to the house
/ found the back door of the house standing open
and the front door unlocked and nobody in the
house. had ascertained, before going to the
house. that Curry had left the city; and as my
order was against him had no reason to suppose
the goods found in the house belonged to any
other person, and that they were left by said
Curry.
But it appears that Curry had left a man by the
name of Fenton--the son of your reporter--in the
house, to hold possession of the premises, for the
purpose of preventing the landlord from getting
possession Of his property; and on my finding the
premises in the condition as above stated, l re-
moved everything from the house and fastened it
up as well az could But it appears, from your
reporters statement, the goods belonged to his
son and wife. He (ihe reporter) asks whether the
goods were advertised, and in what papers?
answer him they were not advertised any paper
they would not pay for Advantageous a notice
was put up, usual in such cases, at some public
place. He asks, further, what has been done with
the goods? / answer, part was returned to the
wife of bis son. her assuring me they were hers,
the balance was sold. In regard to his statement
about his attorney, will refer to Mr.. Martins
statement in regard to the matter.
He Fenton says the goods taken were exempt
from distress, which is not the case. There was
nothing but one bed in the house that would have
been exempt in ordinary cases 1t Is useless for
me to say any more in regard to the matter, as
tsnla oh he ;ntap nc Abo
parties in the case they fastened the doors Sc
curely on retiring, and always left by the back
door and he acknowledges his son has been liv-
ing with him about three weeks.
What have here stated am prepared to prove,
by disnterested witnesses if necessary, at any
time and shall not notice any further scrit ling
of Fenton.
Sept I6, 1856. D. WEsTERFIELD.
N. B.-Fenton says a relative of the parties
called on the officer, which is not the case, as
had not seen any of the parties until the evening
previous to his publication, and then called to
see them. d. w.
WASHINGTON, Sept. l6, 1856.
To the Editor of the American Organ:
Upon my return from New York, this morning,
my attention called to an article in the local
column Of your paper, in relation to matter
termed A Hard Case" in which the author has
endeavored, at my expense, to brand Mr.. David
Westerfeld, an officer of the county of Washing
ton, as having been guilty of gross malfeasance
of Office, and that he (Westerheld) had denounced
me in the broadest terms a liar.
Fenton called at my Office in relation to certain
goods which Mr. Wester6eld as he stated, hac
taken under a distran warrant for rent and asked
my advice how to get possession of the goods.
advised replevy. A short time after Fenton haC
left, Mr. Wester6eld called to see me on some bust
ness. mentioned the matter to him he stated
he went to the house with distran warrant, founC
the back door open and went in ; there was no one
in the house, il having been vacated. The person
Zone Curry who was the tenant had removed from
the house, and also the city.
Mr.. Westerfeld said he took possession of the
goods and removed them from the house, that Il
the person who claimed the goods would call on
him he could have them. In the evening, Fenton,
Jr., who claimed the goods, called at my Office,
with friend of his, l told him had seen Mr..
Westerheld that day and IL he would 20 to him he
could get his goods.
This is the last heard of the matter or saw OF
the parties, and little expected the matter would
find it's way into the public print Mr.. Wester6eld
did nothing more than his duty, as know from a
gentleman who accompanied him to the house at
the time the goods were taken.
And must state that the facts set forth in Fem
toms article, so far they refer to Mr.. Wester6eld
and myself are false.
A Fenton appears 10 be 30 much interested In
the matter, he would oblige me by calling at my
Office and settling a small fee.
WILLIAM J. MARTIN.