Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1856-06-05
WASHINGTON NEWS AND GOSSIP

fair.-Ihe mlsrepresentatlons Dy the political
Black Republicans in relation to the whipping
administered to Mr.. Sumner by Mr. Brooks,
| bid fair to rival those fabricated by the same
hands, respecting the reported destruction Of
the town of Lawrence, in the Territory Of
Kansas, and the attendant murder of numer-
Gus citizens
The "t0tai destruction of Lawrence" 50
industriously heralded over the country by
bad men, and "the murder of many defence
less unarmed citizens" our readers are aware
has turned out upon Investigation to be the
abatement, in obedience to legal process, OF
what the grand jury had pronounced to be
nuisances, to wit: the hotel and the printing
Office in Lawrence, and to be the accidental
death of one person by the falling Of piece
Of timber on his head. Thus We doubt not it
will be, in the sequel, in relation to the critical
condition in which Mr.. Sumner he's been re-
ported to have been placed by a whipping
with hollow gutts perchs walking stick.
We have heard it intimated for many days
that these statements respecting Mr. Sum-
ner's condition were contrary to the truth,
and that they were made for the purpose of
keeping up excitement at the North, and thus
swelling the number and size Of " indigna-
ton meetings" which are being got up there.
But we have not seen so good reasons for put
ting confidence in these limitations as those
furnished by an article in the New York
Tribune of yesterday, which purports to be a
comment upon the report of the committee of
the House on the breach of privilege com.
mitted by Mr.. Brooks.
We have rarely read, even in the Tribune,
an article containing SO many statements
which cannot bear the test Of examination.
Men do not tell untruths deliberately without
controlling purpose or motive. In this case,
it must be the same as that which inspires
these men to repeat and publish such stupid,
stOlid falsehood, concerning affairs in Kansas
In the article to which we allude, it is said :
"We have called the attention in another
article to the fact that Brooks continued -
| assail with furious violence his fallen and
bleeding victim long after lie had become IN.
sensible, and until he, the assailant, was him
| selffOrcibly interrupted by third persons The
conclusion from this, taken in connection with
Committee, is just and reasonable, that Brooks
intended to commit a murder, and that he
would have done so-Douglas, Toonbs and
others standing by without interference had
not Mr. Morgan come to the rescue. n =
"Mith resDect to the testimony of Toombs,
he labOIJ haru to make out that Mr.. Sumner,
during all the time that the blows continued,
was In posture of resistance, and that when
he fell Brooks voluntarily ceased from strik-
ing. But if Mr.. Foster, Mr.. Murray, Mr..
Morgan and other witnesses are to be believed,
this Is all pure invention on the pait of
Toombs, got up to lessen in some slight degree
the cowardly enormity of that conduct" &c,
&c.
Now, Mr.. Murray and Mr. Foster swear in
their testimony before the Committee, as print.
ed in the same copy Of the Tribune from
which We make the extracts, to just the oppo-
site I,
Mr. Murray swears in these words 81
think he (Brooks) did not strike Mr.. S. after
he was down.
Mr.. Foster testifes - the same purport by
implication.
Gov. German swears that Brooks did net
strike Sumner after he fell.
Senator Pearce, under oath, uses this Ian
guage "No blow was struck after Sumner
fell'
Senator Crittenden swears in these words
&C No blow was struck, that saw, after Mr..
Sumner had fallen"
Senator Iverson is direct in his testimony
that " no blow was struck after Sumner was
Frustrated.
Not witness swears that Mr. Brooks struck
Mr.. Sumner after he was Frustrated. So the
evidence, which convicts the Tribune of mis-
representing known and palpable fact in
relation to this matter, is incontroversble.
In another article in the Tribune an attempt
is made, Of course for political ends, to make
unsuspecting and credulous people believe
that Mr. Sumner IS dead The sentence at
the beginning of the article reads thus:
"The fact that Senator Of the United States
has been stricken down and beaten to death
in the Senate chamber for words spoken in
debate
We have read the report Of the House COM
mlttee, and the testimony, with great care,
and think 1t clearly proven that Mr. Sumner
was not rendered insensibe, nor even stunned
by the first blow. The weight of testimony
shows that Mr. S. rose after it, and was in con.
dition where an honest, bold, courageous,
stout man could and would defend himself.
Governor German swears that Sumner 'rose
and attempted to defend himself" Senator
Pearce swears that when he saw the parties,
"Mr. Sumner was standing at his desk and
apparently catching at the cane or Mr..
Brooks" Senator Toombs is explicit that
Mr.. 3. was in the act of Selling Mr.. B. or
defending himself" Senator Crittenden's
testimony is direct to the point that both
parties were standing up and combating"
There are some statements in the testimony
Of Mr.. Sumner himself which seem to conflict
with those made by tho witnesses we have
named; but the allegations made under oath
by that gentleman are so little in harmony, in
some respects, with each other, that it can well