The western Democrat. [volume] (Charlotte, N.C.) 1852-1870, 1857-05-26

n,ent he took up the following facts, adding
tire proof for each as he proceeded.
L.. There aCas meeting at Charlotte, 81
the larger part of the inhdbitantsofM eckLem-
burg county. held on the 18th and 10Th days
of May, I775.
To prove this he adduced no less than
fourteen witnesses, men in their day well
known in Mecklenburg and of irreproach-
able characters, who all testify that they
were all present at such a meeting. Seven
positively name the date 1.-THE 10Th and 10Th
days of May 1775,) and one of the seven tes-
titles from written memorandum, stiilin ex-
istence, and made at the time, as to the date.
The other seven. without expressly naming
the day of the month, testify to incidents
and occurrences at the meeting precisely
the same as those deposed to by the
witnesses who do name the exact day of
the month thus identifying the meeting as
the same. We are bound therefore to be-
lieve there was such meeting. Now If
this be so, it must inevitably follow that
if ana paper acas prepared and read at that
meeting, it could not have been one which
by its own date MAY 3Oth) shows 1t must
have been made ten days afterward. The
only issue then to which we are brought in
this stage of the discussion is raised by the
question: Uas any paper prepared ana
ddopted at the meeting of The 20h? If
there was, it puts an end at once and forev-
er to the hypothesis that the document of
the Both is the only one that was put forth
in Mecklenburg III May 1775.
2. DIR. HI. then proceeded to the issue
thus made, and affirmed as fact suscepti-
BILE of proof, that at the meeting on the goth
a paper 1cas prepared By DR.. Ephraim Bre-
card and presented by a committee appointed
for that purpose; that such paper aoas pub
hcly read by Col. Thomas Polk; that 1t an
equioocaIly declared independence, ipso
uerbo; and that its contents when read Vere
assented to by the people present.
As to the first particular, the preparation
of the paper by DR.. Brevard, he adduced
the testimony of nine witnesses, some of
whom were of the Committee who reported
it. As to the second, the public reading,
he proved it by eight witnesses, all of
whom that specify the reader, name Col.
Thomas Polk as the individual.
As to the third particular, that the paper
explicitly declared Independence, he quoted
the very words of no less than fourteen
witnesses who heard the paper read, every
one of whom distinctly called it declara-
ton of Independence. We give the Ian
guage of some:
One calls it ''the declaration of Indepem-
dence, made in Charlotte, on the 2OM day
Of May, 1775."
Another says of the people of Mecklen-
burg. they .'met on certain day in Char
lotte, and from the head of the Court House
stairs, proclaimed independence of English
government by Col. Thomas Polk"
Another says, they resolved to declare
themselves Independents
-Four others thus speak: they formed
several resolves which were read, and which
went to declare themselves and the people
of Mecklenburg County free and Indepen-
dent of the King and parliament Of Great
Britain: and that from that day, thenceforth,
all allegiance and political relation was alb
solved between the good people of Meek
lenburg and the King of Great Britain"
Another thus speaks: it was however
[the declaration made IN substance and
form, like that great national act, agreed
on thirteen months after"
The testimony of the whole fourteen,
whom, by the way, the people between the
Yadkin and Catawba know to have been
men of unimpeachabie integrity, was re-
markable in the particular that every one
used the word " independence" or "Inde-
pendent" in describing the character of the
declaration.
From this testimony, which, he said.
strangers who knew nothing of the charac-
tiers of the witnesses might question. but
those who lived in North Carolina never
would, the speaker drew two differences.
viz: 1st, that there could be no reasonable
doubt as to what the contents of the paper
of the Goth were; and I'd, there could not
be any difficulty in identifying it by those
contents.
He then took the next step for which he
had thus prepared the way, and produced
the well known document of the goth,
showing that "in substance and in FORM
it does agree with the national declaration;
tina: it does expressly renOunce allegiance
and declare independence; that it does meet
specifically the call proved to have been
made by the excited multitude for Inde-
pcndence; and that it does allude to the
bloody events at Lexington, the news of
which had just reached them, and thus ex-
cited them.
3~Thc next fact he affirmed and proceed
ed to prove, was, that the paper then read
passed into the hands Of ats proper custodian,
the Secretary Of the meeting; and he stated
that this was important, because he meant
to trace it step by step from his hands into
honorable publicity. 1t was important too
because it involved the reputation for integ-
rity of q man who lived with unbemished
character for more than four score years in
this country. and who is now in his grave.
He said that either John McKnitt Alexan-
DER, the Secretary of the meeting. had in
his possession honorably and honestly such
a paper as that which bears the date of May
Goth l775, and it was true part of the pro-
ceedings of that day; or-John McKnitt A
lexander was guilty of fraud and falsehood
by forging such a paper. There is no es-
cape from one or the other of these alterna-
tives. DR.. H. then affirmed what all Meek
lenburg knows to be true, that no man now
living or that ever did live has or had any
right to cast such an imputation on John
McKnitt Alexander. He was as honest a
man as any who have ever assaled our
declaration of independence, be they high
or low.
But, as DR.. H. proceeded to remark.
Providence has in striking manner taken
care of a worthy christian man thus cruelty
assaulted; and this the speaker made appear
by a succession of facts which he estab-
lished by incontrovertible testimony.
4. Alexander declared. uhite yet akiue,
that he had giren copies Of that paper to two