, 1859-07-08
READ THE EvIDENCE!.
Another Letter From Warren Cove.

! have made against Nm IL. wallace. From iAe time
those charges were put in his hands until during
which period he has made some five or six public
Speeches he has not dared to deny one OF them.
Some of his friends, indeed, among whom notice o
p Meeker (whO bad better keep his shirt on, comes
out and denounces those charges Of malicious lies
Mr. Mceker IL well known in this county that it is
not necessary deny anything he asserts TO-
] Mr. Keach SAYS, however, that be paid me for the
coat gave to the Kanaka. never said he did uut
and pretty fool would have been to make pres
ent of coat to Col Wallace This has nothing to do
with my charge. | said he took the coat from the
man to whom gave it, and say so yet; and further
more never thought Of asking for pay for IT, until
knew who had it. This Mr. keach knows as well as
| do, aud he also knows that Wallace would never
have offered to pay for it, for had he intended TO do
he had plenty of time in five months that time
elapsed before got a cent for il.
! As to whether Mr.. Reach had discharge or not,
only had that genteman's own word FOR it-I certain
| ly heard him say be had and very merry be over
it, lie snre of his pay, for he had been mustered
| into regular service. And further, Mr.. kcach and
Lieut., Moore did not compare their statements before
they presented them for publication, for If they had
done so, do not think the thing would have looked
quite mixed, and some persons might have believed
both of them. As it is, one or the other must be
wrong. Keach says Wallace positively refused to
give him discharge, showing by his own statements
that he (Keach) meant to be dishonest but his friend
Wallace would not sanction bis knavery.
! very ingenious production is the statement over
the signature of j. NJ. Blchelder and think the Capt
must have had ifgql advice and assistance he
delivered of it. lie thinks it his duty to correct my
statement and TO attain this end, he lodges rouud
the main charge Of dishonesty, and merely says that
the widow is not interested in the estate, ard that
the whole matter is in a fair way Of being etted
amcably." Capt Bachelors ideas Of honesty must
he very vague. few weeks ago he made assertions
directly opposite to what he states. The veracity
of the gentlemen whose signatures arc attached to
the accompanying statements cannot for moment
be doubted nor do think the Captain will in direct
terms contradict them. And though he has not ex
actly published ialsehOod yet he has sent forth to
the world statement calculated to give false impress
ions, and also much beneath the dignity Of gentle
man. lie stretches the truth dreadtully, and fear
knowingly too, when he says the widow Is not inter
ested in the estate for one knows better than Capt
Bachelor that this estmable lady has written to say
that she will give up her pension that she receives
from government until every cent Of her gallant hus
bands debts paid. Is she not then interested 10
the estate Is not every cent of her means that we
have any righ 10 know Of given to liquidae her hus
bands debts, when there is ample suliciency to
pay all demands fraudulently held by this with
out soul, who is shameless enough to get up in pub
lie and say that he has no objection tn the worlds
knowing al this that he has become thick skinned
and casehardened that tres like these don't disturb
him in the least
These charges, Mr.. Editor arc grave ones, but they
are true nevertheless, and the duty Of exposing this
man has been forced upon me by his unwarnnted at
tacks which, he said in his speech at Olympia, was
all in joke. however have not had my sense Of
shame or nv conscience scared with the same iron
that this gentleman has had applied to his, and conse
quently do care for my fair fame and while have
tongue to wag an arm to lin in defense Of it, will
wage war to the death with the man who attempts to
traduce me.
"STEmAoooM, W. T., August %, 1855.
a. This is to show that W. A. Slaughter has paid to
W. II. Wallace the sum Of Two Thousand Dollars, for
which amount the said Wallace is to make deed in
fee simple for house aud lot in the town Of Fairfield
Jefferson County Iowa, and for forty Of Land
situated in the county and State aforesaid.
ii (SlguedO wv. II. WALLACE,
"W. A. SLAUGHTER"
The above is a true copy Of the agreement entered
y lsvNa
Bachelor deny that? II. A. GOdsborough was ad.
ministrator the estate Of Slaughter before Bache
. der was, and he succeeded, after eighteen months
Y skrmshng, to get Wallace IN make the deed spec-
was forwarded to MI Wells, the father of Mrs. Saugh
ter who sent to Iowa to he recorded and here sthe
! answer Of the recording officer:
RECORDERS OFFICE, JEFFERSON Co. IowA,l
Fairfield, June p, 1857.
i JOHN WELLS Eso-Sir: Yours of the 10th ult. has
been received. In examining the records find that
W. H. Wallace has NO TITLE to Lot No, in Block
No. % OF this place He is the owner Of the S. f. II
Of the N. =. of Sec. II, Township H. Range lO;-no
encumbrance upon it, The probable value Of il is
about 81 so TO SO per 1t is not very desirable
piece Of land. Hoping all your questions answer
ed satisfactorily, | remain yours respectfully,
ri TH0S b. SHAMP, Recorder,
l ... Per GEO. 4. WILSON, Deputy.
When the facts set forth in the Recorders commit
ncation to Mr.. Wells became known here, suit was
brought against Wallace in our courts and his nswer
was that he had fulfilled his contract-that be had
giuC The deed, and il was not bis business to know
i whether there was house and lot belonging to him
there or not This deed, this worthless piece II paper
is all that Col. Wallace has ever given towards the
ufnent of his agreement, except the forty Of
land, worth at the maximum valuation of the Record
er, one hundred and twenty dollars This land was
! represented by Wallace to lie rsyy rd'U1Js. Now
Messrs. Mecker Keach, Moore, Bachelor & Co.,
W " " WARREN COVE.
STATEMENT OF GOV. MASON AND GEN. TILToN.
OLYMArA W. T.. July 2, 1859,
We have read with great surprise letter signed by
! j. NJ. Blchelder In the Puget Sound Herald dated
June 30th to the effect that Mr.. b.. administrator
Of the estate OF the late Lieut. Slaughter thinks II his
duty to correct the statement Of Mr. Warren Cove
relative to the called qtnTk" by which Col. Wal
lace has held portion Of the estate Of Lieut. Saugh-
ter.
Capt. ]. NJ. Blchelder Informed us that Col. Wal.
lace did have certain property of Saughters in the
town Of Steiacoom, by virtue Of transaction deslg-
mated TO us by Capt. B. " DAMNED dark He sta
ted that it would greatly njure Col Wallace if the
facts Of the were known;that it woald probably
lose to the Col the vote Of the county Of Pierce That
all the administrators Of the estate OF Lieut. Slaughter
had tried in vain to get justice from Col. Wallace by
referring the matter in dispute to arbitatos and that
the estate would have been solvent, and able to pay
all its liabilities, had Col. Wallace acted q man Of
honor, and given back the property in Steilacoom
which he obtained from Lieut.. Slaughter by giving
Slaughter deed for property in Iowa, which property
he had previously conveyed TO other persons, and
Thereby the estate slaughter lne OF
about two thousand dollars besides the interest on his
liabilities for the several years which the matter had
been in litigation. In a word, the impression made
upon us by the communications Of Capt. Bachelder,
were to the effect that Col. Wallace had availed him
self Of the delays and "quirks of the law to unfairly
hold the property belonging to the estate of gal
, liant and lamented friend Slaughter.
c. II. MASON,
i JAMES TlLTON.
STATEMENT OF 7. F. MoELR0Y.
On the 29th Of May last Capt. J. NJ. Bachelor re-
lated to the history Of the transaction between
: Lieut.. Slaughter and VIM. II. Wallace He stated
+ that the 22d Of August, 1855. Slaughter paid to
\ Wallace Two Thousand Dollars, for which amount
Wallace agreed to give deed to house and lot in
Fairfield, Iowa and forty Of land in the same
county; that Wallace refused to comply with his part
7 OF the agreement after Slaughters death that he
gave deed for house and lot in Fairfield which did
not belong to him; that the deed was sent back as
worthless by Mr.. Wells Mrs. Saughters father that
Wallace persstently refused to do the honest thing