New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1860-01-14

DIN and Psqutt and grntfen win be proved 70 be "A
eh,sss The, ~. al hono mem c are s IL
and esteemed By the community in which they i've and 4
whose staten unworthy the consideration rs
thinking end fair minded men
Tur ey, to pay all ci.s against them demand and
ss, rate Let me gain al that the st good
10 This matter M such tin ,e@en. Be received
SHRisToP u GRAY No. il SotS .sress wni.m.surs
Comments.
The statement matle in TILE TRIBUNE OF Wednes
day morning was certainly e1 Yarte inasmuch as il
was statement from one eide only, 'hOush made
by us with all the evidences before us Of its entire
Truth. As we have now the statement Of the other
party, the case is complete rs to the main facts;
and it is hardly necessary to point out to the nteld-
gent render how completely the second statement
confirms the first in every particular AS the case
is attracting good deal Of attention among busl-
pees men, and as it is certainly one OF no Little
Importance to those who have, or may have, debts
to collect OF the South. we republish Mr.. Gray's
card with pleasure and without solicitation on his
part as the beet possible evidence that be given
Of the truth of Mr. Crsngale's story.
There are two questions involved in this affair,
which it is proper to keep distinct. The first is
personal one and relates to NJ. Crangale. His
assertion is that he was engaged BY Mr. Christopher
ray to 90 to Savannah in the capacity Of clerk to
Grs, & Turley; and this Mr. Gray acknowledges
n h- tine He also asserts that the bargain to that
effect syas broken by them whereupOn he sued on
the CONTACT, and got judgment against them; this
also DR. Gray acknowledges, with the qualification
that the bargain was contingent on Dir. Crsngaies
cspscity to fn the situation for which ne was en-
gagged. 1t is enough to say that two Courts oil
Georgia decided that such was not the ba'galn, as
one gave, and the other confirmed the Judgment III
Mr.. Crangales favor for the Whole amount cialnea'
The personal part of the controversy is thus Tar con-
cusiyely settled, as there is no disagreement IN the
evidence.
The second question is one of more general in
terest and concerns, not merely DIR. Crangale, but
all commercial men who have, or may have, South
ern debtors. His statement that he found it mpos-
sble to get satisfaction for the Judgment against
Messrs Gray g. Turley, at Savannah, is also fully
confirmed by Mr.. Christopher Grays card. Both
parties agree that the party of the first part did not
choose to compromise his claim; and therein We
conceive Mr.. Crangale was governed by not un-
common infrmity of the mercantile mind, which
forbds the taking of twenty-five or nifty cents on
the dollar, when the chance is good oil getting
hundred. Therefore he went to Augusta. IDa'
be Was arrested there on charge of being an
Aboliton;st We have the evidence OF The hHgasta
Erfnine Dispatch of December ", and Inc
Charleston Mercury of October 81. That he
was imprisoned in the Augusta jan, ana
held in that vile duraRce for three days, we nave
evidence in the bill OF Urah Slack
for hoard marsh, 81 and constable's fees. That the
charge fell TO the ground, and Mr. Cransale was
acquitted is clear from the fact that the accused IS
now ia this city, no longer amenablo to any law oil
the sovereign State of Georgia, unless, indeed, ne
may be considered in the light of an assconding
debtor for the sum Of twenty cents, error OF ad-
dtion, perhaps, cunningly made for this very pur-
pose BY Uriah Slack aforesaid. Thus the whole
case is without flaw in the evidence from begin
cling TO end and even without any essential differ
ence in the statements Of the two parties.
One question alone remains TO be considered:
Did Mr. Andrew Gray denOunce Mr. Crangale as
An Abolitionist. and did that denunciatlOn lead to
his arrest2 The fact of the arrest proves that such
q denunciation was made by somebody. AS Mr.
Craneale is proved on the testimony of Mr.. Chris
topher Gray, to have told the truth, far as Mr..
Grey knows in relation to other points in this at
fair we can see no good reason for doubling his
assertion that the denuncatiOn was made by Mr..
Andrew Gray; for it is altogether improbable that
he would have named James Hughes as his author
ity for a statement, which he asserts was made BY
that witness in public barrOom and open court,
if it were possible TO disprove it. But who Is An
drew Gray brother of the senior party Of
Messrs Gray & Turley
And here we get at the animus of the whole pro-
ceeding. Would it be worth while for the sake OF
getting rid of small debt of $780, for large
house to resort to such extreme meas
ures? Probably not; and had MI. Crangale been
the only creditor of Messrs. Gray & Turl'y OF the
house of Gray & Brothers which preceded it, it is
not at all unlikely that the judgment in its favor
would long ago have been returned as satisfied, and
Georgia had one "Irish fellow. citizen" the more.
But. we are informed by one of the suffering par
ties, that there are a considerable number of dry
goods houses in this city who have on their books
accounts against the late house of Gray & Broth
erp-whem Gray & Turley Notwithstanding
in the aggregate to from SIS 900 to 100000, no
portion Of which has yet been carried either to
Profit or Loss. 1t is within the range Of possibility
,nd credibility that Mr.. Crangale, being only an
freshman, poor man and stranger, was held as
good subject on whom TO Wy this new invention Of
rev way to pay old debts.