Brookville American. [volume] (Brookville, Ind.) 1858-1861, 1860-03-16
uixeryille Correspondence.
MIxERvlLLE, March IL.

MlNtNNlbLEf ha'th -
Mr.. FosrEn. Il Thought that The cx-.
ei.emsnt in regard 10 the MixerviIle.
correspondents Ind boon laid ON the.
shelf but 500 10 your last issue that
you have again been dsmandcd to give
your author. do think that you have
offered Mr.. Davis everything that is
fair. Some time since you very gener-
oasly offered the use Of your coIunrs
TO put tho matter right before the pco-
pie. You again offered him the same
opportunity, and he again refuses sta
ting al ono time that he did. not .wantio
reply but merely wanted TO eowhidethc
correspondent. i can say TO Mr.. Da-
Wis, that This community is not 10 DO
scared by such threats. Ho,had bcttcr
ask himself the question, did my family
sell Feighan tho baltace' that caused the
death OF Mr.. and Mrs. Feighan2' Twill
now give you the testimony assit was
stated before the Coroners Jury on that
occasion: N s..s
Mrs. Fcighan was first sworn, and on
oath stated: .Ihe first 1 hoard of Pat
rick (my husband) after he left home
was AT Mr. Davis Mrs. Davis There
told mo that Patrick was there onWol-
nesday evening, about 8 o'clock. That
llc WAS drunk, that he wanted one gal
lon Of whisky. Sho lot him ihaso one
quart and started him home. Mrs. Da-
Wis was then sworn and examined, and
stated on oath thut Patrick was hot
thcrc on Wednesday,; did not recollecl
whether there was snow on the ground
or not; did notlike to answer questions
Mrs. Feighan was then called back to
the stand and stated in the presence Of
Mrs. Davis that she (Mrs. DaviD had
told her just what she had stated on her
former examination. Mr.. Davis wa.
Their called, and being sworn stated
Patrick was at my house twice, be
love, in tho fore part of the week; dc
not rccollect exactly what days it was
Mr.. Gray then asked him tho question
do you recollcct whether there was
snow Oh the ground or noty TO whitl
no replied, think there was. Was
Feighan drunk on that evening? liz
was. The jury was then satisfied will
Mr.. Davis testimony, and ho was dis
missed.
Now Mr Editor, any one could SCI
at half a glance that Mr.. Davis corrob
crates the statement of Mrs. Fclghan
And / will here say that there was no
q single juror or spectator doubted th'
statements made BY Mrs. Fcighan in thl
, least, Notwithstanding the statement o
Mrs. Davis 10 the contrary Why sir
| MN informed by persons pretending
to know, that Mrs. IIaneol (sister 0
Mrs. Do also nieoo OF Mrs. ID. was n
Mr.. Davis Mt tho time Mrs. Feighal
talkcd 10 Mrs D., and would sny tina
Mrs. Fcighan testified to the truth. An
other circumstance is that Mrs. Feighal
told Mr. Mixer on tho same day Of Gu
inquest, that Mrs. Davis described tn
! jug to her, os u jug having tho handl
knocked of, and one half of tho nee
broken likewise. Mrs. Feighan ha'
never saw the jug, Feishan having 20
tho jug at Mr.. sizelovcs, aner leavinI
homo. The jug was since found an
bears the precise description as state
( By Mrs. Fcighan. Those are tho facts
cowhido or no cowhide.
4 If Mr.. Davis wants TO know whethe
| this article Is indorscd or not, let hin
I ask tho jurors who tried the case, an
almost every man In the community an
b he can find out
D 1t is not tho intention Of this articl
: 10 injure Mr.. Davis in the least, but tina
, tho facts in the case may go to th
, world us they really exist. 1 hope MI
E Davis will now reply.