The Lambertville press. [volume] (Lambertville, N.J.) 1858-1???, 1860-08-15


abouts, &c, and nothing done, he on
present Sheriff, $50 runner talk
herein fair way of being made
. yearldng. But of the Sheriff and O
Field, more anon.
So much for my letter and the Sher
IFS card but before examining til,
latter, | wish to state here, as I hay,
ever said, that do emphatically de.
ny have ever said or insinnated thai
Fields escape waa owing to any an.
tentlonat fault of the Sheriff. Instead
OF this, have only very lightly touch.
ed a tact or two, and left differences
and conclusions for others. The above
card is directed chiefly to four points,
- First, in reply to an assertion oi
mine that he alloaoed Field to haze
has tools aosth ham an jail, he says he
does mot know from whom I got INV
Information, but can show by undoubt
ed testimony that my statement is en-
tirely acithout foundation. " Second,
in reply to my assertion that he al
lowed Field while nnder his charge
liberties BY no means coasistant
nth has safety, &C., he answers, he
treated him as he did all other pris
oners, and that he enjoyed no liberty
whach humanity and decency did not
require and prononnces my charges
unfouaded assertions and ansinud-
tons" to do him injury. Third, in
reply to my observation that the re-
aoard offered for the recapture of Field
was small, he answers that Gin fixing
the amount, he was governed by ad-
vice OF some of the best and most
prominent citizens of his place. -
Fourth, in reply to my assertion that
though he had had information of
Fields whereabouts and yet ACCOM-
plished nothing, he answers by fling
at PHlLos, charging him with a great
err desire to injnre him by destinations
than to aid him in arresting the fugi.
tive. These points embody the SUBJ
stance of his card; and, since he has
made it my duty, shall carefully ex-
anime them in order.
First, in reply to an assertion of
mine that he allowed Field to have
his tools with him in Jail, he says, he
" does not know from whom I.got my
information, but can show by undoubt-
ed testimony that my statement is en-
tarely acithoM Foundation" Now, on
this, his first point, I join issue with
him, and think | can convince every
unprejudiced mind in the county, that
instead of my statement being Sen
tarety aoithout foundataou," his re-
mark, broad and sweeping as it is, is
far more true of his oa0n statement
than of mine. And as the Sheriff does
not know where | got my information
from, I will at the same time inform
him that got it firstly from one of
the individuals who delivered Field
over into his custody in Pennington, !
at 3 o'clock, Sunday morning April
lst, and not on Sunday night as the
Sheriff states in his card. This indi.
vidual told me Sheriff Thatcher al
lowed Field to have with him in Jail
his tools. Secondly. / got this in
formation from Mr. Robert Thatcher
himself, Sheriff Of Hunterdon County,
who admitted to me aud to others here
in Milford, that up to that time. he had
allowed Fisld to have his tools with
him in jail We were all much sur
prised, and censured him, not however,
for wha5 we called an Intentional
fault of his, but for what every nine
men out of ten among US here, pro-
nounced, to use no harSher term,
very imprudent act. But, thirdly,
the very best evidence I have had,
and the best the people of my county
can have, to whom the Sheriff seems
DESTROYS of appealing from what he is
pleased to term "the unfounded as
sertions and insinuations of PHILos,n
is, in his own card of denial, for he
there admits the a0hole point that
is, from Sunday morning till the fol-
lowing Tuesday, Field actually had
with him in jail the identical tools
Having admitted this, he has admit
ted all PHILos asserted, that the Sher-
if kindly allowed him to have his tools
with him i'll jail we did not say how
long he had allowed this, whether for
an hour, or day, or for month. -
Hence if we have nothing but the
Sheriff's card to depend on, does it
not enable as to shoao beyond the pos
sibility of contradiction, that instead
Of his being able to show our state
ment " entirely without foundation"
in truth it has shown ours correct, and
his just the contrary. But. it may be
alleged, that inasmnch as PHILos has
saw fit to charge the Sheriff with kind
" allowing Field to have his tools, and
has left it to be inferred he did it
knowingly, and as the Sheriff g card,
though admitting that he had them
with him from Sunday till Tuesday,
yet makes no admission that prior to
Tuesday he knowingly allowed them
to be in his possession, it may be al.
legged that as all the Sheriff 3 card in
tended to deny was that he knowing
ly left them in his possession, PHILos
has yet SO far as the Sheriff's knowl-
edge goes, failed taking all he says
for truth, to prove the issue joined. l.
This latter view of the case, both as
regards the proof of PHILos, and the
meaning of the card, has | admit much
apparent weight in it, and indeed