The Richmond palladium. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1855-1875, 1863-05-15
a CARD.


deem it proper to say something. had
1000 Circular printed at the Broad Az.
Office, about the LIST Of November last;
printed lot Of envelopes myself, on ligh
buff paper. These Cieculars distributed
myself through the mail About the last o.
November | called at the Postofice, and
Mr.. Hadley. then clerk. handed me a mum
Der OF Circulars, in dark buff envelopes, all
directed IN Mr.. Hammonds oaon hand writ
ing, which had no stamps on them, and
said about one hundred and fifty OF them
had been handed in By the Broad Ar
office boy. who stated they were Banks
matter. The color of the envelope. End the
fact that | had put none in. excited my
curiosity and, on examination, discover
ed what believed Their and do yet, frau
on me and the pubIic-the Circular pur-
l Immediately called on Mr. Hammond in
regard to it. He said the boys thought
they would go into it and make something
l demanded they Should be taken out Of ihe
office. He dared me take them out told
him l would attend TO it, AID left. Ham
mond followed me down on 10 The street,
and told me he would have them taken out
The boy was sent Tor them, aud they were
delivered to me, and l have many OF them
in my posses yet-aN directed IN tic
hand ,crittng of Mr.. Hammond. II any
man doubts it, let him call and see. No
Circulars, and no envelopes. we're ever
stolen from the Broad Are Office to my
knowledge, and presume there were none
without my knowledge, for there was no
occasion to do so. l supplied most Of the
gentlemen who have these Circulars my
self.
In order, however, to get the ugly AID
stubborn evidence OF Mr.. diamonds con-
nection with this swinde out of the way,
he sent Mr.. Remington. last Thursday or
Friday for those envelopes which are direct
ed IN his hand w,ising. Mr.. Hammond
labors hard to make the impression that the
Circulars issued. as he claims, by Mr.. Peck
iDpaugb. was the same as mine, with the
exception that Mr.. Remington's name had
been inserted, instead of mine. and that it
was merely issued as a joke on Remington
Such is not the fact. II is new compost.
ton from beginning to end. No two SEN
fences are the same, and it involved the la.
Dor of composing new Circular. and Of
setting the whole up in type. The writer
of this doubts the ability Of Mr.. Peckin-
paugh to compose the Circular; besides it
bears all the ear.marks peculiar TO Mr.. HIS
style being in his grandiloquent strain
Mr.. Peckinpaugh told me that Mr.. Ham
mond wrote it,sand gave him five dollars to
set it up on Sunday. II Mr.. Hammond in
tended to perpetrate joke, am somewhat
at loss 10 see where the laugh was to
come in. These $50 Circulars were all d.
rected in Mr.. Humna ond's hand irrifiny. to
postoffices in Pennsy lvania Iowa. Missouri,
Nebraska, and a few TO the eastern part of
Ohio. l saw a thousand Of these circulars
in the Broadaxe Office. suppose the fun
nv part would have been the '.receipt of two
dollars in current funds, aud ten cent
postage stamp" in return for each.
The statement that | agreed TO give Mr..
Hammond an equal partnership in the Cir
cular business. il he would withdraw the
Others is utterly false. He made some such
proposition. but il was never agreed to on
my part. 1t is true that he was for time
a silent partner with me in the Photograph
ic business; that he furnished 5000, which
he said he obtained from Hon Geo. w. Ju-
liam for advocating his claims for Congress
in the Broadaxe. The partnership was
dissolved, soon after these fraudulent CIR
culars were issued, l being unwilling to re
main with one whom thought acted in bad
faith with me. l bought him out, and in
settlement Of the balance due him. gave my
note for S75, dated Dec. 60 1869, payable
in the Citizens Bank at 50 days from date.
1t appears this note did not fall due quite
soon enough to suit his convenience, he be-
ing desiious OF raising funds to meet some
note -ade by him due two days sooner, so
he changed the date with pencil from Dec.
90 TO Dec. 81 had put no stamp on the
note. Mr.. Hammond put the stamp on
himself, dated it Dec 27. 1869, and wrote |
my instals on the stamp without my knowi |
edge or consent. | received notice from |
Bank that the note fell due (adding three
days OF grsce) the 2Sth OF Feb. instead Of
the Cd Of March. Surprised at this. on
/ found the above alterations
lad been made. / told Hammond of it,
mi be told the Bank to hold on it the other
wo days. / let it go to protest Hammond
ook it out of Bank, erased the alteration
which had been made with pencil over the
line, kept the note ill due as l made it,
vhen l paid it. except protest fees, and
ave it now in my possession
Mr.. la nmon says l got some of our
usiaess men to sign a certificate 10 my cir
ular. which is trus. He further states that
ONE other names were also added, which
also true but those names were added
" Mr.. Hammond, and, several Of the men
nform me, without their knowledge or con-
ent. l had requested him to ask of them
he u>e of their names, which, it appears,
,e did not take the trouble 10 do.
Mr. Hammond was about this time, in
he habit Of taking very liberal privileges
With other mems names. On one occasion.
lie desired me to borrow money for him. l
Isked him to give me a letter Of recommen-
lation. He came so me with a letter pur
PORTING to be from Alfred Tulidge. OBJ
erved The letter and signature were in Mr..
hand writing and asked if Mr..
rullidge knew Of il. He said be did not,
,ut it would be all right. The letter was
n my possession two or three days. when
gxve it back to him. Mr.. Tullldse says
e never gave him any such authority.
l make these statements, ard leave the
natter to a candid public to judge for them
elves. j. F. BARKs
Richmond, May 6, 1868.
D6- The above card was partly in type
Ist week. and should have been published