Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1863-02-24

ons and Garnett) that he was mistaken; 'ns'
myself and tho CtbCI parties implicated ny
hin we're incapable of fraud, no gracious'J
admitted that I "had been thought respect,
able ,nan;" said that she crilninatod no ohe'
"hoped an investigation might reheSe nie'
hat did not think Il would.
On the 18th january, after had gwen
him time 10 coo in his purpose. ana TO cor
ct INV error of proceeding or Language,
rarI;ad IN card, tuat Mr.. Foote should not
asr,ne from the tissue Of character and fact
,lus raised: that meant to make him try
| u y and that on that trial one or tho other
of US must DO proved base mai,-myseil
! NJ guilty Of corruption, OF himself IS hay
| inr falsely, and withou. notice, aspcrscd tho
character OF an absent and innocent Ecnila-
,npn."
On Janunry 18th Mr. FoUte lslcuted tho
| accusation; sid that "tho msin particulars
T.; laid flour contract Tad been supplied 10
linn hy persoas OF undoub.ei standing hare;
| .,h.t ha had, when introducing TIT tesoih'
t,rns of inquiry, read iron u written meu'o-
| s.nium Furnished by gentleman OF high
..,auIIng here, &C.. and that The csrd that
ha: written had been "marhcd by ~"
coarseai scurriiity, foul !!ilinssgat;,' ~
Az snon SIS could i;t Tbs case t5ied did
sd. AM, 90. the Chairman Of COMMITTEE 10
sumnnrs Mr.. Foote. lie replied u that
summons Nv letter declining TO attend tho
si;,insa Of the Committee, but still declaring
,nsl be had .e:eiyed on The subject state.
meSts from aousces Of apparent responsible
| i,y." aud thai Tie newspaper "statementa
in regard 20 ii.c matter had been greatly
strengthened by the atfirmations OF rcSpccta
bic gon,lv,oen in Richmond protesting to
have personal knowledge of particulars
8! once solicited the y mmitteo, in writing
to request MIR. Fcote to "point out these re-
sporsible sources, "And name these respect
! sble gentlemen" The Committee replied in
writing that they bad usoi all proper dill
gence in arriyiug vt all ths proof which could
! be adduced."
! Upon the testimony in the case, it yas
proved, "a the COMMITTEES have reported, that
whom the contIact was made, had been, for
more than th, co menths, eff duty, from Sc
we're illness, and, for nearly as long time,
absent from the city by command Of my ply
stefan ami the advice Of my superior cfi;er !;
and that the contract had not been made
known ems at any time, from it's inception
to its ratification, by any one whatever; and,
| further, tat bad not and never had had
the slightest interest 10 the fem of Haxall,
Crenshsw 4 Co, the contractors, and had
,mvcr baeG conn, cted in business with any
one of them.
| Whsn this report WAS submitted, Mr.. Foots
rose 10 SAG that HI was 'gratitiel that such
n high-minGed, Intelligent and honorable gen
| tlemsn had no connection with the -four con
tract" and "wished to express his satisfac-
ton that Major Rutlin stands entirely exempt
from ceusure or suspicion" These remarks,
comprising the substance Of all he said, to
say the least, wsro cool; but apologetic they
were not, III ony senEc Of the term.
But M-. Foo!e concurrcd Inc in my full &c
ouittal If SO BIO had committed an offence,
and ore would think, should have expressed
some rcgra. al il. In what did tina offence
consist? Certainly not il tho :.rsignIncnt OF
All officer for fraud If ho hid good and autli-
Gent testimony, '"in his opinion," to prove
it, or even ground , suspicion-that much
was his duty, and wes but just TO The officer
but in his mode Of proceeding. When such
charges are Iuade aud prosecuted, each nsrn-
Der of Congress becomes judge, and is Cub
ject to tue same laws which should regulate
the conduct Of jd6ge in similar circu IL
stances He may, nay must, isGuea warrant
fer tho accused, ard try his case. Bat no is
Justly subjnc. 10 Impeachment for mnlfea
sencs in Office il it shall appear that he has
denounced tho accused az i culp!it, aud that
he has avcwci in advance Of the trial his
conviction cs biz guilt; still uoru. il no has
expressed that opinion upon what he hiss DO
clared 10 be- "grod and sufficient testimony
Hthe affrmations Of respectable gentlemen
protesting to have personal knowledge OF
particulars" Jurymen are never sllowc5
70 sit IN q case III regard to which they have
for,usd Or expressed an opinion, and are often
objected to if they have heard only part of
tho evidence; SO tender is the law Of the
reputation and the personal liberty Of the
citiZon. For the Same reason the Judge ia
expected To keep his mind unbiased, and il
ha shall so far forget the obligations Of his
high Office as boldly to announce prtiudg.
me ut of tho case the law strips from him
the ermiue no hns stained. That offenco,
then, ia one against civil liberty and in 30 far,
is much graver than mere personal griev
suce But If. it shall appear that the Judge
| who has thus vsunted the testimony and has
published it at tue moment Of accusation,
without notice to the accused Of his purpose
to put him upon trial, and yet on the trial
fails to produce it, though urged By TIC SC
cused to do so; fails to point out his "re-
sponSiLle sources" and to name his ''reSpsc-
table acitnesses," fails even to confront the &C
cused, though publicly challenged by him and
invited by his own colleagues and in addition
to this, that the accused, going beyond the re-
quiremonis of the law, proves conclusiyely
not only that he is not guilty and that there
was no probable cause Of suspicion III The
case, but that he has always horne stain
less character, language cannot express the
feelings with which just and wholesome
public opinion should view an act Of such
atrccity. That is one aspect of the case in
which Mr.. Foote has put himself
Tie other il briefly this: if it be true that
Mr.. Focte supposed himself to have wit
nesses to his charges. it ~ very clear n,w
that he was their tool. Why, when he found
out that they had dupsd him, dill lie still
withhold their names; Why did he, SO
ready to denounce gentleman, decline to
oxpose such tlngitous dsfamers Lot him
answer hQt or stand in their place. Until
no does expose them. and until he expresses
regret at having 80 far demesned himself in
his high office rs to sink the judge in the
prosecutor, no one can expect me to retract
the published alternative in which [ stated,
with moderation whose bounds do hot
| WISH 10" 10 eLceeu, tual LILO Iesuit Va tld0
trial of mine would prove ono or the other
Of US "a base nan-myself as guilty Of cor
ruption, or himself as having falsely and
without notice. asporsed the character Of an
absent and innocent gentleman
| As to the Contract with MesSrs.. HsXsll,
Orenshsw & Co, l beg the public not to I'M
derstsnd that ny svowal OF want Of connec-
ton with it implies disapprotation Of it
l =, - a.. -
gard to it. twill now in few days ha the
subject Of rcpor: from the committee after
tho most searching investigation have ever
| seen. FRANX G. RrrFrN.
Feb. 81 1t