The Wheeling daily register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1864-1878, 1865-03-08
/. Xcording tothe &idenee, wkEeh

| eut. *corulng W VIC iuonoo'
WIS tai On just before The trial, the al
legged Conversation NIT hsgs occurred
about the 3Oth of June or first of July
1863. Whether designed or not, the no
tice of the charge was, therefore, of such
a character, lthatit was impossible for
the Judge to know, before the testimony
was taken, what conversation of his was
referred to, or to prepare to meet the
charge by explanatory or couuter-evi-
pehcei ,ii'h 81. g.,a -.-' ....a p 5 -E. - +
There was but one witness to support
this charge, Mr.. Joseph 8. WHEAT, door
keep Der of the House of Delegates, and
formerly delegate from Morgan county.
The prosecution has followed the tracks
of Judge KENNEDY, with the steady
perseverance of the bloodhound, yet they
could not produce anything to eorrob-
crate the statement of the witness; or to
show that, upon any other occasion, the
Judge had expressed the opinion impart-
ed to him, or anything like it, respecting
the government of West Virginia.
Tie witness says he was but partial
ly acquainted " it'll Judge KENNEDY, yet
he represents the conversation to have
been introduced by the Judge, and that
it was uncalled for and voluntary. The
Judge hadjust accepted his commission,
as an officer of the State. from the Gov
ernor of West Virginia, when, according
to the witness, he steps up to a person
in the Hotel, who is almost total stran-
ger to him, and volunteers the declare
ton "that the new State was bogus" ad
ding to make the declaration more en-
phatic, that "he had just had an argu-
ment with Governor FOREMAN in rela-
ton to it, and proved that he himself
was not legally Governor of the State"
If such conversation had taken place
with the Governor, we can imagine his
answer would have been, Every well,
Judge, if / am not legally Governor, |
have no right to sign your commissions
nor can | see how, with your notions,
YOU can take the oath to support the
Constitution of the new State;" and the
reply would have been conclusive. if not
satisfactory. The Governor did recollect
some conversation, about that time, be-
tween himself and Judge KENNEDY, but
of very different character from that
referred to by Mr.. WHEAT. 1t was in
relation to the question whether Judge
KENNEDY himself was legally qualified
to hold the Office to which he had been
elected.
At the conversation related by the wit
ness there was no one present but the
Judge and himself How often does it
happen that such things are misrecol-
lected or perverted, especially after they
have become the subjects of party con-
troversy2 If three men are present at
conversation, the chances are that two
ofthem will not state it correctly Nearly
twenty months elapsed from the time the
alleged conversation took place, before
Mr. WHEAT was called upon to testify re-
speeding it. The extraordinary zeal he
manifested for the success of the prose-
cution, will justify us in supposing that
his report of what occurred would not be
colored SO as to make it too favorable to
the accused The only thing that sur
prises us is, that the prosecution, with all
their diligence, could not produce to sus
I tain this charge other conversations OF
declarations of Judge KENNEDY, equally
misunderstood or perverted If we can
claim nothing else for Judge KENNEDY,
we do claim that he is a man of sense
and ordinary prudence; and it is prepos-
ferrous to suppose that any person of
common sense, who had just accepted a
commission under the Government of
West Virginia, should have stepped up to
Mr. WHEAT and made the voluntary and
uncalled for declaration that the new
State was bogus; for however slight may
have been his acquaintance with Mr..
WHEAT, he must have known, if he knew
anything about him, that the late men,
Der from Morgan county is in the habit
of telling all he knows, to everybody
who will listen to him
The Judges reply to the charges
against him was made under oath. To
the particular charge now under consid-
Grafton, his reply was as follows:
"To so much of this specification as
changes hun with having said that the
Government of West Virginia was bogus
| concern, this respondent denies mostpos-
itively and emphatically that he ever
used any such language. 1t is utterly at
variance with his most solemn convic-
tions and often expressed opinions, as
well as with the oath he has taken to
support the Constitution and laws of
that State
In reference to the reorgauized Gov
ernment of Virginia, the Judge admits
that "he always had grave doubts as to