The New York herald., 1867-02-22

The Pawnee Agency Libel Cause.-The Testi-
Inony CIosed-The Casc Submitted 70 the
Before Jadge E. D. Smith.
Henry ". De PYy us Oliuer p. Hurfnd st cl-Ths
hearing Of this case was resumed yesterday morning
when the FIRST and only witness for the deiencs,
Oliver Hurford being sworn, testified as folows:-
reside in Omaha, Nebraska; became acquainted with
plaintiff In 1857 he opened account with tho brn of
Huriord h Brother; be opened IN Indian agency 40
count and an Individual account; did know Of any
March as s. isea % + was in New York; took about .sn
DAYS 70 come from Omaha; was back at Omaha about
,he list Of AP don't the exaS; Mnsn
collect accounts always gave directions 70 collect ac-
counts when the accounts we're madc out was absent
ut the lime left knew nothing Of what happened -
the reservaon had nothing 10 do with the receipt o.
the 500; when returned my attention was called 70
the books and eaw the account OF 500: the agency
account was sent In December 1862 aer the pain-
tG was removed from Office be remained some time In
washington; he never settled up his agency account;
the charges were made before Dc Puy was removed
from Office; with regard TO De Puy difficulties, rcmem-
Der distinctly, which occurred at our store t was
conversaton the accounts not referred TO
MI Dc Puy, and was desIrous Of doing something 70
wanted Pawnec agency, and would have It would
have Mr. Dole removed cent ny account on and had
no knowledge that any part Of II had boon paid gave
the account Lushbaugh; in October saw this notice
in the newspaper calod the Onsahd Repa5lican:-
pAwsrp ispr.s AcrScY, Oct T. 1852
All persons holding ccrheaes o ndco.eness issued by
s.rsion or other clns against tns agency arc hereby
notified to present me same . nc Tor trsns
"''' = b. y. LUsHBAUcH. Indian Agent
did not send my account until some time.after seeing
this potiee; told Mr. Lushbaugh 10 make out the ac
in consequences OF seeing that advertisement; MI
De Puy told me flaming mill was charged the agency
account but u had been charged 10 the individual
count in justice Mr. Dc Puy could say that II IN not
castonaEy change the dates Of items 10 has ten
dency 10 confuse tho books there IL injustice in 1t,
only makes trouble when dealing with such nien 40
Mr. De puy; ] received letter from Mr. Lushbaugb,
and afterward IRON Mr.. Dole; had made inquiries
about the vouchers they claimed 10 have been
signed By Hnriord * Brother personally; know they
had been signed by under our authority did
intend to charge upon Mr. De pny my attention was
first called Hays the author by Mr. DE Puys letter
after receiving Lnstbanghs letter saw Hays and he
SAID be had no recollection Of having signed any such
vouchers, and acted under that belief; found after
receiving De Puys letter that Hays had signed other
papers, and discovered II wrote TO Lush
baug and he Puy exoneratng the plaintiff; In writing
the letters merely used the words which he put In my
mouth did intend 10 charge him with forgeres;
had nothing do with the charges against him. and
did all could TO have justice done km--eo much 80 that
Lubaugn found fault with me- acted as the friend Of
No essentially new facts were elected from the cross
examination OF this Witness the questions being mainly
confined asccrainng the correctness OF amounts SGT
forth IN the ndiv dual anu agency accounts
The following letter from De Puy 20 hurford, dated
Washington June 81, 1868, here introduced as svi
dcnce II was as follows:-
o. r. HrRToRp, ESQ, Omaha
ssys % n. T 70 efen na june
10 OF Indian Arairr-charrng me with
forgery of certain vouchers your name am somewhat
surprised tha, you should do but have sns CS
missioner send the vouchers, having no uount nas
you viii undertake sustain your charge and shall
expect a prompt and thorough reraction OF H. -.
The handwriting Of your bookkeeper
Mr. ehnc and the signature was attached by your partner
In the Fork Ferry Mr. Hays who was sent 70 the rcser
vaton arrangement with in The fore partof April l
the time OF the annuity payments
III YOU have made this charge Inadvertently consultation
with Mr. Havs will you how much injustice you have
done me- The witnesses that Mr.. Hays there and
vouchers which he received from you Tor that
the money among your neghbors
aud be yond impeachment HENRY W DE rUr.
~ s-You vail that the receipt was written by
~ IN Rogers. of Fremont who among those present
when tho money paid to Mr.. Hays
This closed the testimony In the case motion was
then made BY Mr. Fullerton for the dismissal OF the case
but the Court overruled the application, and ordered
that the case should 20 TO the jury, 70 decide
effect that his letters might produce at tho mc Of writ
ing them.
Mr. Fullerton then summed up in . brief speech Of
about fifteen minutes duration, and followed BY
Mr. Cutler for the plaintiff, at tho conclusion Of which
Court charged the jury and ordered sealed verdict
l.a retur mod m0ru