The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1869-03-30

before MIR. commissioner Cnano0n dSali
Yesterday to answer the charge Of pryint
! into the correspondence Of W. ID. Samuel
and Edgar Allan.
District Attorney Beach made his ap.
pearance at about IL o'clock, accompanied
by the principal witnesses for the Govern
ment.
MIR. BEACH OBJECTS.
Mr.. Beach said that matter of some
enhancement had arisen, which he wished
to bring to the attention Of the Comm1s
sioner. He had written to Mr.. Gilmer, Wht
had previously appeared in the case, tina
he preferred to assume the entire control
the case, being assured that he could give
it a full and thorough investigation withou
any professional assistance. Upon this, the
principal witnesses in the case had declined
| to communicate the leading facts until thu
Commissioner had decided upon MIR. Gil
mer's right to appear.
MR.. GILMER PROTESTS.
Mr.. Gilmer said: I was exceeding sur
| prised at the note I received this morning
from the District Attorney. will read TIT
correspondence that occurred between thai
gentleman and myself, that this matter may
be distinctly understood.
"MoNDAY MORNING, March %, 1869.
"Dear Sir,-I call at your Office this
morning to say to you that | have come
down to conduct the examination to-day
before Commissioner Chahoon in the case
of the United States Us. Fl. q. Wells ct ais
CT think shall be able to give the case
q full and thorough examination without
any professional assistance, and I have
therefore determined, for the present al
least, to dispense with it. I make haste
to give you the earliest notice of my deter
mination, in order to prevent as far Of
possible any embarrassment and l wish
at the same time to assure you that it does
not originate in any spirit Of discourtesy to
yourself, either personally or profession
ally. Very respectfully, yours,
SIS. FERGUSON BEACH,
Sc United States District Attorney.
81. Fl. Gtmer, Esq"
RICHMOND, March 20, 1869.
"S. F. Beach, Esq:
"Dear Sir,-Your note Of this date is
this moment received. I am greatly sur
prised at its conteuts, and most respectfully
dissent from your conclusions as expressed
I have bestowed much labor on the case
referred to-analyzed all the evidence and
grouped all the circumstances-with 8
thorough knowledge of which it would BIZ
impossible for any one to proceed with the
case. Messrs. Allan and Samuel have
regularly retained my services, and it wa:
my intention to have had full conference
with you this morning but for your note
| must ask that your intimated objection BIZ
Withdrawn, as it seems to me unusua
under all the circumstances, the more so o:
II. H. Wells, Esq, has publicly threatened
the prosecutors with the penitentiary. Al
early reply will be agreeable to, very
respectfully, JOHN Fl. G1LMER."
"MoNDAY, March 20, 1869.
"My Dear Sir,-I have your note in an
swer to mine of this morning. l see NJ
reason to change the determination commu
nicated in my note to you, and therefore
have only to say, in reply, that deem i
best to adhere to it.
Respectfully yours,
IS. F. BEACH,
"United States District Attorney.
"John II. GiImaer, Esq"
"RICHMoND, March 20, 1869.
"S. T. Beach, Esq:
"Dear Sir,-Your note in reply to my
note of this morning is just received.
regret your determination; nevertheless,
will be at the Commissioners this morning
where l hope to meet you in q changed
mood upon the subject-matter of our brief
correspondence.
"Very respectfully,
"JoHN H. G1LMER."
., RICHMOND, VA, March 20, 1869.
"John Fl. Gilmer, ST.:
"Dear Sir,-I have this morning seen
the correspondence between S. F. Beach
Esq, and yourself. From reasons best
known to myself, it is my earnest desire
that you should hold on to the position you
occupy in the case, and carry out, to the
best of your ability, the contract existing
between US, 80 as to further the ends Of
public justice.
Every respectfully yours,
"EDGAR ALLAN"
RICHMOND, VA, March 20, 1869.
"Mr. Gilmer,-I approve the above COM
munication of Mr.. Allan, and conjoin my
desire with his that you shall execute the
duties deyolvipg upon you as formally and
regularly retained in the case referred to
in the accompanying correspondence.
"Very respectfully, W. q. SAMUEL"
I am not in the habit Of thrusting
myself before any tribunal, nor of shirk-
ing any responsibility or duty that may
devolye upon me before any tribunal.
Your Honor will recollect-as many in
this room will recollect-that when this
case came up last week took the ground,
very distinctly, that thought it the duty of
the District Attorney to be here, inasmuch
as you had telegraphed to him. In his alb
sence was unwilling to 60 on with the case.
I treated the gentleman in his absence with
the same courtesy that; l shall exhibit in
his presence. Why was he not here then !?
He had been requested to come. Why is he
here to-day, and why not then |? This very
pertinent and significant question will pre-
sent itself to the mind of every man who
hears me. Why is it that as District At
torney he undertakes to say before you, as
Commissioner, that parties who have been
threatened by one Of the accused with the
penitentiary cannot come here and see that
their rights are protected? Where am 1 !?
In what country am / g.? Before what court
do APPEAR "Upon what meat doth this
our Caesar feed that he hath grown so
great 7" have rights here as profess
sional man, under retaining fee, part Of
which has been received, doing the duty Of
this District Attorney, representing the
Government in his absence. And now he
comesin, and I am to sink into insignif-
canoe at the wink of his eye or the nod Of
his head. Is that the practice of this COURT