The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1870-10-21

answer the action of 1ast ttliiam Gleason, as
iaignee ,of John We. Thompson. .:Of O. aspIea of
debtor seven thousand dollars, with legal
interest thereon from the list dry OF April,
1861, until paid. .s.s5
| Damage one hundred dollars. And have
then and there this writ.
| Witness, w Wflliam FoWlkes, clerk Of our
said, court, al the courthouse, this 18th day
tof January, 1857, in the ninety-first year OF
the Commonwealth. WIN. FOFIKEs."
| Witness resumed: Mr.. Chahoon brought
the declaration and note to me In person.
It was the first time / ever saw him. Do
not know, who paid the writ tax, but the
counsel generally pays that. The suit wss
brought by order of. Mr.. Ghahoon. Tie
Following are the endorsements upon the
tdeclaration: stsss< "a = 90.
| !" Feb. A, Dec. filed g. C. o. as. deft.e
4 g 9. %, G. O.. C. cs. defendant"
/ g. 1857, March IL, Office jHdg' t confirmed ~
+ suslf - s. us. deft.o .i
The first two endorsements are inmy haHHe.
| writing the other was written by my dep
uty, Mr. Meanley.# Mr.. j. III. Sands was
marked as counsel for the defendant. No
Ipiea was ever entered. Judgement went
| by default. I would like to tell what was
said about the plea by Mr. Sands, Ii allowed.
| Mr.. Wise: Was it said In Mr.. Chahoon's
presence? $50 : ~ = ~
l. Witness: No, sir butt would like To
| unburden myself Of all know.
| The Court 1t is not evidence if not said
| in the presence of the accused.
b Witness resumed The papers were
placed in an envelope by Major Hambrick,
1 and sealed in my presence. -
Cross-eXamined The suit was brought
in ordinary form, and the papers are in the
usual mode. The process was served JAN
uary Cd, 1867, and the writ was executed
/ February 1st, 1867, upon r. D. Sanxay,
curator. The declaration was filed Febru-
ary 4th, at rules. .zs.ssZ,y.s.
/, Question by Judge Crump Was any
reason assigned by counsel for not filing a
plea in the case? 3
Question objected to by the Common
wealth, on the ground that the prisoner
was not present when the reason was as
! signed. The objection was sustained by
| the court, and the defence filed another
bill Of exceptions.
Question by Judge Crump Did the con-
lversation about filing the plea take place
before the Office judgment was confirmed
| Witness: It did.
! Question: Was Sanxay, the defendant,
present at the time, and did he assign any
reason for not putting in plea to set aside
the office Judgment
Witness Sands and Sanxay were together
at the time.
Question: Is Sanxayaliye now?
! y Witness I hear he is dead.
\ Question - Well, what reason did he
assign for not defending the suit
II objected to by the commonwealth At
torney; objection sustained by the court /;
bill of exceptions filed by the defence.
Cross examination resumed The defend,
+! ant, SanXay, certainly was aware of the
/ existence of the suit, and do not know of
4 his making any objections.
William Christian examined: / knew
Solomon Haunsten for seven or eight years
previous to his death, and he consulted me
several times as to business matters.
think I saw him sign or endorse note
once for one hundred dollars in favor of a
sman named Rose, and also saw him sign
a check. / did not see a great deal of his
1 handwriting, Dut thlnk 1 WOufu KNOW IL.
lGIIe was here shown the writing alleged to
have been forged.] do not think this sig
-.rnature, Is genuine: aituorghit has q si.lilar:
ity TO his handwriting. He usually sigHed
his name fsS. Haunstein."
Cross-examined: Think Haunstein wrote
j, q freera and larger hand than that. I never
4 saw his name signed Solomon" that re.
s;collect. ] have not seen any of his writing
since year or so before his death. Never
had any Of iC in my possession. Don'tthink
i / ever saw him sign his name more than
,. GNlCGs SI StW lliS DupCl IuC SOuiiUy
! Court clerks Office about the time of the
t election of county judge,
EVIDENCE OF THOMAS R. BowDEG.
i ThomasaR. Bowden sworn came to
= the city of Richmond, ] think, in June,
1885. i came as Attorney-General OF the
! State, mot by military appointment, as the
J., Dispatch says,) but under the Wheeling
Government Of the State Of Virginia, which,
| In my opinion, was the true government
My first acquaintance with MIR. Chahoor
was at Norfolk during the war, where
| was introduced to him by my uncle, Mr.
81 Henry Nj. Bowden, now member Of the
I House Of delegates. Before / came tc
Richmond elections were ordered by Gov
i lPierpoint in certain counties, and MIR. Cha.
Il hoon was elected Commemorative at
torney of Elizabeth City county. He ex'
ercised the duties Of that Office, first under
Judge Gregory and then under Judge
1 Christian. subsequently, he went to Flori
da, and stayed there awhile. I do not re
member when,I first saw him in Richmond
i never saw the note, declaration, &C.. ex
:, hibited until ] saw them in Mr. FoWlkeS!
office. IneFer had the note purporting te
!; be signed by Haunstsin IN favor Of Johr
Question by Common nwealth's Attorney
Did you eyer have in your possession, o. O
against Haunstein?
Yes, sir. My recollection is that some
/, years ago Mr.. Chahoon told me that he hat
claim against Haunstein, and asked me K
:. present it to Mr. SanXay. / never went tt
see. Sanxay, but met him one day while
was walking out with a young lady, an6
told him that I had q claim against an estate
,of which he was curator-that OF Haun
stein. He (s.) denied the existence Of any
4 Just claim Of the kind, and went on, rather
! furiously thought. to reiterate the same
; had with me on this occasion memoran
l,drlm from Mr.. Chahoon that this estate wa
: indebted to Gleason, or somebody else
don't exactly remember WhO-several thou
sand dollars: / think six or seven thouSanf
! dollars. Am not sure that the person wa!
y Gleason. Chahoon had been occupying on
/ office with me, land was acting as counsel,
presume. afterwards told MIR. Chahoor
that Mr. Sanxay said that Haunstein didn'
owe any money, and that he wouldn't pay
q this debt. Chahoon replied that he Wouldn'
! be put off in that way, and that the none.
was due on note. I never had anything
more NOR to do wihh the matter during the pro
: gress of that suit. afterwards, however
met a MIR. Turner, of Union Hill, who ask
i ed me il had been at the sale Of the pro
q Objected to, and objection sustained.
Witness resumed In consequence OF tn
! conversation had with Mr. Turner, after
!. wards talking with Chahoon, I told hin
that I heard he had brought suit on tina
note: He said Eyes" I asked him il b
! believed the claim to be just ? He sail
4 Hyes, of5course, p or something to tina
effect. I then inquired why he had not toll
: me ANYTHING about it.? He replied that b
: g didn't know" he hadn't any specia
S reason for doing so,'. and said that l wa