, 1874-01-06
THE CHENEY MATTER AGAIN.

To the Editor Of The Cntcd1o tribune:
SIR: Charles Edward Cheney appears in Tie
TRIBUNE Of this morning, BY his ingenious at
tornev. Melville " Fuller, in respect to tho
memorial 'tTo the Rt- Rev. the Bishops Of the
Protestant Episcopal Church, in General Cou-
ycption assembled" which has been imputed to
Mr, Cheney, bus tho authenticity Of which
is now denied. And the ingenious attorney
loses his accustomed ingenuity, and e1-
hibits Indications OF very disru1 bed spirit,
both in the letter and spirit OF his
communication which disturbed condition. !
take it, is in some part reflection Of the tenn
ner of Ills client. BY these exhibitions Of attor-
rey and client am reminded OF al old maxim
t1at used to real III Latin in my schoolboy
days. to the effect that ''Whom the gods would
destroy thev first mako mad But the ingenious
attorney is happy IN one point: He detects M
uui1,portaut mistake Ill my communication puo.
l,shed in your Issue of the 4th inst..r
and is polite. courteous: and gentle'nauly
enough to nmially intimate that thetelp
an guilty Of s'falsehood." In my
former communication 1t was stated that - Mr.
Cheney denies tue authenticity Of the published
document, aud says It was never presented 10
the General Convention It was, however,
brought tofole tho Bishops OF the Episcopal
yention OF 1871 My error was, that hlr. Che,
news denial OF such presentation to the General
Convention had reference to the memorial tha:
Lc admits he did prepare, and not TO tho Que
Cured because did not see Mr. Cheneys lot
ter until quite late Saturday evening,
when /. read and replied to it very
huIriet1ly, ard without recurrence s
to the portion III question. In this naste MIS- mis-
took tho memorial to which tho denial had ref
ercnce. - and choerfuliy make the correction 80
cou,teously suggested BY Dir. Chonoy'a LAWYER;
But the essential point at issue shall not be
befogged by any side~issuo put forth By mr..
Cheney's counsel. am not to De ura"n it1aop 1aom
The e mpubshed q memorial, il h1r. Cheney is in any
way responsible for 1t. is ., very damaging ono
to bis cause, and exhibits the nartysin u very
Illuminating aspect, considering the datl7
hefora het The tho public Mr. Cheney has de-
MED undor oath, in bis deposition 9aaioa
tnken in the pending litigation, and also denied
IL lis letter in your Issue Of Saturday, that he
wrote or authorized the particular memorial
rnhliahed in TIE TRIBUNE Of the 1st inss, ana
pnrs comes his attorney, and in Ills amiable let
tar referred to, states Tint the memor1Rl which
n Chenay admits that be did prepare IS II hls
IaIr- Fnller's) possession, aud that II ls " nos
Substantially the same rs that Publlshed. ~.
IndHa Williams decides the evidence admissible
and competent, this paper Will be produced On the
haariur.h may DO allowed to sugeess tnas
what Judge Williams may decide has nothing 20
do With the matter now IN hand; ana, nosmeH s. y
etan;,nr Mr, Fuller's idea Of what 1s OF Wnas ~ ls
at tbs snhetauce OF the memorial that mr.
Cbanev did prepare, may also be per1nltsea 20
ro;tarsta The prediction of my former commuI ~
cation. that Mr.. Cheney could best :hsls.s sus
public as to the real pu-port OF tna1 noSu nnts
nooss;bla ~ that others are ss capable Of g''inS
rronstrnction to the contents OF 1he a.
mitted memorial as .,s either .du;t+ea I memo ue