The weekly clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1863-1882, 1875-06-23
THE ALLEGED BRIBERY
CASE.
Col. Matthews. OF Counsel for Bar
renIine, explains, but says
nothing.


The Columbus Index has stated spe-
eially the grounds on which it has charged
Lit. Gov. Davis with having received
money for granting pardon to Thomas
Barrentine, charged with the murder of
the widow in Lowndes county. Since
our last issue, in which we commented ON
the absence of explicitness in the original
article. the Index has made this follow
ing distinct statement, giving names,
dates and particulars:
Columbus Index.l
1.-The attacks of Lieutenant Governor
Davis and the Radical press of the State
have forced US TO publication of the
facts connected with the rumor relating
TO the bribery of Lieutenant-Go vernor
Davis. The Index now defieS those
whose characters are at stake to bring suit
! for libel, and We proceed to state the fol-
lowing facts and dare any one to contro'
vert them:
Between the 18th and Oath days OF
May, Gov Davis (negro) was in Jack
son, begging Gov. Ames to sign a par
don in blank Gov. Ames refused and
then Davis told him the pardon was for
Thomas Barrentine, the murderer of Mrs.
! Thomas. Still Gov Ames refused to
iss ne the pardon, but shortly left for the
seacoast He went by Osyks, near the
Louisiana line, and soon after he passed
that place, Gov. Davis sealed the pardon
of Thomas Barrentine.
/ On May 18th, Henry Barrentine, faith
er of Thomas Barrentine, gave Col. Bev-
erly Matthews, attorney for the Barren
| tines, check for $3.50 to be used in pro-
curing the pardon of IhOs. Barrentine.-
| Soon after, there was some misunder-
standing between Henry Barrentine and
Col Matthews, which resulted in the for
mer's Withdrawing the check and giving,
on May 22d, check for $3.50 payable
/ to cash or bearer. This check was in
possession of Col. w. E. Gibbs, who
obtained the money on it Sunday, May
| 23d, and on that day, he, Col Matthews
and Gov. Davis we're seell in such earnest
conversation together that the observers
| thought that there was some serious diff
Guilty on hand. On that night COL Gibbs
and Davis had an appointment to meet at
Wiley Johnston's (colored) house. Davis
waited at the house until late at night but
the Col. failed to ''come to time" where
at Davis was greatly enraged. The next
morning GATH Davis was at the train
before day waiting for Gibbs and went to
Artesia with him. What transpired du-
ring that interview is not kaOwn, but
| Davis returned with smiling counter
ance and said that he had got has part OF
| the money.
The actual amount Of money received
by Davis for issuing the pardon was only
$4,000. The balance-S8000 90 was di-
vided between Coils. Matthews and Gibbs
for professional services i'll securing the
pardon"
This article presents the issue in a tam
gible shape. Was there $12, 90 check
in the transaction Did Davis receive
any portion of it If not how was it
used? The case had not been tried, and
no lawyers fees could have legitimately
accrued. A subsequent number of the
Index contains the following explanation
for Col. Beverly Matthews:
Several articles having appeared in
our columns connecting the name of the
Hon. Beverly Matthews with the bribery
of the negro Lieut.. Governor, we deem
it an act of justice to state, that having
had an interview with Col. Matthews,
from his statement upon this subject we
are satisfied that his action in the prem
lses was professional and honorable.
We regret that our article of Thursday
should have been misconstrued by intel
ligent gentlemen, and will say that Col.
Matthews explanation was entirely salts
factory, and our intent was to give him
an opportunity of offering it to the pub
lie"
Now, we submit that this explanation
is jejune and unsatisfactory to an impair
tial public, notwithstanding it may he
T" satisfactory" to the Index The public
desires to know not what the editor of
that journal thinks is professional and
honorable" but precisely what the said
" action was. The explanation implies
that Col. Matthews was concerned in the
case; and the inquiry is made, to what
extent? Does he possess kno.Uledge of ho,v
The $1,000 agas erpended9 And If so, actat
IS has intornlatiOl' The explanation ends
where public curiosity begins.
Nothing is heard from Col Gibbs who.
5 alleged to have been the associate
counsel with Col Matthews in the man.
cement of the case. 1t is alleged that
lie disbursed the proceeds of the check,
md circumstances are related which have
reated the presumption that part of it
vas paid to the acting Governor.
On the whole, the affair wears an ugly
spect official. Barrentine was charged
With participating in an atrocious MUIR
er of defenceless woman in the
resence of her children, and without a
rial, is pardoned. The inference is I'M
voldable that a powerful influence was
rought to bear on the acting Executive {
D induce him to interfere in such behalf
/ advance of trial in which the facts
-ould have been elected establishing the
llilt or innocence of the accused.
Col. Matthews has spoken but not to ,
lie point, nor satisfactorily. Col Gibbs
yet to be heard from. Meantime, the t
quiry shall be pressed not for the pro- o
ssiohal nor personal injury of these :.
wyers whom the public acquit of any n
oral crime in striving to secure the re- t,
ase of their client, but to ascertain n
neither the grave charge that Executive II
reference in behalf of a supposed =
iminal was secured by "a pecuniary con- D
ieration. The dealing of the public is n