The New Orleans bulletin. [volume] (New Orleans [La.]) 1874-1876, 1876-03-30
THE CASE AS IT STANDS.

THE CASE AS 1T STANDS.
One of the most indicative events Of the
present state of eff .irs, is the exact position
occ upjei by the witness Marsh in the Belknar
investigation. BY means of the rigid meas
ures adopted by the Clymer Committee,
Marsh was compelled to acknowledge his own
completely in the business Of the barter and
sale of post-traderships, but was forced to
divulge the name of his principal in the bust.
ness, the famous or infamous Belknap. Almost
imm ediately after his evidence had been used
by the Committee, Marsh disappeared The
question, then, naturally arose-why was it
that SO valuable and voluable witness had
placed himself beyond the reach Of his in
quisitors?
the Radical press were very anxious and
forcible in their endeavor to prove that the
Democratic party, fearing that the witness
Marsh would speak louder or to more purpose
than their policy intended, had persuaded
him to suddenly disappear and place himself
eyond their reach. The Republican mem
bers of the committee seized with avidity the
opportunity to express their entire dissatisfac-
ton with the meagerness and lack Of fullness
of the evidence, and their great desire to have
the matter further investigated. In the mean
while the President issues an order to the
effect that the witnesses whose testimony
should tend to criminate themselves, although
it should prove the wickedness of others.
would not thereby release themselves from
tho effect Of the evidence thus obtained.
Was it then 80 wonderful that Marsh, after
having placed himself within the purview Of
the Presidents orders, should seek to avoid
the threatened danger attendant upon al wit
nesses against the pets of the Administration
This was but counterpart order to that is
sued in the Babcock trial, the recognized OBJ
ject of which was to subserve the interests Of
the accused, and to intimidate the witnesses
for fear that they would divulge the entire
secret What wi ness is there who would prove
so courageous that he could resist an attack
managed by the head of the govern ment, and
backed by the entire power of the Admins
tration forces?
But let us look at the sequel The Presi-
dent removes the ban, revokes the threat and
10 the frightened witness reappears Now,
how stands the case? The witness is imme-
diately placed upon the stand, and he'posi-
lively and unequivocally states that it was en-
tirely owing to the threats made by the Ad-
ministration and its representatives that he
fed beyond the limits of the American
power, and emphatically denied that any
Democratic member Of the committee used
any influence to urge him to absent himself
from the territory of the inquisition.
Now, how stands the case? The Demo-
cratic Committee procured certain evidence
damaging to the honesty and integrity Of the
Administration; the counter-accugation is
made that the witness having subserved the
party interests, was sent away to prevent fur
ther questioning. proclamation issues, Of
such nature that Witnesses for the govern
ment place themselves in the same category
as the defendants. DTS are issued by the
Administration; under force of public opinion
those dsfs are Withdrawn, aud the witness re-
appears, and not only confirms
his first evidence, but emphatically
denies that the counsel for the people
used any means TO send him away or to shorten
his testimony; but on the contrary, states
that it was purely through fear Of the power
Of the administration that he fisd. Here is
succlnct and clear statement Of the case.
Now it is for the public and the independent
voter to Judge who is in the vocative, the
Radical administration or the Democratic
people! The Democratic people agaiost
Radicalism, sample case stated, let the peo-
pie, Is the jury, decide. What is the YER
l;n%2