New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1876-10-19
M FX0kx1D EAD ffB pKI 60IfT.

u.; me su Nsx s OEsss2a Rsln9eEgt 6aR q 2sy
erA Occasions recsafly pubd1h0d gIsW
changes against the private character o
MI. Packard. founded upon er pare stats
ments Of parties Who have evidently bssa
spborned for tho purpose. This ha
Elected q sharp but dignided reply from
thAtGaAtlamAn, which aRpeAsaain-y aatas
days Democrat and il copied iato thi
mornings REPUBLICAN,. p 7ocaiasI ~: g. /
The testimony upon which the Democra
relies to sustain it's charges bsafs upoz
the face Of it intrinsic evidences Of false
hood and vaeusnes. It 10 sueh Avidsac'
as would Be rejected BY any court Of jus
tice in the civilized world, and, would mo-
suffice even to convict . vagabond negrt
before q committee Of regulators in .
North Louisiana parish. Yet, in STATE
whose constitution guarantees the protec'
ton of educ process Of law" to every citi.
zen in the enjoyment Of his life. liberty,
property, reputation and all other human
rights, party which aspires to rule seeks
to condemn without hearing, and
upon no evidence at all, Q man whose
character has been above suspicion all his
life. and who stands without . superior
in this city where he has lived for four
teen or fifteen years. The charges against
Mr.. Packard are based upon profound
ignorance of the law and the facts. And
the testimony, through it distinctly men
tons him by name, satisfies rs that the
witnesses never had any business rsla-
tions with him. Being illiterate, they
have merely affixed their marks to the
soococted statements got up by others,
which they could neither read nor under
stand The charges, are, in effect, that
Mr.. Packard, In. his capacity q claim
agent for honorably discharged Union
soldiers, collected money in two or three
cases and never paid it over to the claim
ants. This is made in ignorance Of the
law by the Democrat and in ignorance Of
Mr. Packard's identity by the atlantis.
For it Is very certain that be never had
sither one Of them for client and never
collected cant Of money from. tho gov
'rnment for them OF any one else.
George Warrington puts his mark to .
tatement that he was . sergeant in the
|sventy eighth Regiment of Colorsd In.
lntry, and upon his discharge in 1866
1T his papers With Mr.. Packard. This
} denied by that gentleman. But it
GEMS that whoever may have been the
|ain agent employed, the papers we're
uly forwarded and the claim allowed
nd settled in 1868. A certificate vas
sued by the Auditor Of the Treasury,
nd this certificate was paid in December
the last named year. All these GER
ficates were cashed by the Disturbing
Ulcers of the Freedmen's Bureau. Claim
yents did not even receive the certiA-
ties. They were sent direct to the
'ner, while tho agent merely got draft
: his fees, which amounted {: ten dol
q. In this Washington case, the Demo-
at says that the statement of the witness
akes it 'that he never received dollar
d that Mr. Packard was in possession
his papers representing the claim"
the Auditor certities that the claim has {
en- paid, it follows that the papers were
ut to Washington City, and hence could q
t be in the possession of Mr.. Packard t
any body else in this city. Again, as a f
'ti6cate was duly made in favor of the t
INFANT, he alone could collect it. If o
money WAS paid to anybody else, it 7
lst have been upon forged indorse- 0
mt and George Washington still has a G
I'd claim against the government He c
u find it to his interest to make in s
tries on this subject. Perhaps an ex- t
'ination Of the paid certificate would
Tow some light upon it. According to b
form then in vogue, payment was J
de BY paymaster, in the presence of Z
D Witnesses. It may be the identity Of !
orge Washington, of Brashear, ETC., is Y
sufficiently established He may or p
y not be the man named in Auditor y
'nch's certificate. How, when, or to ~
ON the money called for in this certif- 81
e was paid, if not to the rightful per- b
}, are questions for the Freedmen's ii
reau to answer. MI. Packard, as
i'm agent, was strictly forbidden to re- v
We it, or have anything to do with it. s
mother witness Carroll Tempe-frst s.
'ars that he never received his money, Il
then shows by the certificate of ii
jor n. Vedder that he did. The acting b,
litor testifes that the certificate de- 81
bed as Temps ives paid to Charles al
nps in the presence of two witnesses, til
of whom were well known to the St
master, MS we'll as to this whole COM 81
aity. But not content with denying vi
receipt of money, which he shows he be
receive, he locates scene of alleged tn
eness on the part of Mr.. Packard at SO
corner of Melpomene and st. Charles So
cts, at the Office of the agent of the ce
edmen's Bureau. Mr.. Packard never he
an Office there, never had any official rel
nection with the bureau, and proba- ST
was never inside of the little Office q,
en- was once located there in his life. an
very evident that Temps, like George an
'hington, has another person than di,
Packard in view. They have got Ca
gs sadly mixed, or their Democratic at
pliers have done it for them. And of
Democrat, in its zeal to prove the fit sti