The Leavenworth weekly times. [volume] (Leavenworth, Kan.) 1870-1880, 1876-10-05

| he dale bl Inc eE- pcfi-loD- ne statements
of Mr.. Halliday in his testimony as TO the
iosses Of the firm during The summer OF
1861 are utterly false. and were based upon
gue-. work or manufactured in spirit OF
malice. He had no access TO the books of
The firm.
From the date Of the failure Of the firm
in 1861 TO Octo5e-, 1865, period of four
years, / was continuously q resident of Me-
dina, New York, and never out OF the State
except in the military service from Septern
Der, 1862, to June, 1865, and frequently At
home during that period on leave OF ab-
sence.
During this period Of fouT years was
never charged by Mr.. Halliday, by Hughe.
& Lester. or by any human being in legal
proceedings, BY written or spoken words
| or in any other form or manner with the
crime set forth in the proceedings referred
TO nor in connection with the Transactions
Of Hill, Anthony * Co. with the plaintiff
in this case or with any other customer OF
creditor Of the firm of Hill, Anthony & Co.
No process OF the form oil this one, or OF
any other form was sarved upon me, al
though | was there liable 10 such service,
and where the laws would make Judgment
under such form of complaint good against
| the body of the defendant. | was NOT only
1
there within easy reach Of each process, but
Was in the performance Of public duties in
| the summer Of 1872 as conclusive against
concealment as the p si.ion now held be
fore the people of KANSAS.
The first intimation received by me that
| Hughe- 4 Lester held me guilty Of misr-p-
rescntation and wrong, was found in the
complaint, now Published, served upon me
| in Kansas in lS61
| Immediately upon such service 1 went
10 lhomas I. renion, an a.lorhey IN .ie
CITY oil Lea'eh"ortn' ana ''a'eu 70 Nun 'he
eifcoa-tancss anu iacu' suo'lantiaiy as
herein recorded, ana sald 10 MN that TINS
| charge oil misrepresentation was an alter
,ismsn, q, ,hs CO., ~ NV f,;snds He va
informed that such form Of action would
be resisted BY me TO the last, and success
fully, too, and to this end he was directed
to make answer TO The complaint lie WAS
al-o informed that a suit for debt, simply,
would not be resisted, although the claim
IN equity was due from others than me.
The commission to take the testimony oil
MIR: Halliday In New York, was arranged
without my knowledge. heueT EntU Of
The ertstence q such testimony or any other eri-
de1lce beng taken IN The case untu saU a pub
hshed IN The Times.
l had supposed, and stiIl do, that the
Judgment was entered up by consent,
purely, and without testimony, written or
oral, as had been agreed in stipulation
had and mare between the attorneys for
the plaintiff and myself In the office OF
Hiram Griswold, Esq, one OF said attor-
neys.
In an interview had, as above stated,
informed the attorneys, as all parties be-
fore had been informed, that 1 had no OBJ
jec'ion TO the entering up Of Il judgment for
debt, but would never consent to any ad-
mission OF Inc crime charged; was In
formed 'hat ho'hlng OUT ei'l action was
desired, anu thai such Jndgmest couid ana
"oaiu oe enteIeu up. oa,sheo WIN UNI,
anu oeing ABOUT 70 leaSe nome on 0mcia'
business h iiS',uc'sa mI. NrsWSiu, IN
whom then had and still have confidence,
10 inform my attorney, MT Fenion, oil the
agreement, and my wishes that 1t be COM
Piied with by the withdrawal OF the an
swer and the consent to a judgment IN such
toTn, as should not imply quit Of any rT,ong be-
gond inability TO pay.
never saw the papers OF record, and
never doubted that they were SO closed 8
-
until they appeared In PRINT for my injury
at this time; nor should ever have sub
mitt.d 10 any termination OF the case which
lett this question in doubt had l under.
stood 1t possible for any Just misapprehen-
SION 70 arise d. 10 me character OF the pro-
cesd'hss.
In support Of the foregoing statements, |
and for tnIl protection against the charge of
pleading the statute Of Limitation, admit
ting the truth OF the criminal charge in the |
complaint OF Hughes & Lester. or allowing |
Jllgmsht 10 De rendered on The evidence |
oil Halliday, the following statement OF at
tofneys lor Doth parties VIII, think, be
'0i'' '"i's
LEAvENwoRTH, September %, 1876.
Hoa Gsoyoe IT Iutbony
DEAR OH IN reply 10 your no'e OF TO-
.,.,aan, " ''' 'N' ''
T Tr' a,;';n e.,
ur,,hai Ill n,hars ;r g..
- - IL .L;aL - H. S. Vi
- b. ~, a,,"- ~ 49,, n' "
VI IL Gi,a b. ~ Al '"' '~'e VI -'"
g. ~ H. -, u ,
an ;n,.,r;au lei - = o.h;nI @ n
H., ~ "a nn ~, ~ m ,ou ,'au
IL, III - ~, -, ~, i W ."e
- 49,, IT,. b., " si, Io
- =, I'll - "a VIC Is
.na;ns, ,han' 7, u.s 80" 80 ,, uee"1
- al u.Ja,aS So VI me
- ~ !ou, '.at !ou
80 f,a. n. - haI g 1o ~ "'toiey'
rt;aS -, -, y, ,L :. liz a
w. 80 en.a, y. .ne anes "uops Vi
.he t~Nv"' 'eeu ufVn 'he s'atote Vi hH-