Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1878-06-13

toned that Anderson. or parties representing him
toned by myself, and he had heard the same, that
those documents: | told him that Anderson had
been owl here at my request, and that 1 had in
quired III regard 70 tnose papers and documents ard
session, and would remain safely there; Mathews
% nnointme6t nS sor cSe VI fs ~ ~ e0 VI
son should be willing to give up all documents and
had upon hlm lMathewsl or upo1 the administrd-
ton.
have told us three times over that Matthews Intro
duced the Sherman letter by saying that he did not
care about any papers SO far he was concerned
cept as TO the sherman letter. Did not Mathews in
troduce the subject of the Sherman letter first?
Ans--I can't recollect who spoke first of the Sher
Ques.-Do you recollect its coming up in any other
way man the way you put 1t In your drec. examina-
Ques.-What he in substance said was that he did
not care about ANYTHING else, but II was the Sher
| sa': ''hr. Mathews, what is the Sherman letter."
Didn't you say that TO him? Ans.-There was moth
time, had been published the papers and 1t is to
| be supposed that everybody knew what it was
newspapers, you will tell me great many things
| that are not true while you are testIying under
of what you know. Did he refer 10 the newspapers
as his source of information? Ans,-Neither of US
Qles.--Now, what source of information did you
give to BIN about the Sherman letter in that
Mr.. Potter chairman OF this committee and what
had heard OF it through him.
QueS.-But what Information did you give him
about the Sherman letter dlstinctive? Ans.-I
can recollect nothing as distinctive.
QueS.-What Information did he give you about
the Sherman letter? Ans.-None whatever
Ques.nThen Sherman's letter was spoken of as
matter that you two knew all points? Ans.-Cer-
tainly, it was well known thing.
CUES. 1t was after the fifth of April and before
peTs Anderson 6ada Ans Yes, sir. ON ''' '''0 p'
QIes.-On the nineteenth you had learned that
cake was dough, aud the papers not any longer
Instrumental in helping you why did you want them
you any Information as to that; can't explain that
telegram.
been beaten were you not Just as we'll satisfied to
have the papers established? Ans.-Oh no. sir: 1
had no such idea as that; not at that time.
Ques--AfterwaId you told MIN that he had better
pitcn In? Ans-.There Is but one explanation can
that saw the documents previous to the nineteenth
OF April; about the time the appointment was made,
and few days before went home, Packard notified
me that he had teiegraphed Anderson to come over,
and had signed my lame to the telegram Anderson
having better acquaintance with me Than with Pack
ard, though he was well acquainted with both of us;
that may explain the matter.
and you wanted to antagOniZe him: you were beaten
and Packard, too, by the nineteenth of April. How
do you explain that Packard wanted the papers they
were no longer reason for his appointment?
Ans.-I have given the best recollection have.
:ee w. tme9 r. when IN You saw the papers they
Well, would consider the letters of Mathews and
portant documents.
Ques. When Anderson showed you the papers,
Oues.-Who was PRESENT. Ans.HThe only only gen.
temen present were L. e. Smith, present collector
"a New noan 81 th ana myself MI smith
examined them, and he did the same. The only
the gentlemen present was some expression of sur
prise or establishment on the part of Mr.. Smith that
suea documents or papers existed.
Ques.-You were not surprised at their existence?
Ans.-Oh; no. sir.
there that day? Ans.-Nothing except Mathews's
letter.
Ques.-Youwere surprised that Mathews had been
foolish enough to write such a letter? Ans.-Yes,
sir; and remember that Mr.. Smith expressed some
surprise.
Quss.why, didn't you turn to Anderson and say:
You have been deceiving me all his time you told
Stougnton, and now It turns out that you have got
nothing but copy of a lstter from Sherman what
or more Did you make any such remark to And der
son? Ans.IN0, sir, / did not Witness further
sented to Sherman and stoughton that ne and Weber
had rend red services at the risk of their lives and
Continuing. he said: My recollection is that Slough
ton did not take part in the personal interview but
a eey %eIe 9 d day sss6 "h MS W yegP Nra as
these two gentlemen a letter, and received from
them a let er in regard to 1t,
Wit"ess testified that he met Mathews in the SEN
ate cha9ter and the latter first mentioned the sub
called upon him and spoken very roughly to him,
and had made threats OF the publication of these
told Anderson he felt very much hurt and disguised
at that action; that he had been doing all that he
that he had told Anderson that he did not want to
see him ally further that he might do as he pleased
with the papers and documents, and that he would
drop him; he said substantially the same to me-
that it WIS no use trying to do anything with such
reasonable and expected him to do more than he
could do; that he had done the best he could under
the circumstances and that he was determined to
have nothing further to do with Anderson.
ySiIISam H Ravunur
sworn and examined by Mr. MMahon
Ques.-Where do you reside? AnS.-In New Or
leans
Ques. What is your occupation? Ans.-I am a
notary public and commissioner of deeds.
Ques-Are you acquainted with JAS E. Anderson?
ADs.-Yes, sir.
Ques-Were you acquainted with j. A. Q. Weber?
Ans No, sir.
Ques.-There has been paper produced before
this committee which seems to have your name and
seal attached. Please look at it, and see whether
you can identify your signature and SEAL Ans
Ater looking at paper referred to-Yes sir; that is
my signature and seal.
Ques.-State anything you know about the execu-
ton OF that paper, if you know anything further
than by seeing your Lame there, Ans-This docu-
ment sworn to before at the date it purpOrts
to De given, by Mt Anderson and some other gentle
man who was with him.
with him at the time? Ans.-f did not, only
from the Introduction al the time
QueS.- How was he introduced? AnS.-He was
introduced by Mir. Anderson as Mr.. Weber.
Ques-Did you know whether or not 1t was Mr..
Weber? Ans:-I did not; know the witnesses, Mr..
Dick and Mr. Wilder; they are claim agents or ator-
neyS in New Orleans.
Ques-Was the inside of this paper communicated
to yOu did the parties just present this part of 1t
and say they had sworn to it. Ans.-That is all; l
Just the fnside was not mace acquainted with
its contents; the gentlemen seemed to be very reti
cent about communicating its contents, and | put
in it that would be unprofessiona to sign, or any
thing that would appear ridiculous or non-proies-
siOnal?" and Mr.. Anderson said mo-" the doc!l-
ment was signed when it was brought to me; said
to Wilder rs it all right?" He came and introduced
OIes.NLet me call your attention TO enc or two
pecuarties in this document. Do you notice the
added after the juIat had been written? Ans.-Yes,
sir
called to that, or noticing 1t al the time?
Ans--I am almost positive that l called Ander der
Weber's name was not in that document, at least
his name not inserted, and had the correction
oily Sworn to before me this fifteenth day of NOvem
ber 1876, by the aforementioned jas: E Ander,
son. said there are two gentlemen to this and
the other name must be inserted.
Ques.-And then who inserted 1t? Ans-I don't
know who inserted it, but somebody did, and 1t is
not in my Handwriting.
Ques. DO you notice the fact that your own sigma
ture is signed on the line Immediately below Ander-
sons and partly beneath it so as to lap over? Ans
QtIes.-And the words notary public are still
further to the right on the next line? Yes, sir.
Qu=s.- And the signature I'D: A. Weber" is put in
tary" and in the same line with your signature?
Oues-I Will ask you whether you were in the
habit of putting your own signature In that way upon
the same line with the signature with of the par
ties? AnS.-YeS, sir; sometimes.
Ques.-Look at that paper again, and see whether
the words "by within mentioned Jas. Z. Anderson
and D. A.Weber' might not have been added at your
suggestion and that neither of the parties
toned in the iurat? Ans.--Yes sir.
Ques.-Wnatever was done was before you signed
It? Ans.-Yes, sir.
By Mr. Butler-And you are certain that there were
two gentlemen there TO make oath? Ans.-Yes, sir;
one was this ge teman here (pointing to Ander-
SOM, and the other was man who was introduced
to me-
Ques.-Do you remember whether Anderson and
Weber signed the jurat in your presence? Ans.-l
think that the signatures on the face of the docu-
ment had already been signed bg Weber and Ander-
son; then called attention to the fact that the
| other name had been added in the body OF the
| JuTat.
Ques-Iook at these signatures of Anderson and
Weoer, and state whether, I'm your judgment, they
we're signed with the same pen that you used Ans
They were nos signed with the same ink
QUes.-Were the two Anderson signatures made at
| the same time, with the same ink and pen? Ans
The Ink Is not the same that used on this occasion
| and the ink that Anderson used was evidently the
| same ink; the signature of Weber and the name
written In there seems to be the same ink although
not In the ink used: Anderson and wrote evident
ly from the same ink the Office Is large one, and
we have table which there tGo or three Ink
| stands.
1 lgl