The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1878-06-06


pubic mind surely the administration has only itscli
TO blame. II has taken pains 10 mako its own con.
duct SO suspicious and TO connca itself Ultimately
with dsrcputabc persons that IL has really louled its
rest
FROM OUR SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT
WAsHISGTox, June 5, 1879
PERSONNEL OF THE SENATE INVESTIGATING
COMMITTEE UNDEE THE MATTHEW'S REso-
LUTIoN-THE NEXT SENSATION FROM THE
POTTER COMMITTEE.
Under the resolution adopted by tho Senate to-day
the Senate Investigating Committee will probably DO
appointed tomorrow, but IT may not be named before
Friday. Tho republicans consulting together
Its composition. 1t is already decided that Mr. Ed
munds is TO bo chairman, and among the others named
as probable members Of tho committee Messrs.
Hoar, Howe. Allison, Chr!stiancy, Thurman and per-
haps Hill Ono object OF this contemplated nvcsti-
cation is to bring out any evidence that may DO
fused objected by the Potter committee. Another
is to collect aud PIT record all the facts concerning
the casting Of the electoral vote OF Oregon.
MKT SENSATION. As
Tho next sensation the Potter committee expects to
give 10 the country will be the publication OF ex-Con
gressman Darrell's letters TO Anderson. Those let
ters is saio give complete history OF the alleged
frauds committed IA Louisiana. Darrell became dis
onsencd with Of tho republican managers soon
after tho Inauguration and his correspondence
with Anderson ho talked plainly OF matters. A mem
Der OF tnePotter committeo said to-day that tho de-
vcIopments already made are nothing compared to
what is to como within few days.
ANDERSON AGAIN UPON THE sTAND-A POR-
TIoN OF THE MATTHEWS DOCUMENTS De-
FORE THE CoMMIrTEE-TuE WITNESS DE-
EsTING LETTERS PRODUCED
W WASHINGTON, June 8, 1873
Owing to other engagements Of the members the
2. NJ.
Mr. Butler offered the following preamble and rcso-
tion, winch was agreed to unanimously
IS ana Juno J. 1871 lioa stanley Msthews told him. Il
have w.e him such Iese VIII
d o aa
had received the letter from Mr. Matthews requesting
sf That requested to furnish to
vhchs has received If any certified copies thereof
with copies Of such letters supposed ha been
thereof.
( Tho FIRST witnoss called was George C. Gorham,
Secretary Of the Senate who produced tho returns OF
tho vote OF Louisiana for Presidential electors at the
election In 1876 and stated that tho returns sent up
from the parishes 10 the Returning Bedfd and snbso
quently produced before the Senate Investi eating
Committee were fu the custody Of the scrgcaut-at-
Arms OF she Senate for whom Chairman Potter 1T
once issued Subpoena
THE ASDERsoS-wEBsR AuRREMHxr.
James G. Anderson was than recalled and Mr.. Reed
oontinucd Tho cross-examinasion. Tho copy Of tho
agreement between Anderson and Weber, which An /.
derson stated in his testimony Saturday he had
ALI Mr. Matth 4
Mr. Cox "a member OF the committec) who had pro-
cured II from Mr. Matthews 1t corresponded In
every particular with the copy already in evidence
but Anderson, on a critical examination Of IL, DO
clared that II was not the cory which he had mailed
70 Matthews, though the writing OF the body
OF the paper ana OF tho signatures was an
excellent counterfeit presentment OF his handwriting
In fact no would say that the paper the
same, wcrc not that no was positive that there had
been two spots Of rcd INK on tho upper ana lower
he had erased these spots with an eraser, and tho
paper now presented showed no evidence OF such
sures The object OF putting this paper into the
is not very clear for the present.
Mr.. Cox made a statement shat In accordanc with
suggestion from The chairman he had called on Mr..
Matthew's and requested tho production Of The Ander
son-Weber contract and that Mr. Matthews, in CON-
pllnncc with hat request, ID banded him this paper
Tho witness still persisted In declaring that 1t was
not tho paper which he mad mailed TO Matthew'S
ANDERSON Of TnE
The witness Il m ned minutely as 10 the
circumstances attending the signature OF tho Ander
son-Wcber contract. AZ one time no testified hts
recollection OF its taking place at the orco OF Mr.
Seymour the notary pubic. and another tme he cx-
pressed doubt as to whether one set OF the sigma
lures therc were two sets to the same paper may not
have been mado AT tho Custom House Then no could
not Tx denltely where tho rst set had boon mace,
out be inclined to the belief that both signed
a. ScymouI's Office. In reference TO one Of tncso
varialIous Mr. Reed said -
You stated distinctly that tho frs, sct OF signatures
were executed at Scyinour's nfilcc
The Witncss-Thcn 1 am winIng to correct IT..
Mr.. Recd-Now want 10 know whether that is the
truth whether you said that with tho ton OF
dcceiving this committee.
rho wItness-Aliow me to say that have no inter.
est In deceving this committee
Mr. Rccd--Of that, perhaps wc want some better
assurance.
the wilness--lt Ia a matter OF Indifference 10 mo
whether you want better assurance or not
q Did you see Weber sign the nrst one, wherever
II was signed? A. ! say DO not recoIlcct any thing
the irst signatures whether VIC signed Them 10
the Custom House, or where. Ny impression IS that
We signed both OF tnom IN Mr. scyincur's office
O. DO you say that tins Is not your handwriting on
furnished by Mr.. Matthewsl A. 1 say thai< to the
best OF my knowledge and belief, 1t is not my hand
writing
q. Can you make Il no strongerY A. can make II
stronger by saying that THINK II an excellent coun-
tcrieit OF my handwriting.
u DO you know whether u Is your handwriting or
not A. know that II - not
q And you swear that II is not your handwriting
A. swear that u Is not my handwriting. That copy
WINS not written by me.
u And you that this Is not the original paper?
A. IL ~ not tue original paper.
q. Is this wcbcrs signature 10 IT, A. II Is neither
Weber's signature nor my signature.
Y. Did you ever zee that paper before A. | nave
no recollection OF over seeing that paper before.
U la not this the paper that you mailed TO senator
Maubewss A. IL Is not know by tho TACT that tue
sheet OF paper on which wrote tho agreement had
two spots oil red Ink 90 u, one top right hand
corner and lust below the centre, which spots
erased; remember ~ very distinctly ana this paper
has no mark OF any such ensures then, TOO IL was
double sheet of paper, and this ~ d single sheet
Y. Is that the signature to IL OF Mr. seymour, the
notary publicY A. As nearly as rceoIect IT Is.
q. You are pretty confident that II is9 A. / do
not say that II IS hut 10 the bost or my recollection
ana belief " Is; tho seal Is his.
q Do you know In whose handwriting the paper la
II II is not IN yoursY A. do not
q. moan tho body OF IL? A. | do not know
q. Is the body OF II c0untcrcit Of your writing
A. rbc body OF II rs n counterfeit OF mine
q. Was the original all in your hapdwriting2 A.
II was, without ensures or ntcrIincations, except
the crasurc OF these two blots
q. Was thcro any envelope or any OF those letters
thnt you got IN tho packale OF Moher nnnnrsY a.