The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1878-12-27

dured them TO ask what 1T was ABOUT, HIu
either Mr.. Acklen or the motner Iepucu, ~
was only money TRANSACTION, the Two ao-
ouiescing in the assertion. 1hls paper SUD
aeuuently proved to he an application signed
bv the mother for marriage license Tor the
daughter. We received no explanation why
this mystery ana TINS deeelO WAS piacNoou VI
these witnesses. ,.
Wa also learned from respectable witnesses
that Mr. Acklen. on tho morning OF the mar,
riape. called at the same boarding house ana
invited the daughter 10 walk out with him
She did go. and he conducted her 10 a carriage
stationed lin cross street, out Of sight 81 lhe
boarding house. In this carriage weroseated
Wright the intended husband, and ". ".
Wharton, tho same who attested WTlght
statement mentioned above. This statement
was published on Sunday the thirteenth, ny
MIR Acklcn, but w. w. Wharton & attestation
was omitted in the newspaper publication 81
the certificate.
nrofessedIy made Nv the unfortunate young
woman. one of these aitidavits was pre-
scented to III by Mi AclSlen. We will call that
ono affidavit No /. Tho other affidavit was
found among the effects Of Mr.. II j.. Smith,
after his dcath. we call tnls ONO aillu"Nib
Affidavit No. IA worry important and very
favorable TO Mr., Acklen as the girl testlties
in IL to his entire innocence of any criminal
intercourse at any time with her. This aili-
davit No / was signed Matte p. Wright
the girls name, IN full, the signature was
evidently that OF person accustomed to
writing that Ia, the name was written In a
running hand no hesitation manifested III
the formation Of the letters. The name was
not written IN the handwriting OF beginner
or of n person unaceustomed to writing their
name This affidavit was sworn to before
MIR. Alfred lngraham, notary public
I'm August 1878, who attested the signature:
and Ii was III the form and nature or quos-
fions and answers; and when MI. Acklen pre-
sented il 10 us he called our attention to the
fact and we wcra told by him that the ques-
finng were prononndpd by the notary and the
answers were written down by the notary, as
spoSen by the girl. and that she signed IL IN
the notarys presence
timouy i'll this matter. He met our commit
Zee and test fed. That one morning Mr.
Acklcn came into his office, accompanied by
n Young woman. presented him an affidavit,
questions and answers all written out al-
ready signed, and that he only read the cap
ton TO learn If the alllant was tho person
mentioned I'm the affidavit. Mr.. lngTaham
asked the Young woman II that was her sig
nature and that was all Mr.. lngraham did in
the matter. he was asked specially " he
had propoundcd any of the questions set forth
m the affidavit and had taken the answers
down, He said he had not, and that he know
nothing of the contents Of the affidavit AZ all,
We have very grave reasons TO doubt the
genuineness of this affidavit NO |. We had
the most positive proof that the girl could not
placed in her hand, and she was requested 70
write her name and she could not make the
first stroke of the letter NJ; Moreover, Mr..
Aeklen admits and states IN his card publish
cd on Sunday, October -. that the girl could
neither road nor write. She certainly did not
sign the affidavit bearing the signature OF
Matte n Wright, because she could not
write Now this question presented itself to
the consideration Of our committees. Who
did sign this atlidayit2 We could only con
lecture, but had no evidence TO determine the
question satisfactorily 70 ourselves Mr..
kelSlen based his claim to innocence IN great
measure on this affidavit NO. l. AFFIDAVIT NO,
. alsn made by the girl, Is aS damaging 10 Mr..
Acklen as affidavit No | was favorable to
him. The history of affidavit No. . Is this:
The girl made the acquaintance OF MT II, u.
Smith and told him her tale. lie reduced The
statement to writing; induced her to como to
his house. when she appeared before Judge
O'Rourke Justice OF the peace, stated she
knew the contents, which were not read to
her: swore to the truth of the contents; made
her mark, which was attested ny the justice,
i'm August. 1873. This affidavit No gives
4 fun and detailed statement OF the whole
matter between Mr.. Acklen and herself;
alleges the seduction; the manner Of the SCI
duction; the pregnancy, which she attributes
to Mr. Aclxlen; her visit to the New Orleans
Dhvsician; what took place there; attempt on
her part TO produce an abortion by taking
medicines and by the use Of Instruments; her
marriage with Wright; his subsequent deser-
IN.
the marriage; his meeting her subsequently.
This affidavit Ne. relates all the facts
with 50 much mnuteness Of detail that II
carries much weight with it, although we did
not rely on its statements as materially inilu-
encing our judgments, but we believed much
of il TO be true, particularly where there was
cDrrohorative testimony to sustain what she
alleged. The question OF Ill. IL. Smith mo-
tiyes. whether that was revenge or black
mailing did not interest us. Highly respec-
table witnesses testified that the girl related
to them the facts mentioned in the affidavit
No. q at the time of her marriage, when she
did not know of the existence OF Smith; but
what was of interest to US to know, was that
Smith had not concoCted the statements. u
this we were fully satisfied.
10 the atlidavits furnished by Mr.. Acklen,
which he procured on his visit to his planta-
ton in the last few days, we attach but little
Or no credit They are all in the handwriting
of Mr.. Aeklen, and made by his negro car
rage driver and wife, by his negro black
smith and wife, and other negroes, all OF
whom are now or have been employed on his
plantation; most Of them afiixing their
marks, not knowing how TO write, and sworn
10 before negro justice OF the peace
All of this batch Of aftidavits, even had they
not been made by illitCrate plantation negroes,
alleged nothing more than instances OF the
vice and corruption Of the poor girl.
Mr.. Aeklen, after our decision was known,
objected to our regarding the matter from
political standpoint. we can only relteraUe
what we said on this subject in our first state
ment dated October .. There was an express
understanding with Mr.. Acklen, that If we
did not exculpate him from all blame, OF
criminal character. he pledged himself TO
withdraw from the canvass as a candidate for
Congress. Without this understanding the
committee would not have entered into this
examination at all As further proof Of our
intention in the matter, we append letter
from one of our committee to another member
of the committee.
MIR. VOORHEES, wrote Mr.. Kenner note with
drawing from the committee as he (Mr. VI
did not wish to consider a question of o social
character. Mr.. kenner's answer, By letter,
was transmitted to Mr. VOORHEES, by Mr.. Ack-
len. We cannot say if Mr.. Acklen knew the
contents Of the letter, but he was in the room
where the letter was written and the contents
were discussed previous to being sent.
NEW ORLEANS, October 1, 1875
Hon. Albert VOORHEES,:
Mn Dear Sri regret much that you
shplIld have arrived ut the conclusion men