The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1878-06-06
Potter Investigation.

vestigation Committee having reassem'
bled, General Butler offered the following
resolution:
WHEREAS, James E. Anderson swear
that between May 25th and June lst
1877, Stanley Matthews told him, q
have Just to-day had letter from tht
President in regard to your case, and
have written him such letter rs viii
secure your appointment to some posi-
tion," and that on or about the ID o.
June the President said TO witness thA
he had received letter from Matthews
requesting him TO give him 4 place. there
fore,
ResOlred, That the President be request
ed 10 furnish to the committee all the
original letters above mentioned which
he has received, II any, or certified copiel
thereof.
The resolution was adopted.
James E. Anderson was then recalled
and renewed the continued answers OF ex.
animation. The copy Of agreement be-
tween Anderson and Weber which Ander'
son stated in his testimony on Saturday
that he had, mailed to Stanley Matthews
was produced by Mr.. Cox, q member ol
the committee, who had procured 1t from
Mr.. Matthews. 1tcorresponded in every
particular with the copy already in eyi
dence, but Anderson on critical exami
nation declared It was not the copy which
be had mailed 10 Mr.. Matthews though
the writing Of the the body Of the paper
and Of the signature was an ex-
cellent counterfeit presentment Of hiI
handwriting, in fact he would say
the paper was the same were
il not that he was positive that there had
been two spots Of red ink on the upper
and lower corner Of the paper on which II
had been written and he erased these
spots with an eraser, and the paper now
presented showed no evidence Of such
erasures. The object Of putting this paper
into the case Is not very clear for the
present.
Mr.. Coz made statement that in &C.
cordance with the suggestion from the
Chairman be had called on Matthews and
requested production Of the Anderson
and Weber contract, and that Matthews,
In compliance with the request, had
handed him this paper.
Witness still persisted In declaring
that II was not the paper which he had
mailed 10 Matthews.
Witness was cross.eIamined minutely
as TO the circumstances attending the
signature OF the Anderson. Weber con
tract. At one time he testified 10 his
recollection Of It's taking place at the
office OF Seymour, q Notary Public, and
at another time expressed doubt as TO
whether one set Of signatures There were
two sets TO the same paper) may not
have been made at the Custom House.
Then he could not fix II definitely where
the first set had been made, but inclined
to the belief that both sets were signed in
Seymours office.
In reference to one Of those variations,
Mr.. Reed said: You stated distinctly
that the first set Of signatures were exc.
cuied at seymour's Office.
Witness-Then am willing 10 correct
it.
Reed-Now, want TO know whether
that is the truth or whether you said that
with the intention oil deceiying this com.
mittee.
Witness--Allow me to say that have
no interest in deceiying this committee.
Reed-of that, perhaps, we want some
better assurance. -,
Witness-It Is matter Of indifference
to me whether you want better assurance
or not.
Q. Did you see Weber sign the first
one wherever It was signed? A. | say
that do not recollect anything as TO the
first signatures whether we signed them
10 the Custom House or where. My i'm
preston is that we signed both Of them
in Seymour's Office.
Q. Do you say that Is not your hand
writing on this paper-the copy Of Web.
er's agreement as furnished by Matthews?
A. l say that, 10 the best Of my knowl.
edge and belief, il Is not my handwriting.
Q. Can you make II no stronger2 A.
I can make 1t stronger by saying ! think
II is an excellent counterfeit Of my hand
writing.
Q. Do you know whether It Is your
handwriting or mott A. l know thatit Is
not.
Q. You swear that II Is not yourhand.
writing1 A. swear that 1t is not my
handwriting; that copy was not written
by me.
Q. You swear that this is not the orig.
inal paperi A. It is not the original
paper.
Q. Is this Weber's signature to III A.
It Is neither Weber's signature nor my
signature.
Q. Did you ever see that paper before7
A. I have no recollection OF ever seeing
that paper.
Q. Is not this the paper that you mail.
ed 10 Senator MatthewsI A. It Is moi; /
know by the fact that the sheet Of paper
on which l wrote the agreement had two
spots OF red ink on 1t, one on the top
right hand corner and one Just below the
centre, which spots erased. I remember
It very distinctly, and this paper has no
mark OF any such earsures. Then, too,
itIwas double sheet Of paper and this is
single sheet
Q, IL that the signature TO II Of Sey.
mour, the notary publieR A. As nearly
rs recollec. 1t 10.
Q. You are pretty confident that II Is !
A. I do not say it Il; but to the best Of my
recollection and belief 1t Is. The seal Is
his.
o. Did you know in whose haudwrit.
ing the paper is, il not in yours' A. l
; Q. mean the body oiit' A. do not
know.
o. Is the body Of it counterfeit Of
your writing? A. The body Of II Is a
counterfeit OF mine.
Q. Was the original all In your hand
writingl A. It was, without erasures or
interllneations except the erasure oi the
two blou.
O. Was there any envelope on any Of
those letters that you got in the package
Of Weber'd papers? A. There was not.
Q. So that there is no postmark to
show that you ever sent sent the Butler
letter. A. Not single one.
O, Nor q postmark to show that you
ever sent the letters TO D. A. Weber. A.
q q. No postmark to show tha. you sent
any Of the lettere which you claim TO
have found in the envelope containing
the Weber papersH A. None whatever.
R. They are in your handwriting altos
rether? A. Altogether.
20. Is there any endorsement on any Of
t6sm in Webers handWritlpg2 A. I do