St. Johnsbury Caledonian. [volume] (St. Johnsbury, Vt.) 1867-1919, 1880-11-05

ed Jan. %, 1880. The envelope pro-
duced is stamped with the Washington
post-mark The day and month of the
post-marking cannot be made out, these
having been like every other date on
the envelope-though in some alleged
fac SMILES published, the date Jan. %
is fraudulently inserted--erased. 1t is,
however, absolutely demonstrated that
the month in which the letter was post
marked was not January, for the post
mark is made and the postage stamp is
cancelled by stamps which were not
used in the Washington post Office IN
til after Feb. /. The precise date when
the change of stamps was made in that
office cannot be ascertained, but it was
certainly after Feb. Is. A letter dated
Jan. % would hardly be sent in an en-
velope not post-marked till after Feb.
l. Further than this, one figure is left
without erasure in the date on the
stamp showing the receipt of the en-
velope at the n. Y. post office. That
figure is figure 2. 1t obviously form
ed the last of two figures. The date of
receipt at the New York post office
must therefore have been the 10Th or
22d of the same month. A letter dated
on Jan. % would hardly be sent in an
envelope received in New York on
the 18th or the 22d. 1t is thus absolute
ly and repeatedly demonstrated that
the envelope in which the Morey letter
is asserted to have been sent is fraudu-
lent. The same hand that wrote the
letter admittedly wrote the address
now on the envelope. Is there any es-
cape from the conclusion that the letter
is equally fraudulent?
All the facts above stated are from
uncontradicted testimony upon these
points. 1t is now admitted by Philip
that he wrote the editorial charging
Gen. Garfield with being liar. The
defense denies that Philip wrote the let
ter, and asserts that Gen. Garfield wrote
it. On the question whether Philip wrote
it the prosecution have proved by per-
sons intimately acquainted with him
and his handwriting that in their opin
ion he wrote it. One witness, under
whom Philip worked for long time,
states that Re recognized the Mercy
letter as being in Philips handwriting,
and so stated before he knew he was
suspected. They have also proved by
Messrs. Paine, Southwortb, Hagan and
Aims, who are the four leading experts
in handwriting in the country, that in
their opinion the Morey letter was
written by the same person who wrote
the editorial now admitted to be Philips
though of course this Morey letter is in
u disguised writing, but the experts
point out in detail the similarities arts
ing from unconscious habits in writing,
which are not and cannot be disg uised.
The same experts also say with entire
positiveness that the Morey letter was
not written by Garfield. Persons who
have seen Garfield write hundreds of
times say it is not his writing.
Thus far the defense has introduced
no evidence to show that the Morey
letter is in Garield's writing. They
have introduced various witnesses,
mostly newspaper men employed in the
Brooklyn Eagle Office, democratic
paper, who swear that in their opinion
the letter is not in Philips writing.
They have also introduced one alleged
expert who on his direct examination
stated that in his opinion, the Morey
letter was not in Philips handwriting,
but on cross-examination this expert
admitted that he examined the fac sim
lie when published and declared it was
a forgery, but that thereafter he went
to the Office of the Truth, and having
been paid S25, he made an affidavit
that in his opinion the letter was writ
ten by Gen. Garfield, though he had
never seen any writing which be knew
to be that of Garfield, and had only seen
three signatures, written upon cards,
which he was told were Garfeld's. He
also admitted that in his affidavit he
had made numerous misstatements such
as that he had seen Garfield's writing,
and that the Morey letter was address
ed to Henry L. Morey, when the name
Henry never appeared in it. He fur
Their admitted that after getting S25
and making his affidavit, he went back
to the person to whom he had said the
Morey letter was forgery and told him
he had changed his mind, and begged
him to say nothing of his former opin-
ion. He also admitted that he left a
Boston bank ''short" in his account.
1t has been shown by one witness
who had continually to revise Philips
manuscript that he had habit of spell
ling companies companys, is done.
The defense have shown by several
witnesses who have had occasion to see
his writing that they never noticed such
misspelling.