The Windham County reformer. (Battleboro, Vt.) 1876-1897, 1880-10-29

that they would do damage proved 10 be
John !. Davenport's deputy marshals. Tm
Truths editors claim that the Republican,
managers have tried 10 bride different
parties TO own up to the forgery. Jas.
Larkins, foreman In the shop OF Graves
Bail * Co., manufacturers Of shoemaker
lasts makes affidavit that Newton Savin, one
of the employees In the shop, told him
that he knew Morey and all about the
Employers Union, and that since Savin
has been mysteriously spirited away
aud nothing can be found Of him.
Summing Up.
is the letter genuine? All the collat-
eral evidence advanced for defense by
the Republicans, is knocked over as de-
liberately false, and the question reduces
itself to the letter and It's internal evil
| dence. One point over which consider.
able noise has been made is the spelling
of Garfield" in the signature. II amounts
to just this, that the dot Is put to the
left instead of the right of the '"f" lust as
man in his hurry would be very likely
to do, even in writing his own name. but
as no one would naturally do in forp-
ing name. The word Companies" in
the body of the letter is spelled "compa-
nys"-a mistake which scholar like
Garfield would not be expected to make.
But Abram S. Hewitt produces an I'M
questionably genuine letter from CIR
field, in which pedigree" is spelled
'pididree," and it is claimed that he is
very much in the habit of making such
careless blunders. But would a man,
smart enough to commit forgery, make
than1 Elnonial1ty n aItfAr Ill, o
Expert testimony as usual is contra
dictory. Several swear positively that it
rs a forgery. Others equally as famous
and accomplished, including d. N. Cav
alho, ID. W. Cowl of New York CITY, Il.
Il. Rauch OF Pennsylvania, and Geo.
simpson, Jr, OF Brooklyn say it is I'M,
questionably genuine. Mr.. Rauch saysl
it would be impossible to forge whole
letter like that. even by the most expert
villain, unless he had an exact COPY be-
fore him, and he expresses his willing
ness to leave the question to such men As
Prof. Ames of New York, or Thos. Nj.
Pierce of Philadelphia, to see if his opinion
is not sustaii,ed. Abram s. Hewitt and
Speaker Randall still insist that they ard
well acquainted with Garfeld's hand
writing, and they know the letter is gen
uine. They are both honest men, who
would not say this unless they believed
it thoroughly but of course their parti-
san prejudice may deceive them. Ex-
Congressman, L. r. Meade and Hon.
John Fox, the leader of the Irving hall
society, both make affidavit to the let
tors ganninnnnss, and Gen Badly Smith
says unequivocably that it is not the at
tempt of an imitator.
The REFORMER will not venture an
opinion on the case. No fair minded
man or journal can on the evidence 80
far. The simple denial of man in
Gen. Garfield's position ought to be suf-
ficient and would be If he had not once
been virtually pronounced guilty of
lying under oath by Luke p. Poland. N.
P. Banks and George w. Nj Creary, his
party associates on the Credit Mobllier
investigating committee.
On one side.we have Garfield's denial,
for whatever it is worth. and the testi-
mony Of lot Of experts. On the other
side, the letter itself, appearing on its
face to be genuine. and the testimony of
even more experts. The only difference
is that many leading Democrats have
come out openly testifying to the genu-
ineness, while few prominent Republic
cans have ventured, over their own sig
natures. to pronounce it forgery.
The truth will not be known till after
election. Whichever side is in the wrong,
is determined to lie it out for the few re-
naming days. The popular belief will
rather incline to its genuineness, not so
much on the direct testimony as on the
fact that so many already, exploded false
hoods have been promulgated in the de-
tense.