Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1880-11-15

genuine letter or u. a. GarnelQ. doubtless
| it was not supposed that the envelope would
be the subject of much scrutiny The letter
itself was the great subject of his thought,
and the envelope, he probably presumed,
having served its purpose, would fall I'M
needed into the publishers waste basket.
All the facts above enumerated, which dis
close so clearly the character of this envel
ope, bear with no less force upon the ques-
ton. Is the letter forgery?
1t is next to impossible that
they can be true and the letter be
genuine. But they are reinforced by other
facts which remove from my mind the least
shadow of doubt. There was no such per-
son as "John w. Goodall, of Lynn, Mass, :"
| by whom the letter which accompanied the
Morey letter to MIR. Hart purports to have
been written. 1t is proved most clearly that
no such person SIS Henry l.. Morey, as being
| the person to whom the letter purports to be
| addressed, ever existed. The experts ON
both sides all agree that the Morey letter,
both in body and signature, was written by
| the same person, some OF them declaring
| there can be no doubt about it. An exam
| ination of the letter itself shows this fact to
| every person who is free from obliquity of
vision or perversion of Judgment.
Mr.. Hewitts connection with the letter
and transactions that have grown out of it,
| are, to say the least, of a most extraordi
| nary character. According to the testimony
of Mr.. Hart, when he received the letter, in
the very singular manner in which it reached
him, his suspicious were aroused. He saw
its Importance if genuine, las weapon of
deadly power in the hands of Garfield politi-
cal foes. He was not satisfied to publish it
upon the examination, which he and his edi-
torial staff could make, and therefore took
the letter and envelope to the Democratic
National committee for inspection. He there
saw Mr.. Hewitt, Barnum, Randall, and sew
eral others. Mr.. Hart showed them the
papers, and said, in substance, that he did
not want to publish the letter if it was for
gerry, but, if genuine, he did, and wanted no
other papers to get ahead of him in its pub
LEGATION. He says it was examined by ali the
persons named, but Mr.. Hewitt ma6e the
closest and most careful examination, and
spent fully half an hour in its examination,
and then pronounced the letter, both DO dy
and signature, to be in the handwriting OF
General Garfield. Photographs were then
taken for use of the National committee,
and Mr.. Hart returned with the letter to his
Office. But his mind was not fully satisfied,
found Mr.. Hewitt again, and was again as
sured that Hewitt had examined a large
number of Gen. Garfield's letters, and that
the Morey letter was genuine; and that this
was clincher. By impressing Mr.. Harris
mind with the idea that he would have made
it out forgery if he could. 1t is not very
surprising that Mr.. Hart, with the usual
anxiety of newspaper publishers, to be
oh rs fhnTr f<,Ih oh.
lished the letter with further inquiry, but il
Is astounding that man of known sagaoity,
of great experience in business, and in pub
lie affairs, and who is supposed TO have de-
cent respect for truth and justice, and who
speaks as an expert in writing-with all the
suspicious circumstances that attended the
reception of the letter, with the envelope
and its erasures before him, with the CITY
postoffice and station stamps on its back,
with the letter Ma, -, " I5onal and conf
dential," and addressed to some person
whom he certainly did not know-with let
ter before him, the contents of which if true
would be greatly injurious, and if false would
do wrong to his intimate friends, as base and
wicked as an sssassin's stab-could have
thought it just to press and cause its publ
cation without first removing all doubt as to
division may leave for others, upon Mr..
Hewitt must rest the larger share of respon-
sibiity of the first publication of the base
and shameful forgery, and his subsequent
relation to the forgery does not lift single
shadow from his conduct. He was q mem
Der of the National committee. He doubt
less knew the extent and purposes for which
it was taken and used by that committee,
and that it went forth to the country with the
sanction of his endorsement. He knsw that
it met with the indignant denial of Gen
Garfield, who denounced the letter as a base
and stupid forgery, and Its sentiments as
brutal.
Under our statutes the utterer of forged
instrument, with knowledge of its falsity, is
placed In the same rank of criminality with
the forger. Had the subject of the forgery
IN this case been an instrument purporting
to be an obligation of Gen. Garfield, and he
had publicly declared them to be forgeries,
who could thereafter send them forth and
circulate them throughout the common
wealth with his representation of their genu-
ineness, without mourning the penalties of
the law ? The difference is purely statutory
and in moral form wholly vauishes.
Judge Davis also says: 'My mind has
IOCOAfSo u S4CdI COAVlCtlUA Lbdb tL6 6O-CSil6C
Morey letter in body, signature and all its
parts is not in the handwriting of Gen. Gar
field, but is altogether forgery, perpetrated
by some person or body of persons for the
purpose of deceiving the people and defraud-
ing them and Gen. Garfield of their votes.
The evidence bearing upon Philips guilt or
innocence of the forgery is voluminous and
would demand careful analysis. Taken
in connection with other evidence in the
case it tends to establish conspiracy to &C.
complish national crime. The conspiracy
points to men in other quarters and of far
higher positions, of whom he may have been
an accompiice or only dupe and tool. It
was better, therefore, that the question of
actual guilt of the forgery be left to the con-
sideration of a jury, before whom additional
and perhaps more decisive evidence may be
brought.
'sIt must be the wish of all honorable minds
that this case will lead not only to the dis
covery and exposure of the guilty but to the
enactment of laws which will prevent or Sc
verely punish offenders of this character
Whoever be guilty in this case, right think
ing men everywhere must look upon the act
as an appalling crime, wholly at war with
the safety and sanctity of popular govern
ment. Fortunately no committee and body
Of men hold in their hands the conscience of
the people and none strong enough to inter-