Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1880-11-18

fact to every person who is free from
ObliQuity Of vision or peryerSlon of
judgment Mr.. Hewitt's connection
with this letter and the transactions
that have grown out Of it, are, to say
the least, of the most extraordinary
character. According to the testimony
of Mr.. Hart, when he received the let
ter in the very singular manner in
which it reached him, his suspicious
were aroused; he saw its Importance, If
genuine, as a weapon of deadly power in
the hands of Gartield's political foes; he
was not satifed to publish it upon the
examination which he and his editorial
staff could make, and therefore took the
letter and envelope to the Democratic
Nationhl Committee for inspection. He
there saw Mr.. Hewitt, Mr.. Barnum, Mr.
Randall, and several others; Mr.. Hart
showed them the papers, and said, in
substance, that he did not want to pub
lish the letter if it was forgery, but if
genuine he did, and wanted no other pa
per to get ahead of him in its publica-
ton. He says it was examined by all
the persons named, but Mr.. Hewitt made
the closest and most careful eXamlna-
ton. and spent fully half an hour on its
examination, and then pronounced the
letter, both body and signature, to be in
the handwriting of Gen. Garfield. Pho
tographs were then taken for the use of
the National Committee, and Mr.. Hart
returned with the letter to his office, but
his mind was not fully satisfied, and so,
late in the evening, he sought and found
Mr.. Hewitt again, and was again aSSur-
ed that Hewitt had examined a large
number of Gen. Garfeld's letters, and
that the Morey letter was genuine, and
this was clinched by impresSing Mr..
Hart's 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 ahead of their neigh
bors, should have published the letter
without further inquiry, but it is aston
iShing that man of known Sagacity, of
great experience in business and in pub
lie affairs, and who is supposed to have
d decent respect for truth and justice,
and who speal,s as an expert in writing,
with all the suspicious circumstances
that attended the reception of the letter,
with the envelope and its erasures be-
fore him, with the city postoilice and
station stamp on its back, with the letter
marked personal and confidential" and
addressed to some person WHOM he GER
tainlu did not know, with letter before
him, the contents of which, if true, would
be greatly injurious, and if false would
do wrong to his intimate friend as base
and wicked as an asSasSinS stab, should
have thought it just to press and cause
its publication without first removing
all doubt as to its character. However
much an equitable division may leave
for others, upon Mr.. Hewitt must rest
the larger share of responsibility of the
first publication of this base and shame
full forgery, and his subsequent relations
to the forgery do not lit a single Shad-
Ow from his conduct. He was a men,
Der of the National Committee; he doubt
less knew the intent and purposes for
which it was taken and used by that
Committee, and that went forth to the
country with the sanction of his indorse-
ment. He knew beyond a question that
it met speedily with the indignant deni-
al of Gen. Garfield, who denounced the
letter as "a base and stupid forgery, and
its sentiments as brutal"
Under our statutes, the utterer of for
ged instrument, with knowledge of its
falsity, is placed in the same rank of
criminality with the forger. Had the
subject of forgery in this case been in
strumentS purporting to be obligations
of Gen. Garfield, and he had publicly de-
clared them to be fOrgeries, who could
thereafter send them forth and circulate
them throughout the commonwealth
with his representation OF genuineness,
without incurring the penalties of the
law? The difference is purely statute
ry, and in moral forum wholly van
iSheS.
1t must be the wish of all honorable
minds that this case will lead not only
to the discovery and exposure Of the
guilty, but to the enactment of laws
which will prevent or severely punish
offenses Of this character. Whoever be
guilty in this case, right-thinking men
everywhere must look upon the act as
an appalling crime, wholly at war with
the safety and sanctity of popular gov
ernment. Fortunately no committee
and no body of men hold in their hands
the conscience of the people, and no
party fealty is strong enough to inter
pret the sentence of condemnation which
honest men of all parties must pronounce
upon such guilt. The men most crimi~
nal in this case may not be reached by
the hand of justice, but they will find
no party willing to bear and share with
them the just measure of infamy and
scorn that awaits them. If they have
failed in their guilty purpose, so they
will fail in securing the approval even
of those for whose success they have
done the guilty work. 1t will be small
consolation to know that they have
gained by this forgery few useless
Electoral votes, melted all infuriated
mob to the murder of a few unoffending
human beings, and caused few of their
own agents to suffer for peTjuries and
miSdemeanOrS.
The defendant is held to answer upon
the charge of criminal libel, and must be
committed or give bail for his appear
ance to answer any indictment that may
be found against him.