Litchfield enquirer., 1880-11-25

1
discern with almost the highest degree of GER
| tainty that evidence eau attain that the enye-
'ope in which the Morey letter is said to have
been received was never mailed, stamped.
sent, and received through the Post Office but
once; that it VAS mailed that once at Wash
iDgton, on some day later than the 18th of
February, 1880, and when the steel starr D
was in use that it was received in New York
and stamped in the receiving department on
the 18th or 22d day of some month. as those
are the only dates of which the figure 80"
can be atertninal number; that it was sent to
| station and delivered to the person to whom
it was addressed, whose name, beyond all
doubt, was not III. L. Morey," for in that
case no erasure would have been necessary ;
that this envelope has, since its receipt and de-
livery in New York, been taken and used by
some person beat on criminal purpose, who
erased therefrom the name of the person to
whom it was originally addressed and deliv-
cred. and every date of month and day that
would clearly show when it was in fact mail
ed and received, for the purpose of putting in
to 1t letter antedated to day prior to the
nomination of Gen. Garfield, and on which he
was known to have been in Washington; and
that such person wrote or caused to be writ
ten thereon the address 'H L Mercy LYNN,
Mass" fer the purpose of deceiving the pub
Usher OF the newspaper to whom it might be
delivered, into the belief that the letter it
should lnclose was genuine letter of j. A.
Garfield. Doubtless it was not supposed that
the envelope would be subject of much
scrutiny. The letter itself was the great sub
ject of his thoughts, and the envelope, he
probably presumed, having served its purpose
would fall UNDECIDED into publishers waste
basket o:- ="
1t is inconceivable to suppose that Gen. Gar
field should have obtained this once used en-
velope, erased the former address, and
blurred and scratched the dates of month and
day for the purpose of delivering such let
ter to a man who, If he ever lived, was so ut
terly Insignificant that neither the vigilance
OF justice. nor the avarice of gain, nor the
malice of party, nor the fear of punishment has
been able to discover his present existence, or
the proof or repute of his death; and that hav-
ing obtained it he should have prepared the
antedated letter, marked it personal and con-
fidential," as one writes to his closest friend,
and enclosed it in such an envelope and ad-
dressed it over the erasures and delivered or
caused it to be delivered without using the
mail for the special and private information
of one so soon to become uddiscoverable and
unknown. Yet to such a belief the mind of
every person must come who accepts as true
that this envelope ever bore to any III L.
to Mr.. Hart. .1s@
All the facts above enumerated, which dis
close so clearly the character of this envelope,
bear with no less force upon the question: lie
the letter forgery? 1t IS next to impossible
that they can be true and the letter be gen.
uine, but they are reinforced by other facts,
which remove from my mind the last shadow
of doubt.
Ftrst-It was shown to my satisfaction that
there never was any such organization at
Lynn as ''The Employers Union" Citizens
of intelligence and apparent integrity, whose
public and private positions as manufacturers,
as Mayor of the city, Postmaster and superin
tendent of wOrkmen, have the best opportuni-
ties to know, testify that no such organization
existed. They describe the meetings of man.
ufacturers that were held during the excite
ment OF the strike known as the Crispin strike
and their objects and purposes, and their ces-
sation when the strike was over. All the evil
dence that tends to contradict them is idle
hearsay, in no sense sufficient to justify the
finding of fact. - g.
SecondIv-There was no such person as
John w. Goodall, of Lynn, Mass. by whom
the letter which accompanied the Morey let
ter to Mr.. Hart pnrports to have been written
This is proved as strongly as negatives of that
kind may be :. for the only person in that city
who hears similtude to that name, Jonathan
w. Goodall, a respectable physician of many
years standing, appears and testifies that he
never knew or heard of any other person bear.
ing the name of ''E w. Goodall, I" and that he
did not write the letter, and other, witnesses
coroborate his testimony. No one isproduced
to show the existence of such person as
Goodall, or to stand godfather to his pretend
ed letter. Nor is it shown that any such per
sor has ever, at any time or place, been ap
pointed administrator of any Henry l.. Morey
The letter signed John W. Goodall, of Lynn,
is clearly fabrication, ofwLich the writer is
so far an unknown conspirator.
|, 7htrdly-It is proved most clearly that no
such person as H. L. Morey, as being the per-
son TO whom the letter purports to be address
ed, ever existed. If that persen existed at all,
he was of the family Of Morey, so many of
whom were produced it court. He was stat
ed to be an uncle of Samuel S. Morey, pro-
duced as a witness by the defence who swore
to his existence, and to having seen him at
Ly nn in March and October 1879. His testi
mony, when given, had all the semblance of
truth; but how does it appear when the wo-
man whom he acknowledge as his fathers
widow, and who knew her husbands family
thoroughly for IS years: and the witness, who
is the son of Samueps father, and knew his
relatives by personal intercourse or by tradi-
ton; and the other witness, John w Morey,
who would be the brother of Henry l.. Morey,
if such member of the family had lived, ali
unite in testifying that there was never Hen
ry l.. Morey in the family, and that no person
of that name was ever known to them? They.
give the genealogical history of the family
with such clearness and fullness of detail that
not shadow of donbt can remain. Besides,
Samuel s. Morey stands lmpeached as to the
time when he says he was in Lynn and saw
his putative uncle, by the date of the affidavit
which he says he went there to obtain from
Mrs. Morey, and by his confessions to the wit
ness Moore, tending to show that he was cor
ruptly induced to come here and testify to
the existense of an uncle that never liv-
ed. =,
The testimony of the witness Lindsay, alias
Barry, was 50 completely overthrown by his
own cross-examination, and by the examina-
tion of the other witnesses from Maryland,
that he is not entitled to consideration.
The entries in the register Of the hotel at
Lynn are not trustworthy. These are shown
to be written with the same kind ofink, which
differs from the ink used in writing the other
names on the same page. and are both written
In spaces at the foot of a days registration
several months apart. They receive all their
sanction from the oath of Samuel s. Morey,
who swears they are in the hand writing of
Henry L. Morey; but when is established
that the Henry l.. Morey of whom he testi-
fies had no existence, the entries appear to be
another forgery based upon perjury, concot-
ed by criminals to uphold crime. In the light
of all the evidence bearing on this question,
the conclusion is Irresistible that no euch per-
son as the "H. L. Morey" named In the letter
as the personal and confidential correspond
ept of Gen. Garfield ever existed"
! It may well be said that the facts already
considered establish with sufficient clearness
that the letter imputed to Gen. Garfield is
forgery. for 1t surpasses credniity to believe
that he was induced to write the letter to some
one who assumed the name of Morey, and to
place it in second hand, erased, and altered
envelope for delivery to such person. Still,
ifsthe letter were found to be in fact in Gen.
Garfeld's handwriting, some such solution of
the mystery must be adopted. .s,.,sr q
B The testimony as to the handwritingi is main
To-