The Portland daily press., 1880-11-01
THE MOREY FORGERY.
What the Evidence Has so Far
Shown.
CONCLUSIVE PROOF OF FOR
gerry.
Pitiful Weakness Of Philips De-
fence.
Especial Dispatch to the Press. ,


The Morey letter is dated Jan. %, 1880. 1t
is claimed to have been transmitted through
the mail to Lynn, Mass. The envelope in
which it is said to have been so transmitted is
produced by Philips counsel. On that envelope
there are three distinct lines of erasure cores
ponding in position to the place where, if this
envelope had been previously used, the address
to the person, the city or town and the State
would naturally come. These erasures are dis
| tinctly visible to the naked eye. What words
| have been erased cannot be seen except that al
| the end of the first erased line the word Esq
can be made out. In this envelope, which has
thus obviously had upon it some other address
| than that which now appears, the Morey letter
! is alleged to have been transmitted through
| the mail to Lynn, Mass. This envelope has
upon it an undoubted stamp, showing that it
| has been in the New York post office. But it
| is undisputed that by the routine of the posi-
| Office no letters posted in Washington and ad
| dressed to Lynn could come into the New York
post Office. The bags containing such letters
| pass directly from the cars at Jersey City n
| the Boston cars in the upper part of the city
| On Sundays, no vever, as there is no morning
train to Boston, the bags remain in the New
| York post Office. but are never unlocked o.
| opened This also shows that when the enve-
| lope was in the mail it was not addressed Lynn
but addressed to a person in New York city.
| But more than this There are in New York
! city eighteen sub-stations to which the general
| post Office in that city sends letters received
| there by the mails and addressed to persons re-
siding or having their places of business with
l =. II. IT.
situated On receipt letter at one of these
sub-stations it is again stamped. The envelope
| produced has on it the stamp of a sub station
thus showing that it has not only been in the
| general post office in New York but has been
| sent from there to sub-station in that city
| What sub-station it was cannot be ascertaiDed
as that has also been erased from the centre OF
| the stamp. The result of this evidence is tina,
under the system prevalent at the post Office
| letter posted in Washington addressed to
Lynn could not under any circumstances ge,
into the New York post Office. If, however. t
accidently got there IL could not from there
get to sub-station. 1t is by this alone made
perfe city obvious that the envelope is frnud
that tte envelope of letter which was origi-
nally addressed to and received in New York
has been used, the address erased and a new
address to H. L. Morey, Lynn, Mass, written
upon it; that it has never been in the mail with
that address on it. This address to Merey is
by the admission of all parties in the same
handwriting as the body of the Morey letter.
This envelope was probably selected for al
teration because it has on it the printed
stamp of the House of Representatives, but the
nndisputed proof goes further. The Morey let
Ter as already stated is dated January 23d,
$780, The envelope produced is stamped with
a Washington postmark. The day and month
of the postmarking cannot be made out, those
having been, like every other date on the en-
velope, erased, though in some alleged fac
SMILES published, the date Jan. 23, is fraudu-
lently inserted. 1t is however absolutely DEM
onstrated that the month in which the letter
was postmarked was not January for the post
mark is made and the postage stamp is can
celled by stamps which were not used in the
Washington post-office until after February
first. The precise date VIXEN the change of
stamp was made in that Office cannot be ascer-
tanned, but it was certainly after February
first and probably after Febr 1ary Is. A let
ter dated January % would hardly be sent in
an envelope lot postm arked till after Februa-
| ry 1st. Further than this one figure is left
without erasure in date ON the stamp, showing
the receipt of the envelope at the New York
post-ofice. That figure is a figure 40" 1t OBJ
viousIy formed the last of two figures. The
date of receipt at the New orb post-ofiice
must therefore have been the 10Th or 22d of
the same month. A letter dated on January
23d would hardly be sent in an envelope re-
ceived in New York ON either the 18th or 22d
1t is thus absolutely and repeatedly demon
strated 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 on the envelope.
Is there any escape from the conclusion that
the letter is equally fraudulent? All the facts
above stated are proved by uncontradicted tes-
timony upon these points.
1t is now admitted by Philip that be wrote
the editorial charging Gen. Garfield with be-
ing liar. The defense denies that Philp
field wrote it. On the question whether
Philip wroteit the prosecution have proved by
persons intimately acquainted with him and
his handwriting that in their opinion he wrote
| it. One witness under whom Philip WORKED
| for long time states that he recognized the
Morey letter as being in Philips writing and
| so stated before he knew he was suspected
They have also proved by Messrs. Paine,
Southworth Hogan and Ames who are 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 disguised
writing. But the experts point out in detail
the smilarities arising from UNCONSCIOUS
habits in writing which are not and cannot he
| disguised. The same experts also saw with
entire positiveness that the Morey letter was
not written by Gen. Garfield. Persons who
have seen Garfeld's writing hundreds of
times say it is not in his writing. Thus far the
| defence has introduced no evidence to show
the Morev letter is Garfeld's writing. They
| have introduced various witnesses mostly news
paper 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 in his direct examination
stated that in his opinion the Morey letter was
not Philips handwriting. but on cross ex-
animation this expert admitted that he ex-
amned the fac simile when published
and declared it was a forgery, hut
that thereafter he went to the office
of Truth and having been paid 1875 he made an
affidavit that in his opinion the letter was
written by Gen. Garfield, though he had never
seen writing which he knew to be that of Gen.
Garfield and had only seen three signatures
written upon cards which he was told were
Garfield's. He also admitted that in his affi-
davit he had made numerous misstatements,
such as that he h ad seen Garfield's writing
and that the Morey letter was addressed to
Henry L. Morey, when the name Henry no.
where appears in it. He futher admitted that
after getting his S25 and making his affidavit.
| he went back to the person to whom he had
previously said the Morey letter was a 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 Boston
bank "short'' in his accounts. 1t has been
,l,a rlol