Knoxville daily chronicle. [volume] (Knoxville, Tenn.) 1870-1882, 1880-10-29

having forged said letter ne wrCte and
cansed to be published In said paper,
called Truth, said article referring
thereto. which is herein before quCt90.
And I further state, that upon infor-
nation and belief, that the Article SO
published, rejecting upon the said
Garfield, is a false, malicious and
wicked libel and that said ar icle was in
tended to e 3ert the genuineness of the
said forged and fraudulent letter, which
said Philip knew to be so forged and
fraudulent. That subsequent to said |
publication, in said Truth or in some of
them, the property ofsaid Truth, IS l
am informed and believe, entered into !
some agreement with the democratic |
national committee or some members
thereof, by which it was arranged that |
large numbers OF the said forged letter |
should be circulated, and to that end,
since the knowledge of its denial by |
the said Garfield, have delivered or
entrusted to the said committee the |
said forged letter for the purpose of
having the same copied and photo~
suance thereof the said committee
have caused many hundred thousand
copies of the Lsaid forged letter to be
circulated in various forms, both in
the English and the German lapgu-
ages. rT
An affidavit follows by Joseph
E. Paine, an expert in handwriting,
stating that the Morey letter is notin
Garfeld's writing, but that it coin
cides, in some particulars, with that OF
Philp. He declares that certain manu-
scrips signed 'Kenward Philip and K.
Philip submitted to him, and the Mt
rey letter, were written by one and
the same person. A. f. Southworth,
of Boston, and D. II. Ames of New
York, also experts, make corrobora~
tive affidavits.
At the trial before Judge Davis
to~day in regard to the alleged forg-
ed Garfield letter on Chinese labor,
the prosecution, demanded the pro-
duction of the original letter from
which Photographic copy was made.
Joseph Hart, one of the proprietors
of the paper which printed the origi~
nal letter, said he had the original
letter but declined to produce it at
the present time. His counsel said
they would produce the original
when they deemed the proper time
had arrived. The court committed
Hart for contempt.
Further hearing of the case was
postponed until the commitment pa~
pers had been made out. The coun-
sci for Philip have decided to pro-
duce the original Morey letter in
court this afternoon. The proceeds
ings in the case attracted large
crowd of spectators. The charge
upon which Philip is arraigned is the
malicious libel of Gen. Garfield.
Judge Davis occupied the bench,
and there was a full array of counsel
on both sides.
Assistant District Attorney Bell,
for The people, called as the first
witness Col. A. F. Rockwell, of
the United States army, of Washing
ton: He testified he had Known
Garfield 27 years, was lis classmat9
and graduated with him at college.
In his extensive correspondence with
Garfield more than 1000 letters had
passed between them. Witness was
therefore perfectly familiar with
Garfeld's handwriting. *t 4
A ithograph was handed the wit
ness and identified by him as copy
Of letter received by him in De
cember from Garfield. Bell asked
the counsel for the defence if they
had the original Morey letter in the
court. In reply they stated that
they did not propose to answer that
question at the present time. A
photograph of the letter in a gilt
frame was handed in by the defence.
Bell declined to receive this, and
again called for the original, in or
der that he might examine Col.
Rockwell in regard to it. The coun-
sci for Philip stated that the original
letter was not in the possession of
their client, but was held by Hart,
publisher of the paper in which it
} first appeared. The latter was in
court, and was called to the witness
stand. Hert said he had not the
original Morey letter with him. It
was in the possession of friend,
} but he declined to give his name.
Witness could not procure the letter,
as his friend was out of town.
Bell demanded the name of the party
! to whom the letter had been deliv-
cred, but Hart again refused to ans
r wer. The court ordered him to ans
wer, but he again, in a respectful
) tone, declined. Judge Davis order.
ed him committed for contempt of
: court, and he was handed over to
the custody of police, Capt Walsh.
5 Howe made a motion to purge
! Hart from contempt, saying that
! Hart was willing to produce the let
ter but that he wanted a guarantee
that the letter should be returned
to him. Howe explained that he did
not mean to- say that the court
i, would take the letter, but that il
: might pass into subordinate hands
Q or be lost.
I Continuing, Howe said that if the
!, letter was to remain in the custody Of
9 Judge Davis, Hart was willing to
t produce it. Answering, Judge Davis
r said that the letter would remain in
his custody. On motion, Hart was
: allowed three hours to go with a