The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1881-03-24


HE ACCUSES LANCASTER OF wILFUL AMI
MALICIOUS MISREPRESENTATION.
HARRIsoNBURG, March IA, 1881.
Editors Richmond Dispatch: During the last
week or ten days have noticed in your pa
per, and also in several others Of our Virginia
papers, illusions to report OF Special Agent
G. G. Lancaster in reference to this judcia
district, and in to-day's issue you gave the
report itself.
This report is full Misrepresentation from
beginning to end, but as the Marshal, the Dis
trict Attorney, and the other officers attacked
are abundantly able to take care ofthemselYes
1 would not have troubled you with any reply
had not this fellow chosen to insert in his
report a wilful and malicious falsehood in re-
gard to me.
The report says: "Also, Voucher s, Deputy
D. S. Lewis, son of Marshal Lewis, July to
8, 1879, where he has charged in the case Of
2. Hall, for July 1, 2, and 3, endeavoring tC
arrest and SO miles transporting selfprisoner
and guard, G. d. Langhorne, when IN fact he
was not day endeavOring to arrest, and did
not transport the prisoner mile. See affida
Wit of c. D. Langhorne, Exhibit 1911. When
called upon for an explanation, Deputy Lewis
acknowledged the above facts, and said he had
no explanation to make. The fraudulent fees
amount 10 Sl| OU.
Now, when Lancaster said that SIT go had
been fraudulently charged to the Government
by me he knew he was telling what was dbso-
lutely and unquallfetlly false.
The facts OF the case are as follows: During
parts of the years of 1873 and 1879 / was a
deputy marshal and had in my possession
a warrant for the arrest of Zadock Hall, accus-
ed of Illicit distilling.
Hall had succeeded in avoiding arrest for
some time, and had employed one of his
neighbors (Mr. w. T. Lawson) to be ready to
assist in his capture when went or sent to
his neighborhood.
Learning that Mr.. Robert E. Latham, a
regularly commissioned deputy marshal, was
going up to Patrick county with Mr.. G. d.
Langhorne on a a trout-fishing excursion,
asked Mr.. Latham to try to bring Hall back
with him. With the assistance Of Mr. Lang.
horne, who acted as guard as Mr. Latham in
formed me, he brought Hall to Danville, where
he was examined by the United States com
missioner.
The account was sent to the marshal in my
name and amounted in dollars and cents tC
the identical sum which it would have done
had performed the service instead of having
it done by Mr.. Latham.
The law allows expenses in endeavorng to
arrest not to exceed two dollars per day, and
six dollars were therefore charged for expen.
ses in endeavoring to arrest this man, qolten
had an reality paid out q much larger sum.
All of the warrants of arrest were in the
name of the President of the United States
and are addressed Ito the marshal or any OF
his deputies" therefore Mr.. Latham, who was
regularly commissioned deputy, had Just TIKI
same right to arrest Hull as I had. So it will be
seen that the party arrested could not COM
plain, because he was arrested by regularly
appointed deputy.
The government has no possible ground OF
complaint because-first, every item of ser
vice charged for aoas Actually and necessarily
performed and secondly, the account as rem
dered amounted to the same, whether it was
made out in my name or in Lathams name
In other words, the service charged for was
actually rendered. and the Government was
charged only the legitimate fees for the ser
vice.
In the extract given above the report says
when called upon for an explanation, Depu
ty Lewis acknowledged the above facts, anG
said he had no explanation to make
Now, the truth is, | told this man all the
facts above recited and had he not been guilty OF
a suppress5o Ue,I I would have had no eXplana
nation to make now, and he would have had
one less falsehood for which to account here
after. After recitng part of the facts and
being guilty of the suppressions g
alluded to, he says, ''see affidavit of c. D.
Langhorne," as flo create the impression that
Mr.. Langhorne had given him an affidavit
stating that the account aoas fraudulent Though
have not seen Mr.. LaEghorne's affidavit,
say here, with perfect confidence, that Lang
horne has made affidavit to nothing of the
kind, nor aojN he do 50. I presume Mr.. Lang
horne and myself agree as to the facts.
Now, part of this fellows malignity towards
me is accounted for by the fact that he at
tempted while here a little game of bullying
which l at once stopped him in without the
least ceremony, and succeeded in vastly INF
proving his manners for the time being
though as the result proved can lay no claim
to having improved his morals-at least 50 Jo'
as 0eracity goes.
But | will not waste words upon such 8
creature who is only willing tool, as. car
and will be shown, in the hands of much worse
men-son.e of ao1tom disgrace our old State By Ao
ing aottlsin her borC5eTs
If have made any fraudulent claim againsi
the Government, the law prescribes . heavy
penalty for it, and demand to be tried undel
the law, where the truth or falsity Of the
charge can be examined into.