« ForrigeFortsett »
Mr. WAYNE agreed with the gentleman Mr. WAYNE"further objected to the interfrom Pennsylvania, (Mr. Coulter,) and for the rogatory, as placing the gentleman from Ohio, additional reason that the member from Ohio, (Mr. s.) in a very curious position, who, in his (Mr. S.) had asked the indulgence of the testimony in chief, had denied that he intended House to introduce additional evidence for a to impute fraud to Governor Houston; the inparticular purpose, namely, that he might have vestigation must therefore be, as to a fraud, an opportunity of showing that the ridiculous committed by a third party. light in which he had been placed by a part of Mr. REED expressed his disapproval of the the evidence, was capable of explanation, or, course which had been taken by the House, in at least, of some relief. That evidence be bad permitting any question to be put as to this adduced, but the witness now introduced by Transaction. He had voted against that course, the member from Ohio, was intro:luced for but it was sustained by a majority of the quite a different purpose. For that reason, and House; and he did not see how they could now under the rule stated by the member from Pa. extricate themselves from the difficulty, or rebe (Mr. W.) should object to the examination fuse the examination of the witness; and the of the witness now before them.
more so, as it had been declared by the genMr. MERCER inquired if certain other wit- tleman from Pennsylvania, (Mr. CRAWFORD,) nesses, and particularly Thomas L. McKenny, that the quantum of punishment would, in his had been called to attend by the subpæna of judgment, depend on the truth or falsehood of the Chair?
the charge as to the alleged fraud. The SPEAKER informed the gentleman Mr. ROOT argued, that the House would be from Virginia that all the subpænas were issued placed in a very embarrassing position by by the clerk of the House, by order of the adopting the motion of reconsideration. It House itself, and, therefore, without the know. would extend as far back as the original ques. ledge of the Chair.
tion of the Counsel for the accused, on the The discussion was further continued by subject of the evidence of fraud. That ques. Messrs
. DODDRIDGE, Warne, Coulter, and tion appeared improper to him, and he had Patron, the latter of whom moved a reconsi- recorded his vote against its being pul; for the deration of the permission of the House to ad. inference which he had foreseen would be mit the witness.
drawn from entering upon that charge was, Mr. ADAMS then rose to another question that the justification of the accused depended of order. No vote had' heen taken on the ad-on the truth or the false hood of the imputation. mission of the witness, and it was a rule of the Mr. Root continued, by adverting to the for. House that no member could move for the re- mer proceedings on evidence given concerning consideration of a vote, unless he had voted in the fraud, and concluded by repeating his the affirmative. Mr. A. put it to the Chair, opiffion that the question should come up on Whether, under the circumstances, a motion of the motion of Mr. WICKLIFFE, to reject the reconsideration could be sustained in the pre- testimony, which would show opon the journal sent case?
The reasons for their vote upon the subject. The SPEAKER decided that, according to
Mr. PODDRIDGE said, he had foreseen the daily practice of the House, such a motion the difficulty into which the House had plungcould be sustained.
ed itself; but having already gone into cir. Mr. CRAWFORD advocated the examina- cumstances with a view to extenuate the tion, on the ground that ibe accused had a right offence charged against the accused, no interif he pleased, 10 put his own conduct in ques rogation which might have the contrary effect tion; he had done so by calling on the member of aggravating the offence, could, with profrom Ohio, (Mr. S.,) to produce evidence of priety, be refused. His objection to a reconthe asserted fraud, and Blake's evidence had sideration was this--although he (Mr. D.) been admitted on this ground; not because it should vote against this interrogatory, as now was strictly legal, but because the accuser was put, yet one might be proposed to the witness called on in produce any evidence in his pos- to which he should not object. He under. session. Mr. c. further advocated the investi- stood the interrogatory now offered, to relate gation, as necessary to show whether the charge to the conduct of Gen. Eaton, in regard to a of the member from Ohio, of fraud, in this certain transaction; but it might be so modified transaction, was made out of wantonness, or on as to connect Houston with that transaction. In sutticient grounil
, inasmuch as he thought the which case, he should think it, according to the House should not measure out to the accused rule which the House had acted upon in this the same punishment in the one case as it trial, perfectly admissible. would in the other. If Gen. Green's testimony Mr. DAVIS, of Massachusetts, said the ques. was to strike at Governor, Houston, and who, tion was argued as if it was, whether it were being present, did not object, he (Mr. C.) proper to put the interrogatory. That was not thought it ought to be taken: if it was to affectine question. The question was, whether they the character of others, not before the House, would reconsider the vote which the House he thought'it should not be admitted. was supposed to have given, admitting ben.
Mr.CLAY offered a proposition with the view Green to examination as a witness in this case. ofobviating the difficulty which had arisen; but He asked where the House would be, if they
The SPEAKER decided it was not then in should adopt the motion and the witness should order.
be conducted from the stand? Suppose the
party should introduce him again as a witness, and was not his going away sudden and unex. how could they object to him? The first in- pected? quiry would be, is hie a competent witness Answer.-I have been acquainted with him The answer would be “Yes;" for nobody ex- nearly two years. During his stay here, of an presses a doubt on this point. Would the evening I have seen him under the influence of House then place on record, in their journal, liquor frequently. His habits, I believe, while that they would not examine a witness whom he was here, 'were very irregular. I saw him no one declared incompetent to give testimony when he was getting into the carriage to leave And if so, what reason would they assign for the city; he was then evidently under the in. objecting to him? Would they say that his fluence of liquor, very much so. His going evidence would not be relevant to the case?:- was very unexpected to me.
I saw him in How could they be supposed to know any thing the morning, and asked him when he was of its relevancy, or importance, until they heard going? He said he did not know. I saw it! He (Mr. D.) was willing to judge of this him again at noon: he thien said he was going by putting interrogatories; if they were im- in an hour. He went at three o'clock; I saw proper, object to them by all means. But his hinn get into the carriage, and he left the city, yote, he declared, should never deny to any Question by the accused.- Do you know the party the right of examining a competent wit. cause of said Blake's sudden departure from
The competency of a witness was the the city? only question, and bere, he repeated, there Answer. I do not. were no objections to the competency of Gen. Question by the accused.--Had you not pre. Green.
viously understood from him, that he was enMr. WICKLIFFE urged Mr. Patton to gaged in business here, that would detain bim withdraw his motion for reconsideration. some time at Washington?
Mr. PATTON assented, stating that he was Answer.-I did. about to rise for that very purpose.
Question by the arcused.-- What is the seve. The question then recurred on the objection ral characters of said Blake, for truth? to the interrogatory.
Answer. - As far as I have understood, I had Mr. STANBERY modified his interrogatory never heard his word doubted on any important as follows:
subject. “Do you know of any attempt on the part of Question by the Committee. -On what day Gov. Houston, fraudulently to obtain from the did said Blake leave this city? late Secretary of War, a contract, &c.?" Answer.--I think on last Tuesday.
Mr. WICKLIFFE then objected to the ad. Question by the Commiltee. - Was there such missibility of this question. It is precisely the particular intimacy between you and Luther same, and he offered it for the same reasons. Blake, as that you would necessarily be ac. He would state that it was the intention of a quainted with his movements' long before this member to introduce a proposition for the full occurred! investigation of the subject of the impuled Answer.- I think there was. fraud. He implored them not to waste the Question by the Committee.- What was that public time by further debate on the question, connexion? but to pass upon it at once. This charge had Answer:-We were in habits of daily interbeen imputed to thein in a paper of this morn course, having to attend the department on the ing; but he would rid himself of the imputation saine business; that was, the settlement of his by saying no more than that be called for the account, and the settlement of the account of yeas and nays
the agent I was here attending 10. The question was then taken, and decided Question by the accused -Do you or do you in the negative-yeas 94, nays 124.
not believe that said Blake's sudden departure So the House refused to permit the interro- from the city was owing to his having given gatory to be put.
bis affidarit about the accused? Mr. STANBERY then said, that as the To this question, Mr. HUNTINGTON, a mem. House had determined not to enter into the ber of the committee, objected. subject of the fraud, he should propound no And the question was put, “Shall the said further interrogatories to this witness. interrogatory be propounded to the witness?"
The witness was then conducted from the And was decided in the negative-Yeas 31, bar by the Serj -ant-at-Arms.
Question by Mr. CRAIG.Do you know any EXTRACT FROM THE JOURNAL.
facts or circumstances calculated to induce the TUESDAY, APRIL 24th, 1832. belief that Luther Blake left this city in conseSAMUEL Houston, accompanied by his coun- quence of having given his affidavit to be read sel, was placed at the bar of the House, and in the case before the House? If yea, what are
THOMAS MORRAY, Junior, a witness on the they? part of the accused, was sworn and testified as Answer. I know of none. follows:
Question by Mr. WaRDWELL.-Did you hear Question by the accused. - Are you acquainted him say any thing about his affidavits in relation with Luther Blake? if so, what are his habits to the accused, and what? of temperance? Has he not been in the habit of Answer. I did not. getting drunk nearly every evening or night? Question by Mr. SLADE. ---What was the bu. What was bis situation when he left the city, Isiness, which you understood from the said
ce of hik
Blake, would necessarily detain him in the city? Question by Mr. C. C. CLAY.-From what
Answer.-The settlement of his public ac. yon have witnessed of said Blake's morals and count as sub-agent of the Creeks.
habits, would you believe him on oath? Question by Mr. BULLARD.—Is Mr. Blake To this question, Mr. Bates, of Massachu. still acting as sub-agent?
setts, objected. Answer. I believe not.
And the question was put, “ shall the inter. Question by Mr. BATES, of Maso. When rogatory be propounded to the witness?" was he discharged!
And passed in the affirmative; yeas 80, nays Answer. I do not recollect.
76. Qaestion by Mr. BOLLARD.--When was he Answer thereto.-I have not sufficient ac. appointed; or has he been discharged at all? quaintance with the general character of Mr.
Answer. I do not recollect when he was ap- Blake through his life to authorize me to form pointed; but he certainly has been discharged. an opinion.
CHARLES E. Hawkins, a witness on the part Qisestion by Mr. LEAVITT. - Did you hear of the accused, was sworn and testified as fol- Mr. Blake say any thing in relation to the affilows:
davit, which he has made against Houston? Question by the accused.- Are you acquaint-And if so, what did he say? ed with Luther Blake; if so, what are his babits Ansuier. - I heard him say nothing about it. of temperance? Has he not been in the habii Question by the aecused. -Do you or do you of getting drunk nearly every evening or night! not know of his seeking and obtaining a reconWhat was his situation when he left the city, ciliation with the accused? If so, state facts and was not his going away sudden and unex- within your knowledge. pected?
Answer.-I believe he did; we were at dinAnswer.“I am personally acquainted with ner at Mr Brown's, Mr. Blake was there. Gov. L. Blake. I should judge him, from having H. was there, at that time. They did not been a room.poate for three months whilst he speak to one another. Governor H. invited us was in the city, to be a man of intemperate ha- all lo liis room, and in passing to his room, I bits. With respect to getting drunk every saw Mr. Blake take a gentleman, I think it evening, there was an interval of two or three was Doctor Davis, of s. Carolina, by the arm, weeks, when he was engaged in business, du. and say something to him. Afterwards I heard ring which he kept sober. During the latter Dr. Davis a-k Houston, “ if he would receive part of the time he was in this city he was ex. Mr. Blake?” General H. replied, “certainly." ceedingly intemperate, especially for a few When Blake came in, General H. got up and days before be went away. His departure was offered him his hand in a friendly and concilia. sudden.
This is all I know of the matter. Question by the accused. -Do you or do you Question by the Commillee.-When did the not know that a difference existed between the reconciliation take place? accused and Luther Blake; if so, what do you Answer. It took place previous to the de. now about it!
parture of Gov. H. to New York. I do not Answer.--The only knowledge I have of the know the time precisely. I presume the Godifference existing is from Luther Blake him. vernor can furnish it, it was some six or seven self, from whose expressions I should conclude weeks ago, I think. that he had been, previous to Gov. H.'s arrival Question by Mr. IARIE. —When was it that in the city, an inveterate eneiny.
you heard Blake call Houston "a scoundrel," Question by alr. ALEXANDER.-Doyou or do before or since the reconciliation? you not know the cause of Mr. Blake's depar Answer. It was before the reconciliation, ture:
before Gov. H. arrived here for the west. Answer..I do not.
Dr. E. S. Davis, a witness on the part of Question by the Commillee. What is the the accused, was sworn, and testified as follows: general character of Blake for truth?
Question by the accused. - Were you asked Answer.--I never had any business transac. by L. Blake to procure a reconciliation betions with Mr. Blake, and I am, therefore, to tween him and the accused, and what passed in tally unable to say. if I should judge from consequence of that request? circumstances which have passed, I have some
Answer.- Mr. Blake called on me, and ob. times found him wanting in truth: as to his served that he discovered Gov. Houston and general reputation, I don't know what it is. I myself were on friendly terms; that he had bad never knew him till bis arrival about the mid- a difference with the Governor in Arkansas, dle of January
but wished now to be on friendly terms with Question by the Committee.--What were the him, and he would be glad that I should interexpressions of Blake, concerning Houston, fere and make up the difference. I went to from which you inferred his inveterate hosility him (Houston) and told him what Blake had
Answer.-The expressions were these: "He said. Governor Houston showed some reluca believed Gen. H. to be a scoundrel; that he tance to comply, and told me that he would (Houston) had prevented his making a large think of it. Mr. B. subsequently told me he ortune by some speculation among the Indians, wished I would repeat to Gov. ú. his wish to and that he had carried weapons there for the become reconciled to him. Mr. Shaw, I think, purpose of killing Gen. H., if he met with any was by. As I felt some reluctance to go a se difficulty with him (Houston.)"
cond time, Mr. Shaw went with me, after
which Mr. Blake entered, and was met by Go-general denial of the charges preferred by the vernor H. and they shook lands together. article in the Telegraph.
Question by the accused.- Did The accused Question, by the accused.-How long have give his reason on your first applying to him you known the accused; has he always, during for declining the reconciliation.
your knowledge of him, suffered from a severe Answer. “Yes, he did give his reasons; he wound, still unhealed, in the right arm; and is stated to me that Blake had branded his cha- the wound such as to disable the arm? racter in some publication, perhaps, or in some Answer. I became acquainted with Gen. dispute with him; he assigned that as a rta. Houston in 1827. On intimating my intention son why he would not receive him, but would to visit Tennessee to Mr. McDuffie, of this take time to think of it. If he went into a de- House, he gave me a letter to Gov: Houston, tailed statement of the circumstances of their who was then Governor of the State. We met differences I do not recollect it. I recollect at Let's Spring, a watering place in Tennes. the general expression. He said that Blake see, where we remained together some time ; had branded his reputation,” or “that they had while there I examined his wound; I had un. had a quarrel in some way.'
derstood the object of his visit to the springs Question by thie accused.-Did you, in the ac- was to renovate his health, which had become cused's absence, at New York, see the publica-impaired by this wound. The wound is in the tions in the Telegraph charging him with right arm, about two inches from the shoulder fraud in relation to the contract for supplying joint, it was caused by two balls which entered the Indian rations? Did you write an articie to the upper part of the arm ; and, from having exculpate the accused from those charges, and lacerated the integuments very much, the wound send it for publication to the Globe? Did you was running much, and is still running-I ex. : show the article or read it to Luther Blake? amined it tsis morning. He is disabled in the Have you endeavored to obtain the article from use of it ; he could not exert it so as to strike a the Globe, and seen the editur search for it, and blow, or any thing like that. was he or was he not unable to find it? If so, Question, by the Committee.-
Which article what were the contents of said article, and in the Telegraph have you reference to, and wbat did Blake say as to its correctness? on what day was it published ?
snower-A few days before Gov. Houston Answer. - I alluded to the charge against left the city for New York, probably the very Gov. Houston of fraud in the rations of the In. day before he left bere, he observed to medians-I do not recollect the date, I cannot de.
that he had understood before he came to the signate it particularly, but the article contained city, probably in Philadelphia or Baltimore, charges of fraud against Gov. Houston. It may that Duff Green was about io make an attack be well enough for me to state it was the first upon him about Indian rations.” That was the article which appeared on that subject in the first I bad heard of it. 0. finding that I knew Telegraph. nothing about it, he read to me a publica io. Question, by the Committee.-In the piece which he had made, I think in an Arkansas you wrote, and showed to Judge Blake, did paper, on the subject. After he left here a you state any thing relative to the proposals few days, a piece appeared in the Telegraph inade by Mr. Houston to the War Department on the same subj-ct, and as he was not here to in the name of other persons to supply the Inanswer it, I did write a piece and sent it to the dians with rations ? Globe, refuting in general terms what had ap Answer.- I think not, peared in the Telegraph, and begging the Question, by the Committee.
Did you state public to suspend a decision on the matter un-in triat piece any thing relative to the proposals til he should return. I mentioned these facts made by Judge Blake, or by Mr. Prentiss, or this morning to the counsel of Gov. Hlous'on, by David Butler, jr.? who "told me that it was all-important to reco
Answer I did not. I mentioned none of Ver the manuscript of this article.”
their names, nor did I mention any thing about I went to the office of the Globe, and after. it. wards to the house of Mr. Blair, who searched Question, by the Committee.- Did you state for the manuscript in vain; he told me he would in the piece alluded to, any thing relative to an bring it to the House in 15 or 20 minutes, or interview belween Judge Blake and Mr. House balf an hour, it he could find it. After I had ton, on the 21st of March, 1830, or any interwritten this piece for the Globe, I sent for Mr. view between them from that day to 24in of the Blake, (known generally as Judge Blake,) to same mon.h? my room, and invited him up. I read to him Answer.-I did not. this piece, in which he concurred most fully. I Question, by the Committee.- Did Mr.Hous. observed to him, that these remarks embraced ton leave the Arkansas paper containing the the grounds, as 1 supposed, on which he and publication alluded to by you, in your possesHouston had quarrelled. He said he believed sion, or had you access to it when you wrote t embraced the greater part of them. I said the piece for the Globe ? o him, have I stuled any thing here which is Answer. - He did not leave it with me, nei. not correct? He said no, or gave asıent, byther had I access to it. words or gesture, that I had not. I can't reply Question by Mr. BURD. Do you know to the latter part of the interrogatory fully, for whether Governor Houston is riglit or left I did yot keep a copy of it, but it contained a 'banded?
Answer.-1 do not know.
Answer. That inference must be made by Question.-By Mr. Bund. - As a professional gentlemen for themselves. General H. always have man, do you, or do you not know if one limb goes armed. Before he went to New York, he Ruring of a man be disabled, so as to throw more ex. had the same arms_belted around him; and I
ertion on the sound one, whether such sound know that since he had the dispute with Mr. S. and's limb receives increased strength or not? he has worn the same arms.
Answer. -I believe it is a settled principle in Question by the accused. -What did Mr. Hous. Geo the philosophy of our profession, that it does ton say to you, about attacking Mr. Stanbery?
yet it depends very much on the constitution Answer, -After Governor H. received the
and personal habit of the individual, or the em reply of Mr. S. probably on the same day, he 118:00 ployment in which he is engaged. As a ge- came to my room at Brown's Hotel, (our rooms
beral answer, I should say that it would, perhaps. are not far apart,) he read to me the reply of
Question by the accused.-Do you, as a pro- Mr. S. and appeared to be rather doubting how fessional man, think that a man's having for he should proceed in the business. He said, many years a running wound in one of his arms," If I challenge him, he won't fight; my only increases the general strength of his body and alternative is to whip him; and I will do it other limbs?
whenever I can catch him.” Instver. I should think that it would not. Question, by Mr. H. Everett-Do you know, We know that it would tend to debilitate the or have you heard said Houston say, when and system, and not to strengthen it.
where he obtained the cane with which he atQuestion by the uccused. - Did, or did you not, tacked Mr. S., and whether he obtained it for in the article written by you, refer to the pub that purpose? lication of the Telegraph, and in general terms Answer.- I heard him remark " that it be. deny its correctness, and did not the said Blake longed to a Mr. Shaw, of Georgetown." He read the publication in the Telegrapb, or speak said he had brought ibe stick from the Her. of it as if he had read it?
mitage, the residence of Gen. Jackson, and giAnswer.“I did reply to the article in the Te ven it to Mr. Shaw." How he got it back, I did legraph in general terms, denying the charges not hear him say. I am pretty certain I heard preferred there against General 81. Whether him say, " he got it back for the purpose of Mr. Blake had read the article or not, I cannot chastising Mr. S.” tell; but I repeated to him the general contents W. E. Asquith, a witness on the part of the
of the article in the Telegraph, which was then accused, was sworn, and testified as follows: į lying on the table.
Que tion, by the accused - Were you present Question by the Committee.-Can you at Dr. Davis's room, when he read the article state any one sentence, or the substance of any he had prepared, denying the fraud charged in one sentence written by you for the Globe? the Telegraph against the accused, to Luther
Answer.--Yes, I think I could slate, and per. Blake; and when they conversed on that sub-
Answer.-I do not think I was.
Answer: I do not recollect that I ever heard leaving here for New York.
him mention it. Question by Mr. COOKE, of Ohio.-Where Question by the accused.-- Did you ever hear do you reside?
said Blake express his feelings towards the acAnswer.-In South Carolina.
cused? If yea, what did he say? Question by the same.--How long since Answer. - 1 have beard him state that they you arrived in this city?
had been enemies, desperate enemies, when in Answer.-I think it was the 20th or 22d of the Indian country; that his animosity grew out January 1 do not recollect the day of the of a quarrel which was not his own, but onlac. month; it was about the middle of January, count of his friends, with General H.; and that perhaps.
at one time his feelings were so hostile, that, Question by the same. ---Have you been an understanding Gen. H. was about to cross á intimate associate of Mr. H.?
ferry owned or rented by him, that he sent Answer.--Yes; and I felt honored by his ac. word to Gen. H. that if he did so cross, he must quaintance.
be prepared to meet him, as he should be armQuestion by the same.-Do you not know, ed on ihe opposite bank, and oppose his land. or have you not heard, Mr. H. declare," that ing." I have also heard him say, here, since be was armed for the purpose of attacking Mr. he mentioned that fact, " that as the quarrel S." and what kind of arms did Mr. H. carry for originated between a friend of his and Gen.
H., and he had understood bis friend was satisfied, Answer. -Yes; I know he was armed with he was willing to come to a friendly under. pistols and a dirk-knife; and I also know that standing with Gen. H., and that he had ceased on the evening he attacked Mr. S. he was not to entertain those feelings of hostility against umed.
the General." Question by the Committee.--Do you in.
RICHARD S. Coxe, a witness on behalf of the tend to be understood that you know he was so House, was sworn, and testified as follows: armed for the purpose of atcacking Mr. $.! Question by the Committee.—Have you any