|
APPENDIX. 383
be private up to the time of the signing of the verdict. I have con-
sulted several eminent gentlemen of the bar, and several persons in
high official station, and there is no difference of opinion; they all
concur in the views expressed. I have asked the friends of the deceased,
and some of the friends of a person supposed to be interested in these
proceedings. I have stated the matter to the eminent counsel of that
person. He has no desire to have the examination private, and expressed
no desire to have it public, and thought that he should not interfere
in any way to affect the Coroners' decision.
SAMUEL D. PARKER,
Attorney of the Commonwealth for County of Suffolk.
In this connection it may be pertinent also to quote the following act of
the State
Legislature, passed April 2d, 1850, which undoubtedly originated from the
discussion
connected with this case.-REP.
Chap. 133, Sect. 1.-Whenever an inquisition shall be taken, pursuant
to the one hundred and fortieth chapter of the Revised Statutes, the
Coroner, with the consent of a majority of the jury of inquest, may
order that a secret inquisition be taken; and in such case the Coroner
may, at his discretion, exclude from the place where the inquisition is
taken, any or all persons other than those required to be present by
the provisions of said chapter; and, during the examination of any
witness, may, at his discretion, exclude from the place of examination
all the other witnesses; and may also, if he see cause, direct the wit-
nesses to be kept separate, so that they cannot converse with each
other until they shall have been examined.
SECOND "CIVIS" LETTER..
(Postmarked " Boston, March 28th," and addressed " E. D. Sohier, Esq.,
Member of the Bar, Boston, Mass.")
Boston, March 27th, 1850.
Mr. E. D. Sohier:
I am very desirous to inform you, that there has been a great mis-
take made in the testimony of some of the witnesses with regard to
that " Civis " letter. Now, I must inform you that I wrote that letter,
myself. I first saw that letter published in the " Herald " of this even-
ing; and I observed at first sight that the letter had the appearance of
having been written by me. But there was one thing about it that looked
singular, and that was the signature, which was in the " Herald " as
Silence,-which was wrong. I signed the letter, " Civis; " and, on
seeing the letter in the Journal, I at once recognized it. You can com-
pare this writing with that of the " Civis " letter, and see if it does not
exactly resemble it.
With regard to the formation of certain letters, I would remark, that
I usually make d in this manner:-d [with the top curved backwards]
-and sometimes thus: d [with the top part of the second stroke upright.]
In forming the a, I make it thus, a, a, and not a, a; [the two differing
slightly in the regularity of the curves. In making the w, I do thus:-
w, w; not w, w; [the last made as if from a u, and the first from an
n.] I's I make thus:-I, I, I; [with the hair-stroke of the loop crossing
over the main stroke of the letter.] Figures, 1, 3, 4, 9, 8, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5,
6, 7, 8, 9, 0.
I positively swear that I wrote that identical letter. My writing
,may resemble that of Webster's; that I know nothing about. Mr. Web-
ster himself will say positively that he did not write that letter; but,
in saying so, he would probably not be believed.
|
