theßeiver Argus. J. NyIaYAN,D, Zurroa Ain) ritoriurroft Heaver, Vss.. , Dee. 22. 1869„ - - • WE yield -much of our space this week to: tho Qufitpcbmniercial libel suit. Ou? readers will understand, ofeourse, that'the trial hero reported was only a Preliminary one, and that the defendants had not the privilege efintrodticingteStimony in their own behalf. The point in this inquiry be fore the Alderman was simply to as . certain :whether Messrs. Brigham and Thompson should or should not be held to appear In pourt. The rut idgs of the Alderman were continu ously favorablO to Ilai proAwution, awl of course the dethndants will be bound over. At the outset the pulr lie was aksured that, Mr. Quay titir ed a full investigation of all matters Hating to Legislative . I I which, It wito alleged lie acted part. The rePoq Of the proceed- ceedings in the preliminary hear ing, before Alderman -Kneeper, t shows that himsblf and counsel flinch •ed at - the eritlati thne,by refusing to answer such•qudstions as would tad \ Both to elicit " the 'rail and the facts." Instead, therefii e, of "throwing open the doors," go t nit the " monkeys " might be seeni ,Mr. Quay and Ills vigilant attorn Ts:took good care to keep themelos4d, and sturdily refus al to let the exhibition go . on. At the trial of the case in the Quar ter Sessions, we apprehend, the cur- 1 tam will be raised, whether Mr. Q. andbis uttorneV's are willing or not; and. If we are not greatly mistaken, an array of farts and ,eireutnstanees will be brought to. light , which will convince every honest man In the Commonwealth that the qininier eittrx course, in! tizicprthing Mr:Quay and his co-schen:leis at Har t risburg and Philadelphia. has clone the State an important serviee, and the people an incalculable anionnt of good. The attorney in the caseate Messrs Marshall and Schwartzwelder for the prosecution, Mid :Messrs. Hamilton and Carnahan flit• the defence. Mr. Hampton ' .conducted the defence alone, 11114 associate being absent .du ringthe hearing before the alderman. Vhf but state what was apparent to every one pri , sent at the examina tion, when !we say that Mr. Hamp ton conducted the defence with grad •tact and agility. Peddled •at all piiints, comprehending every ques tion as soon aslit came up, and withal. a ready detach r, he was more than a pnatch for the heavy . double-team 'pitted against him. His bearing throughout,• bitliclited a strong belief in..the justice of his cause, and we have no , dont t lint'ithat the people will honor him all the more for his .vigorous effort to expose and break up a "ring" whit h, for years, hiva been a disgrace to the 'State, and a heavy burden uponf the shoulders of the people. . _IT is doubtless known to many of our friends that a l prosccution, charg ing us with helm; a party to an info _ MOUS cri me, .kvas commenced against us a 'few da l / 4 7s since in Beaver. Of •ctiurse those who live in this town and vicinity, undersGind that the person who brings this charge against ' us ; is only a t l ool in the hands,of oth .ers, who stand in the back-ground. s lbe ri mattei is now in the hands of • seem improper on our part to make public any of the particulars in the (use. In the meantigne, the mailers of the Ann; and - its friends every- . • where, may rest assured that its edit ' or has done nothing nor been con ' nected with any trarbaction of which ,' they or hiMself need be ashamed. This will beiniale very apparentat the proper t me, and in the proper way. • Tut; first lively timeof this session occurred on ptursday last. It was in the I rouse, and grew Out or Mun gen's so-mtg.& financial speech, in which he fairly and directly advoca ted the repudiation of all the Govern limit Mmds, and painted his picture of yrosperous tithes that would fol low such to act. lie has been at Work on thi.spets4t for a long time. Tim' litet.thatlie would Omie out for - repudiation gut nidsed abroad; and many friend 4 tried to prevail upon hint to de:4n* his pile of manuscript. Ile was slit uhe dissuaded and the "' IMuse gave him an hour In which to road it. Tire was precept fide un easiness all ever the Democnnic side while he spoke, and as soon as . he finished his party friends join peel for J the floor ih lrder to repuiliate him. Messrs, Oki Itandall,tilocum, \\*twit ' ward. and f.thers, washed their hands - vigorously i i f the wltole thing, and spoke their minds' about Mungen with charming freedom and derisivt..- . ncsi. It wi.4 a good thing to hear, though. Ime could not help marvel ling at the situiden apparent conver: sion of these gentlemen from the I , ,_• , Vetalicton ,ereettoack scheme for half repudiationl. The afternoon's work renders It c ear, however, that the fi nancial par of the last Republican platform w as made of good timber.. T It r. imp nt . ionnumt bill brought in by Mr. Allison on Thursday last, is sithilar to tile one which he presented before Alui Census Committee. It provides tit the' house shall have three hunt, red members ; that the 'Secretory $f the Interior shall - make up the appOrtionment on the hmis for the next Omgress as soon as the cen sus return, are receivcd, and by (Ali cia! announcement /show how i !natty reprcsenta i Ives each State is entitled to in the new Ithuse. States having an excess aver the present number are to elect them on a general ticket. 'This whoit matter of apportionment will be pretty thoroughly debated in the cont.'s° bf the winter and spring. A good many members think two hundred and seventy-live is enough for the House, and some don't want any change till the Forty-third Fon-. gres. Itlis not yet possible to see wind conclusion will he reached. ' THE following noritatiims were sent; to tite Senate on Friday lust: .111105 T.. ekertn in, u Attorney, I nit riet of :la. S. L. \ l 'ithey,ofMich. Judge Sixth Judicial circuit, 'vice tteo. It. Veitinan, withdrawn .: 4 ):%4trrrEt: of Cincinnati doer toot have' telt . ..mph:4l to Day Cl Leary . l that they"are Plittistled that Dr. Paul Schoemai Ints been convicted upoit insullicittlit evidence." I )octora froth other plates have Ilkewiso expresmod tbemselv f 4. 'They seem to agree, for once, but manifestly upon a diagnosis which th whave picked up trout the i.. press ievi)rts. . , •• • 1 . • . THE QUAY . COMMERCIAL LI DEL RCM I= .diettnery Elearlast—Ezaattuattow ot Itt. Qu aaaaa others oh the part of the Proteeuttotti—Deteuee sot per mitted a Hearing. At 8 o'clock, on Friday afternoon last, the libel atse of M. 0. COW v"• C, D. Brigham, Editor, and R: D. Thompson, Business Manager - of The Pittsburgh Cbmnierelal, atm up for a preliminary hawing before Alder man Nee r, of Pittsburgh, having been continued. from the previous day on account of the absence of Mr. Quay, the prosecuting wit ness. Our readers will understand that In these preliminary hearingi, none but witneasea for the prosecution am be exaMined. This prohibited the defendants from olferingtestimu ny. and confined them to tho cross examination of Prosecutor'S witness-• es. At the hour stated the aiderma erimdedLamong those in attendance were several ex-members of the Legislature, and other promi nent citizens. The was represented by M.T. Marshall and M. Swartzwelder, Essis., and, -the defence by John IL lltunptom'Esq. At a few minutes past three, Mr. Swartzwelder said: ilfr. Alderman, this is the time fixed for the hewing. The alderman stated that if the parties were ready, the case would be proceeded with. At the request of Mr. SWartzwelder, the alderman read the Information, and also the alleged libellous matter, us follows: "The following mysterious para graph appears In a letter written front Pittsburgh to THE BEAVER ARGUA: "A diversity of opinion exLits here a. to what the new, large building In your town ahould be raged. Some Insist that it should bo known a. the "Mackey Building," othen.claim that It should be called "The State Trea.ary while other. again seem to think, "The Cameron. Block" would be more appropriate. I would moat respectfully urge that the latter be the name by which that •'monument of greatness" be known by Mei generation■ which are to come. By the way, do you know that one of your Ileaverita nod one of our prominent men here are running a distillery not an hundred miles from where I write? It is more than suspected that the far Pager. of Me State are entitled to a share of the profits of the noncom when they come to be divided, on the ground that they who furnish the capital should not be cheated out of the dlvallends.' Touching that 'large buildkflg,' the name will make,little difference. Perhaps no one name could be select ed to signify the whole truth. For instants?, if a man succeeds in draw ing nut of one candidate for United ~tatesSenatorthesun2of $13,000, and betrays him to his opponent for 820,- 010; and if ho puts the money Into a 'large building,',a special coinage would be necessay to give it a name. If several similar transactions, to say nothing of the 'unexpended balance,' should enter into the history of the structure, the dillituity as to a title would be increased. Our Beaver friends, we doubt not, will be found 'equal to the occasion.' As to the distillery, the mystery of the corres pondent is grant. The reference,' to Ouse who understand a certain state of facts,mlght be illumined, however; by the suggestion that men who will deliberately. propose to a revenue of, (leer that—for a largo consideration— he-should be conveniently blind for certiti» length of time, to enable them to steal ,$60,000 and upward; would not hesitate tomb the govern meat if they had a Chance. Perhaps they hive gone into the whiskey business to do it. Who knows?" , 1 Mr. tiwartzwelder then stated that Michael Fitzgibbon, mersenger at the Allegheny National Bank, was in tended to be put upon the stand, as first in order, ho having purchased a paper at the office of the thnimercial, containing the alleged libel. The purpose was to prove the publication if it was necessary. ' Mr. Hampton. You will be expel- ed to prove the publication in the or dinary manner. Mr. riwartzwelder. We will show by this witness that Messrs. Brig- ' ham and Thompson are the publish-. ers . f the Commercial,' and, second; " kilVAstlikrerititafer end, by putting Mr. Quay on the stand. TESTIMONY OF CCL. QUAY. Matthew 8. Quay, sworn and extunin ad by Mr.iwartzwohlor. Q. iVhoro do'you A. lu Beaver, Pa. Q.. State how long you have rovidod there. A. Since 1851 or '52. (2. Did you mak° this inforuuatio against Messrs. Brigham and Thom Yes, air. (I. Whore Wa`i that portion of yonr in formation, containing the alleged libel ous information, token front? A. It.ww an.esiraet taken from an anonymous letter in the Beaver Artons, republished by Mr. Brigham, and the li bclous niatter added. The whole libel, in the inf)rmation, was taken (rota the commie/Tin/. Q. Did von read those articles in tho Beaver A:MiCS RIO o.llMerejai ? A. I did. Q. Is that the article? (Paper shown witness.] A. That is the article. • 'Q. What date? A. Elec. 9111. 12.• On reading that article, Col. Quay, whom did you believe it . was written con cerning? • A. Me of mast,. I nut the only per son building a large house in Deaver, excepting a Methodist church. I knew it ulid not allude to the church. Q. Was Hutt (Wooly reason that made y9ll believe the:article applied to you? A. The Illtstairgh Cbminercial. had .been attacking Den. Cameron and my self, charging us with corruption, Am. had been engaged in a newspaper con treversy before this time with the tioa merniut„ Mr,, Brigham and I haul two or three shots at each other. The con troversy was about the State Treasurer ship. Q. 1 lad Mr. Brigham, Lt his paper, prior to the libel of the nth, Yeety the 14th) alluded to you by name? A. Ile had spoken of" Don. Cameron, Quay & Co. ' l%tr. Swartzwel6r—l do not want G ;now what he utthtz—inerely it he men lotted your name ? A. I think tho allusion was as I have stated. Q. Wa4 it for - the forogoing rcwons Ht3tell by you that you took this urtlelo to refer to yourself T._ A. Yei:Fdr., I don't think Mr. Brig 11111 WM deny it. Mr. S. Jtuit, answer the ri tiestion 'yin' r •no.' Q. You have statoil thatyou arooraet log a law building in the town of Hoo ver 2- A. Yes, sir, at a rout of 81,000. It is the only large one In the town, except the Meihodist church, 4. As to this portion of the article: "It a loan sneeeeds in drawing Old Orono candidate for United States senator the sum 01'813,000, anti betrays him to his opponent for t 120,000, and if he , puts the money in a 'large building,". etc., la good enough to :Hemet specifically, ,whother, at any time or under any cir cumstances, ir m ces, you over drew flans any candidate for United States Senator the auto of $13,000, betrayed him to another candidate for MOOO, and put that mon ey in a building at Beaver? •A. I never drew andn any candi date for any Mlles, never betrayed any one. Wits never paid tow money or anything else to betray a candidate. 4. Did you at any time, or were you at any time, paid any money by ;{fr. Mackey, State Treasurer ? Mr. Quay—For my support? Mr. S.—For your support to put him in Mikes:nil retain hint there? A. No, mover did. It was not no-. eftecary. Q There Is another reference here: "The rat:resit - a - , to thosewho understand a curtain state of recta, might balite:nin es), however, by theenggdstion, that man who Will deliberately propose a revenue officer that, for a large consideration, he should be conveniently blind fur a cer tain length of time, to, enable them to steal N 0,000," etc? 1. My answer is, tlmti never 'tried to steal anything from the Government, anti never attempted to bribe say reve nue °Meer to help mo do it. , Are you with a distillery ? eugaged in any manner A. No sir; I never bad 'any interest whatever in any distillery. (Moss-EXAMINATION. :11i. /lan:won then proceeded to cross-examine the prosecuting wit ritt,s uy follows; Q.—Flow long have you lived in Beaver County, CNA Quay? A.ce 11t52 ; read law In Beaver County. • yoil recollect when you were admitted.to the bar? A.—ln 1854 or 1855, I think; I was then elected Prothonotary. . Q.—How long did you continue in that. office? .A.—Six and a ludf years; I resign ed and went to the army. Q.—What did thatoffits3pay you— what did it net you peryear? Mr. Marshall —We object. The Alderman—The objection Is sustained. Mr. Hampton — You do not wish to hear any arguments then. The Alderman—Yes, sir, I will. Mr. Hampton—Btit I do not care to say anything, now that you have decided the matter. The Alderman—But I will with drew this decision. Mr. Hampton stated that the pur port of the articie—thealleged libel— was, that Mr. Quay was erecting a building at Beaver, Pa., with money obtained by corrupt means. The purpose of the defense was to show the pecuniary condition of Mr. Quay when ho left the office of Prothono tary •, and further, that it was not possible for him to accumulate such sums of money since then, unleas ob tained corruptly. In other words it was the design of the defense to inquire Into Mr. Quay's financial affairs. Mr. Quay allege; that the article is false, libelous and malicious and does him great injury. • The do fense proposed to shdw that his means were such as would not enable him to build such a structure, unless by money wrrUptly obtained. Mr. Marshall stated that Mr. Brig ham was present, and if he would sign a paper, setting forth that was what was meant in the article, name ly, that Col. Quay was erecting a building on 811,000 corruptly obtain. ed the prosecution would admit the evidence ; otherwise they would have it ruled out. • Mr. Hampton did not choose to enter Into any such arrangement The defendants were present to an swer the charge preferred. in u legal way, and not to sign papers. lie understood the article, construed by Mr. Swartzwelder, to declare that Mr. Quay is putting money cor ruptly qbtained into the building at Beaver. • Mr. Marshall—We understand the charge to be that Mr. Quay obtained the sum of 813,000,corruptly. Mr. Hampton—lf the objection is valid it is a matter of law. Mr. Marshall—lf the offer is not acceeptcd we will insist upon our ob jection. Mr. Swartzwelder—They have re fused to accept the. offer. Time Alderman—The objection is sustained. Q,—Col. Quay, what year did you go into the Pennsylvania Legisla ture? Mr. Marshall—You need not an swer that; wo object. Mr. Hampton—Put the question down Mr. Alderman. Mr. Marshall—What does the gen tleman wish to show? Mr. Hampton—lt Is.my cross ex amination, and I am touching only on matters brought out In the exam- Ination in-chief. I ask the question for the purpose of showing that the gentleman (the witness) was a mom •her of the Pennsylvania Legislature at an election held for United States Senator; that money was paid— Mr. Marshall—Put the purpose Just stated in writing, Mr. Alder man. . Mr. Hampton—lt Is not customary to put in writing at a preliminary, hearing what either side expect tt: prove. Swartzwelder—ltead the question Mr. Alderman, as you have got it in writing. Alderman—That the prosecutor received money from a candidate for United States Senator. • Mr. Hampton-1111d not state that that 14113 my purpose. [lt is but in oper to state hero that the attorneys for the prosecution spoke of Mr. Hampton's purpose several times, and the Alderman taking It down amid considerable confusion got it in the wig VlNVVi l attahrmunniyi - to" iircertain from the witness whether lie was In the Pennsylvania Legislature, when there was an election for U. S. Senator. That's the purpose Mr. Marshall—We do not object then. The witness—l WILY in the Pennsylvania Legislature and a candidate for Speaker in It6i, when Curtin and Cameron were candidates. Mr. liaintiton—l asked you what year you went into tho Legislature. The witiums—ln ; that was nay ❑rst session. q.—ltow murky seAsions were you than sir? • A.—Three years—three sessions. wish you to state, if you please, what amount of money you wore worth in MI, before you went into the Legisla ture. tt Mr. Swartzwidder—we object. \I r. Hampton—Put the question downy Mr alderman. Mr. Marshall—We object because it is prying into private matter. Mr. Hampton—State the grounds of the objection. Mr. Swartzwelder—Because, it Is neith er pertinent nor relevant; affirmatively stated, it is impertinent and irrelevant. Mr... Hampton—l propose to ask Col. Quay this question, for the 'purpose, as already stutal, of getting at this election; that Is, ascertain whether there was any money used corruptly in it or not. We cannot get ut the matter In any other Sir. Marshall—lf thogentleman admits that that is what the defendant meant in his article of the 9th, we make no objec tion to the question; otherwise wo do oh'ect. .Ir. HampLon—Thorn is tho article. You ran draw that infatuate° or any oth er that you sea proper from the article. Mr.lcliirshall—Weobject then, bemtom that Is not assuanim , the responsibility. Mr. Hampton—Take it M you please. Mr. Marshall—That kooks more like crawling out of the responsibility than assuming it. Mr. Ifumpten—l have said that if the gentleman Minks that it is such, ho can admit the evidence. Alderman—l sustain tho objection. Ilartijgort—T eunnot ahlc that quo; tion then. about how much he IVII-9 wort) Wore going into the Legislature? Alderman—No. air. Mr. Hampton—Mr. Quay, when did you purcluelo the lot on which you aro erecting that building? A.—l flavor bought it at all ; my moth er-in-law convoyial it to my will) last fall. Q.—Who is bupding tho house on tho otY A.—l am, sir; Messrs. Monroe Miller, .t Co. are thecontraetora. Q.—Miura the contract prim f Q.—'rho legal title of the deed is in your wife's nruie A.—Yes, air. Q—eol. quay, is there anything In tied article of the 9th, J ust read by Mr. Swartzwelder, which leads you to be lieve that you answer the description of the person alluded to In it, except. ins the reference about the building which you are erecting? Mr. Swartzwelder—Put down the quction. A.—No, air; only that the editor of the anomercial had been attacking we. • Mr. 3lanihall—ls the question in writing? Wt , tTiit the advantage of it. Mr. ihtsupton—tle on with your answer. hangs The witue3s—The wholething upon that; it indicater wh th o is meant by what follows: that Is the extract from the Antes. If there had Ileen no extract from the and the building matter had been left out, I do not think I would have known that it referred to me. I; might have supposed from previous personalities that he meant me. Q.—l ask you this question. If there had been no allusion to the building, Li there anything' else in that article that you could have con strued to mean you? A—Apart from the personalities I_. •Q.-1 want a direct ensurer. -- A.—l do not think that I would ever have dreamed - at that time that I was indicated, if it had not tom for the allusion to the new building, at the present time I would. Mr. itunpton.—But I will take you track to the time, when you first read the article. ! Whit was your im pression then? A.—The mere nakiii charges, with-, out reference to the building, would never have caused me to think I was the man at all. Q. Prior to this, ow what terms had you been with Mr. Brigham? A.—On good terms. Q.—You had no quarrels? A.—Np, sir. Q,.--Btato whether, prior to the publication on the 9th, you were on good ly terms with Mr. Brigham per senal. A.—No, sir. ! twos Q.—Yqu had no Wilco' W e er hatred towards him? A.—No, sir he WI been making rough and audacious charges seam • me, Q. Col. Quay state whether you are not editor and proprietor of the Bea ver Radical. A. Yes, sir.' eetor? Q. When did you become propri- A. Purchased it from the Mart. Q. What time wyas that? A.—A bout a year ago. Q. Did you buy out an established paper, or start a now one? A. I purchased materials and started the paper. How „1 . Q. much did the paper vest you ? A.—Ahout $3,500 or 11'3,600 Q. You say you had 4 tough news paper controversy, when did that be gin? A.—About two ;weeks before the appearance of the article on De ceuiber. lith, Mr. Brigham called upon me through his newspaper to write up a transaction at Harrisburg, about a man who had bought ;up the Legis lature and ran away with the money. He wanted me to write it up, and if I I:did not dose, it would be necessary to have some one else do it. - ; Mr. Hampton. Did: you reply to' the article? A. Yes, sir. Q. Was this tho commencement of the warfare? A. I think the libel suit business— . Mr. Swartzwelder: That's enough. Q. Now, did you not turn around and charge Mr. Brigham with cor ruption; that he had received money of the corruption fund?' Mr. liwartzweider. 1 I object; the V gentleman wants to e that Quay libeled Brigham. , Mr.. Hampton. I want to anew that 'there were charges on one side ' and allegations on the other--erimi nation and recrilnination. Malice is. one of the ingredients in the lawgf libel, and my purpose is to prove tlffit. there was no malice in the publica tion alleged to be libelous. Mr. Swartzwelder--:-The law will Infer malice from the libel Itself. If the article is ascertained to be libel lous, malice is presumed. -- Mr. Hampton—This is true of a private individual, buta newspaper publisher can print anything con cerning a public officer or relating to the public business, provided it IS; done through grail; motives. Mr. Hampton then read ;the 7th section of the Deelaration of ;Rights, which declares: "The printing press shall be free to every person who under takes toesaraine the: proceedings of the legislature or any branch of (ley-. ornment, and no law shall over be made to restrain the right thereof. The free communication of thoughts and opinions 13 one of the Invaluable rights of man; and every citizen may freely speak, write and print on any subject, being responsible for the abuse of that liberty. In prosecutions for the publicatiorrof papers investi gating the official conduct of officers, or men in public capacity, or where the matter published is proper for public Information, the truth thereof may be given lu evidence; and in all indictments fur ; libels, the jury shall have the right to determine the law and the facts, under thedirection of the Court as in other cases." I Mr. Hampton continued—Where' the libel concernsprivate person malice is inferred The acts of men in public positio ,; such as In the re Pennsylvania islatu, may be, Lei .a freely commented upon, and no news paper man can be punished therefore unless malace be shwa. Now the truth is what the defense desired to get at—a thorough search of the mate ter from top to bottom. This was a •rekTirxiiii:e: The Commonfeg l it should open wide the door, and let the investigation be as thro' as pos sible. A controversy had sprung up between the parties, in reference to acts of Mr. Quay, while in the .Legis lature. The alleged libel had been printed in the heat of this controver sy and his object was to show what this was. It is focus to say hereafter whether we um prove the truth or net. The truth cannot be admitted in evidence inn ease where private parties are lebelied; but is different in public life. The defense also; wishes to rebut the presumption of malice. The magistrate is to deter. mine whether we , are actuated by malicious motives or not; because, if we are not, this relieves us of all dif fleulty If these remarks were made in thisimanner no malice can be in. ferret'. [Mr. Hampton here cited the Sanderson case In support, of his position on this point. 1 What the defense wanted to get at were the. factsand circumstances attending the e libel prior to its publication—that Mr. Brighatu,ns an editor and an In dividual-, had no ill feelings toward Mr. Quay. We have the sworn dec laration of Mr. Quay that they were good friends, and this is to rebut, the presumption of malice. Mr.Swartswelder—The question here is prior discussion to rebut the presump tion of malice. If tho article is libelous malice is inferred. The gentleman says, this is a case different from private tar ties—that tho - partv libeled and the libel ler are editors. lie grounds his position upon the seventh section of the bill of rights ; but this is a prosecution for libel on a public, man, or a man acting. In a public capacity. It ,has nothing to do with a man in public life. If it hacl, has Mr. Brigham or M. Thompson to as sume that it is proper fur publication. It is only when it is shoes& to be for public information that such testimony can be introduced. This section of the bill. of rights has nothing to do with this libel, bemuse Mr. Quay does not now hold any public Wilco; neither does ho act in any public capacity. Mr. Marshall—This article charges 3f r. Quay with receiving Slam* from ono man, 84000 from another, and contriv ing to defraud the Government out of 1330,000. .No matter how many libels ware published against Mr. Brighlun, they would be no offset to this. Mr. Hampton—The gentlemen do not I seem to apprehend my argument. It is about something that transpired when Mr. Quay was a member of the Legisla- turo that I wish to investigate. It will not do for them to attempt to escape the force of this argument by saying that Mr. Quay is not now a member of the Legis. lature; neither are they thejudges wheth er the article is proper for publication or not. You are—lto the magistrate) to consider what was published by Mr. Quay about Mr. Brigham, because you have to be governed by the lawn laid down here in Wharton, that no libel can be sustained unless malice is shown. I do not propose to offset one libel against another. There is no authority, at least that I know of, that; will gainsay the au thority I have quoted. 'rho publication was in reference to: a matter of public concern, something that took place In the Qtpital of the State, and it to for the magistrate. to say , whether this case comes under the definition of this law of libel or not. , Mr. Marshall Task the magistrate to rule the po!nt. _ : The A' I/ Alerman o you object to the whole question. Mr. Swarizwelder Yea, sir. The 4lderman '.l snstain the objection. 'Mr. Hampton 'liras do not permit ms to ask Mr. Quay about any charges he made lii his paper against Alr.Brigham. The Alderman No, sir. . I roose to ask the witn lie did Q net p attack Mr. Brigham through if his newspaper before the 9th of December.' Mr. 4 arshalL I object, Q. More you had a controversy with 3ir. Brigham. A. !I have already s tated , that 1 had. Q. What was the subject of that news paper centmversy 7 - Mr. Marshall. I object, immense It would be the worst kind of hearsay. Objection sustained. Q. Was this extract given in the 'Web copied front the Beave Antsca A. Yes sir. Q. When was It published. A. Last Wednesday week.: that. You nail it. when It appeared in paper A. Yes sw. Q. Did you makt: Information against. the editor orate Alma/ for libel. 4.. slt I brought a - Mr. Hempling Isere stated that he could act Paled* gek through with the cross examination (It bibigr now five o'clock) and aske4 that thso:ase be continued un- IlLtollaY• After lame controversy In re. hard . 4 hewing titl witnma from Bea ver, who erMaa *let home. (to which Mr. liautpW'objected, because 'be did not wish to hive Vs cross israminstlon broken in upon,) the Magidnue ordered t he hearing to-tbeeptdinuedvintil next of- Leenonn, at three o'clock. satoorsilari;Prisesedlsfis- The hearing la the above case was reamed in the Quarter sesidons room of the Court Rouse; the Alderman's office belfigsndirely too small to so. mmodate the audience. Mr. Hamptei resumed the cross minitice of the prosecuting wit pens Air. Quay, is follows : Q. This house that yen are build ing; Is It a dwelling, or a business house? A.—A business house. Q. You owua dwelling In Heaver, do you not? A. Iris. Q. What Is it worth. A. From EU® to K . l ook . Mr. Quay wbh to say I was only five yews In the Prothonotary's of nee, instead °Egg and a half years, as mistakenly. ~ _ed to yesterday. Q. You stated you never drew out any money from any candidate.— Were you in the igislature in 1867? A. I I was, as a member from Beaver. county. .. • Q. Wasthentan election fora Uni ted States Senator In that year? .A.. —There was.. AfrAwartravelder. We object. Mr. Hampton; The witness stated in his oxamtsMlon In chief that he. never had' taken money from any candidate, or**ayed any one. We now propine.to ask him In regead to this.very matter. Mr. Swartawelder. To this we do not'object. — Nsitti! , Q. You we the Pennsylvania Legislature when Cameron and Cur tin were candidates for Senator, were ,you? A. ysp, air. Q. Were ' you a candidate for Speaker of the House? A. Yes. EQ.,,.C01. Glass was your opponent? A. Yes. Q. Were you a friend of Gov. Cur tin in that cotOest? A. Yes; I was a friend of (103: Curtin throughout. Q. Was plat Curtin's election as Senator audiour election as Spmker regarded as identical? A. No, sir. I was stronger than Curtin. Q. Up till the, day of the caucus, in relation tb the election for Speak er, did not your friends and yourself consider yout nomination by the mu cus, almost ailtitalnty? A. No sir. .Swartzwelder. I object. Hampton. I propose to ask this question• for the purpose of connect ing Mr. Quay with the election of United States Senator. . Mr. Swartzwe!der: The chat* is, "if a man," etc. To this the witnes s had answered. In chief that he never received any money, nor ever betray ed anybody. ,The question now pro posed. to be asked was not a proper crow examirutt i lon. Nothing was said about his election as Speaker, or about the caucus, in the seccaminatoin in chief. The Alderman sustained the ob jection. Mr. Iliunpton. Col. Quay, did you not go into the caucus and move the nomination of Col. Giese' Mr. Swartzwelder. We object. Alderman. The objection is sus tained. Q. Have you'any knowledge, di• reetly or indirectly of a purse of mon• ey having been raised, by a party of gentlemen In • Philadelphia, to pro. mote the election ofyourself as Speak er and Governor Curtin as United States Senator: Mr. Marshall. We object. Mr. Hampton—l want the reason for this objection. Mr. Marshall—We object because it is not pertinent.:_ Mr. Ilampton—We desire to go into a full Investigatam of the whole matter. Mr. Quay-4.san peva:atty. willing, so tar as lam oo - to' answer. .. Mr. ob ect. , • Mr g ewer. —..............,-v.-,f-i Mr. Rampaoh—/Eint that his counsel will not let hint answer. Mr. Marshall---No, sir; tho counsel for ihe Commonwealth—not his counsel— object.. The publication of the al lotted libelous article was here admitted by tho defend ants' counsel, and the witness who was called for that purpose WAS excused from further attendance.] Q. Col. Quay. at or about the time. of the election of Speaker, in 1847, bad you a man with sls,ouo, or any other stun of money, or anything of value, to be used s t e as afu to secure your election or that of U. 8. ' nator. Mr. 11 rshall. Wo object for the reason . previously givlin. Alderman. .Objection sustained"' Q. What was the ordinary legitimate compensation of a member of the Legis lature during - lea% '66 and '67? ;Marshall. Wo object—not pertinent to this inquiry. Aldermen. Objection sustained. , Q. During the session of 1867, whilst you were a member of the Legislature, did you receive inly stun of money, bonds, stocks or notes or other valuable consid eration, other than your pay as a mem ber front any source whatever? Marshall, Wo object. Alderman. I sustain the objection. Q. Do you know Mr. Bombarger,cash ler of the Mechanics' Bank of Harris burg? VOL ' Q. Did.you keep a bank account there In MS? A. Yes. Q. In the latter part of Iffidstate wheth or you had a note for %111,000 discohnted at that hank? Mr. Marshall. We object. Alderman. I sustain the objection. Did you not about three weeks after the election of Senator, in Itio7, take up that noto for 013,000. Mr. Marshall. Wo object. Alderman. I sustain the objection. Mr. Hampton. The usual ruling! Cl. Prior to your going into the Legis lature, wore you over the owner of any msg d. u i ter railway stocks or railroad. Mr. Quay. I am willing to answer. Mr. Hampton. You are in .tho hands of your counsel. Mr. Marshall. We object. Alderman. Objection sustained. (2- State whether dunhg the time you wore a member of the Legislature, you became the owner of ton or twelve thous and dollars worth of the Union Passen ger Railway stock of Philadelphia ? Mr. Marshall. What is the purpose of the question?, . Mr. Htunpton. The object of this is to show where the j 13,000 mute from, that is going Into the building in tho town' oh Beaver. • Mr. Bwartswelder. Now we formally rePeat this offer: That it the gentlemen will agree to say that their charge of $13,- 000, obtained from ono candidate for U. S. Senate, was corruptly taken, and hi vested In this building In the town of Beaver, is applicable to Mr. Quay, and that tho charge is of and concerning hint, then we will make no objection. Mr. Hampton—l wish to state that we are not here to make any ad missions, as suggested, but are here to make a thorough investigation of Colonel. Quay's conduct in, getting money, stocks, bonds, or other val uables, while a member of the Leg islature, and give him an opportuni ty, if he so .desires to purge ;himself of any suspicion of corruption while u member of that body. , Mr. Marshall I repeat the objec tion, with the explanation—that we. will not reply to an assassin, who dares not avow his purpose. Mr. Hampton There is the arti- , ele. You ma go into the other court and bring your action for damages If you choose.. Mr. Marshall Yes, and we will do It. Aldermen I sustain the objection. Q.- During the time you were in the Legislature did you become the owner of : Railroad bonds lo the amount of $lO,OOO or upwards? ' Mr. 3farshall IVeobject,generrilly to all this elass of questions, and I ask the .4.hierman to rnie , Jhent all out promptly. Alderman I sustain theobjection. Q. Are you the owner-- • Mr. Marshall I object. Mr. Hampton I deknot intend to be "choked off" in that way. Hear the questions first. Mr. Marshall I object to taking (rand mn Jury. ptou The object is no such" thing, Y propose to hive the question put. • - . Alderman . Orion. , Q State whether. you have `pur chased any real :ate in Philadel phia recently. Mr. Marshall e'object. Alderman _ Objection sustained. Q. Stater;wheettherwhether you have not purchased property, In Philadelphia, worth $16,000 or tio,ooo. Mr. Marshall ;We object. Alderman. Ohjection sustained. Q. Do you own'an 'interest in the Girard Rouse, Philadelphia. , Mr. Marshall IWe object. • Alderman Objection sustained. Q. From the I time .you went to the Legislature lo the' time you re turned from it, were you engaged in any business', was publiabinga nearspaper and dabbllngln stocks. . Q. From tbelime you went Into the Legislature until you left it had you accumulated any means? . Mr. Marshall.! We objecti I Alderman. Objection sustained. Q.. What areyou worth to day ? A.—510,875 excluding personal prop erty, house hold, urniture, die. Q. .Have Yon,' in the last three or four . years, met path any , losses? A. No, sir ; not of any consequence. Q. Do you know Alex, P. Tinton Supervisor of Internal Revenue? A. I do. Rad you In conversation with him, (4. In Philadelphia, daring the lust hill? A. Yes. Q. What'were TUtton''s du tie+--had ho charge • of distilleries° A. I think he, with other du tin: • - Q. State whether, in thaiconver settee, you spoke to him in reference to not seizing , J some distilleries in Philadelphia for violating the laws? Mr. Drennan. *We object. Alderman. • Ohjection'sustained. slellumpton.l Do you sustain the oh-, jection generally 101 to this conversa tion Alderman. I kustain the objection to the last question;., Q, 'Dld you propose to Mr. Tutton not to matzoth° distilleries for *certain time, and that if ho did so some $60,000 could bo realiied by the operation ? Mr. Marshall.) Wo object. Alderman. I sustain the objection. Q. Were you present at any time when au 'offer was made to Mr. 'ration that if he would . not Interfere with the dlstlllerles ho would receive, in an en velope, withoutany letter being written, a thousand dollar mote, or more, every week .for several weeks. • ' Mr. Marshall.; We ' object.' Alderman. Objection sustained. • Q. Did you ever follow your profes sion as an attorney A. No sir. Q. Tho publication of yyour paper and you being in the Legislature, took up you atlme,llld• it? Mr. Marshall: We object. Alderman. Objection sustained. Q. Do , you keep any bank account at Harrisburg no# ? Mr, Man/hail. We object. Alderman, Objection-sustained. or t wo . ban Do. y kti la ou keep pia unt in one Mr. Marshall. Wo object. Alderman. Objection sustained. Q. Do you dot keep an account in the Allegheny 'bank in this city? . Mr. Marshall. Wo object. Alderman. Objection sustained. Q. making; this information did you make it for the purpose of having tho truth broug ht out? • A. Yes air. I was very much exci ted, and I wanted the truth brought out. 'Q. How long was it after the article was pin:dishedin tho Beaver Atums from which the thinmercial extracted, that you brought spit against the editor of the Annus. , Mr. Marshall. We object, and objec tion, sustained: ' Q. When ypu came to the city, and before it, did you threaten Mr Brigham with 'personal violence—threaten that you would kill him. Marshall. 'We object. • Mr. Manapten. I understand you to say that you did not answer the various guesticin because you wore so instructed by your couniel? 'A. That isithe reason. Q. Are Messrs, Manihalland Swartz. welder retained by you as your counsel? A. I insider them my counsel to as sist In prosecuting this case. Q, Have you. retained these gentle men with . pay or a promise to pay them for their services in this matter? A. cannel say that I have. Q. Doyen consider these gentlemen as your comma? Q. Did you get any one to retain Mr. SwartzwoWei for you? A. did not. -•- _ Q. Mr.'Swartzweldor a volunteer in this eastr7 Mr. Swartawohler. I will say that I ant not. Mr. Ilatnriton. Will you let In° 'ask I any other qu'estions Swartzwelder. I will not lot you ask any iniptrtineut question: . Mr.'ilainp on. 1 nover ask any ! pertinent guritions. C. W. lIATCIIELOR'S TESTI MINI% Q. Do yliu know Mr. Brigham?, A. I do. ' Q. H o d you a conversation with , him a few (lays before the publication of that arth.;•le? A. 1 cannOt Kw . positively the day I had:a coavemition with Mr. Brig ham, but I 'think it was tile day be I fore the publication. Q.. What did that conversation relate to? Mr. Hampton. We object. If it relates to this identical article I haVe no,objection, and it is proper; but, if it relates ta l ,anything.outsule of this I do object ,• • because we are here- to answer a sikvitic charge. Mr. Swa!rtzwelder. I propose to prove by Mr. Batchelor, that a short' time beford the publimtion of that article, he had. a conversation with Mr.,Brigluim the editor of the Pitts- burgh Conimercial, in which conver mition Mr.' Brigham stated certain things to Mr.;Batchelor, which were I afterwards repeated in this article I andistated that they all referred to Mr. Quay,or something to that effect. Mr. Hainpton. Now that might, answer if this was an action for shin- der,' for spoken ; but I main tain that ynu cannot offerns evidence I anything thatlirecedes the publica tion of a WI, connecting the party With it.. Prior to the publipition of a libel the 'Were- assertion or, .shite ment,' of a party cannot be coupled' with the pub li cation. • The objeCtion was overruled. Q. You' had a conversation with I Mr. Brigham. a few days before the article appeared, in the paper, in ref-1 erhnce to some eharges contained hn that paper: Did not Mr. Brigham in that universation, speak of these charges against Mr. Quay, which lie nfterwardSpublishml? A. 3fr.Brig ham did not say that he 'was going to publish that article. Q. What did occur ill that waver- Ration. %L I ' told Mr. BrighaM that I waY sort, to 'see hint pursue I the coursedie did in publishing eft- thin articles in his paper. 1 told him that they Were injurious to our far ty, He tlihn gave his reason for Hp ing so in a general way; that he satisfied there were rings whose oper ations would injure the party, and' he Intended to c'xpose them,tual In the course of the conversation the $13,000 or $20,000 Came up, and I understood It to apply, to Mr. Quay; this is about all that took place; Mr. Marshall, after your conVersa tion With IMr. Brigham, when you read that article in the paper of .De eember.9,2-4 0 you know to whom it , referred? • Mr:Hampton. That is the point I Propose raise objections to. Mr. SWartzwelder.. • The question here Is, whether this conversation with Mr.trigham relates to this $lB,- 000 matter and Mr. Quay and wheth er that article which he saw a few days after had'referenee to It. - Mr, Haimpton. I object. The wit ness don't say that .Mr. Brigham made thnehaige against Mr. Quay as to the $13 ,000 or tb1:1,000. His name was not mentioned. He may have understood what 31r.Drigham meant byte drift of his 'remarks, but Col. Quay's name -was not mentioned. Mr. Batchelor. ,fir. Quay's name was mentioned. • Mr. aricaptcat In reference to the $13.000 ur $W,000? Batchelor. Yes. life 3ittitshall. Then the remarks of Mr. Brigham to you relative to Mr. Quay and the $13,000 and the $211,000, and the article are thessundY A. Jolt about the same, sir. That I . conversation lied reference to ]if.r. Quay and the slB,ooq and MOOD. CROSS EXAMINED. Q. Capt. •Batchelsr what object had you in going to see Mr. Brigham? A., / went there WSW Mr. Brig ham about the course ho was pursu ing, and see if some : f, his - articieg couldn't be stopped as they were in juring the party; I Wanted to wolf it couldn't be fixed up. Q. Did you not go to see Mr. Brig ham as a friend of Mr. Mackey? • A. I did; but, 1 desire it understood, not at his request. Q. Did' you not say to Mr. Brig. ham that it would be better in the end if 'he would stop thesearticies? A. 'No sir, I did say that I thought these. things ought to be fixed up; that I thought ho and Mr. Mackey Were not so far apart as they iniagin ed, and that they should get together and have a talk over the matter. ' Question by Mr. Marshall. Did Mr. Brigham state any particular reasons for hiS Insellity to Mr. 31ack ? ey ObJectol to by Mr. Ilampton, and objection overruled. - A. Yes sir; shall I state them ? Q. What were they? A. Ile Said that Mr. Mackey had attempted to buy up a maJority'of the tbninicreia/ stock, for the purpose of turning him out. of his business. Question by Mr. Hampton., Did not Mr. Brigham give other reasons, aradid he not say that he believed Mackey had secured his election ns Trcitsurer by corrupt means ; that be belonged to a onrupt faction, and it was for that reason' he opposed him? A.Yes; Mr. Brigham said hi! be loved that'Mackey had used corrupt means to secure his election as State Treasurer, and that he WM opposed to him on that account. TESTIMONY OF MR. J. WEYAND. Q. Mr. Weyand, where do you rt... side? A. I reside in Beaver. Q. Aro you the editor of the Bea ver Atutus: A. t mu. Q. Were you the Miter of thalia -I)er on December Sth, 1869? A. I was. 1,1 copy of the Ant; us of Dee. Bth, was shown to witness and identified. The correspondence quoted from it in the amimercial was also shown wit neis.l • Q. Islluft article an editorial or not? Mr. Hampton. I object. Mr. Swartzwelder. I merely wish to knovi what It is. Q. Do you know who wrote that art Mr.' Hampton. I object to the_ question fur the reason that the wit nesr has a civil suit pending against him In Beaver county. I submit to the magistrate whether a man can be placed upon the stand to put him in jeopardy. Witnms.l prefer not to answer, ti.s I have a suit pending in Beaver Co.,'" and the fibsiver might tend to 'preju dice my case. Mr. MarwhaU. Look at that, (handing witness a copy of tho Pittsburgh Ma mercial,) do you know who wrote that article? t Mr. Hampton. That ho need not an swer. It is a matter of law. .7%h. MarshalL t did not ask him to say who wroto that article, but whether he knew who wroto it. Witness. I prefer not to numwer it. 3lr. Marshall. We don't ask you to rumwor It; wo only ask you whether you know who wrote Witness. I refuse to answer. Mr. Swartzwelder. Why do you refuse to answer this question. Witness. Because a civil suit is pending against me fur the publication, as I pre sume, of that same article. I believe that my answer might tend to criminate Me. 3lr.Swartxw•cWcr. In what way would it tend to erhninate you. Witness. I decline to answer. Aftor a rambling discussion, in which the counsel on both aides participated— Mass rs. Marsludl and Swartzweider insis ting that the question should be answer ed and that the witness be committed it it was net, and Mr. hampton maintain ing that it was an unheard of doctrine, and that ho would like to see any magis tnne in Pennsylvania attempt any such proceeding—the question was dropped, and tho witness retired. A desultory con versation ensued as to the continuance of the curse, the prosecu . !.! • thing re-a fix the 11. IStr. Hampton stated tt:nt as ho desired to consult with Mr. Carus _ahau, who wasalso. in the case, but had been-called to Washington on official •business, ho asked for a continuance of the ease, until Tuesday afternoon, by which time Mr. Carnahan would proba bly be home. Sonic further conversation ensued, in the course of which .Mr. Mar shall said the defuse could not Mier testimony. Mr. Hampton took the olr polite ground and cited Supreme Court decisions to sustain him. At the con clusion of this discussion, the alderman overruled Mr. Hampton's proposition, when Mr. Hampton asked—"lmes Lit honor overrule the decisions of thi,:sic• nreme Court?" [laughter.) Finally the vise was continued b day afternoon at three o'clock. ; _Pry Gothls. MEYRAN & SIEDLE, MEE= REINEMAN. MEYRAN & SIEDLE; Ng. 42, Filth Avenui I'l'l7z-4:um:lL 'lave ju.t opened vvecially for the com iftz lo.litlitvg untf.ually largo :old ch.; r.,lnit stool: of PINE JE WE 1.;1:. Yir WATCHES, DIA3II)NDS SILVER AND PLATED 'WARE. • Fine Table Cutlery, I•'renelt Clock\ Brun• 7.C9, Mu.;teal Itoxes, Nartlin'4, Charles Jacob's and Fred Sltw'4 Watehe.t. Aineriran Watches.' made b Appleton. Trley fi Co., .\llll.ll can Wateh Cm, E. Howard & Co , El gin Watch Co. • PIN . I: A .1/ERII :IN 7, Of 7;;Y, Muth. by SETA 111031 AS ora<;untnr:ucaw:taw, ly kept nn hand in our liaNetent, :nil winiseiale and retail. (cli dee s, ltycler's• made of Ohio, i. wow tuking th, lead. S. J. Cross & Co., itocErEs.TE.p, it comaantly for sale, %rialto:ale awl retail, at Lower Figures than any other Flour of the;sa <;ZrE74I, .3LaIT'V'" SIM in the County. CM NEW GOODS! Fall and Wlntei Weitr. I RAVE JUST RECEIVED A Da3V STOCK Or GOODS ON OE .. LATEST STYLES FOR FALL A NI) WINTER W Gpmienten's . FurniNhing Good CONSTANTLY ON NAND CLOTDING MADE TO ODDER le latest mad most hablonable stilts, and at abort puler. WILLIAM itracri, Jr.. BIItUKIZWATIZ. =XI Miscellaneous. CASE OR TRADE At tnatket prices ror 2000 BUSHELS OF OATS, 14.100 Iit.THILET..t4 0)1' Trirr% 1000 RUNTIELS OP CORN JAMES DUNCAN, Vulhit4m. - Heaver Co.. Vu. Wlio bow just ruccived one of the Jarge:4 and nio,t completo .tcx•k4 ever br mall& to Beaver county, cun•lating 4,t FOItF:It:N ANI) 1)(01Es'l1t DRY - GOODS ilats, Caps Furs, 'lll>OU'zil 01-sOtTIIING-, Carpets and Oil Cloths, la a rdwa-re, gUEENSWARE, Gizo•clini. - 1,1.E:5;, ' 46 \ 7tarro.+l Flannel, el ,tpward G . Hl.l :un, yn r:..:ui l llj rd Tartan Plaid t, and ujr.vard, Plain i•t utpl.tioy.4l., l'lt I N TSII .1 \7l 131 CENTS )lu , liu , tort , . atid 1:2. 2 *aid upw.irtl nor 11;3m "1"01.3..-I.CCO. Its deleterinu4 the health are annulled and strenzth to the suffering or bits restored by tiring LANGE'S PLUGS Tla.)- in,.; a 1,1,1-ant and p•.wertur tunic ut Ibrraapc rpl :Low t.iluttv.,.• Pat tith, 1569. It your druzl.kt ha-, not but it !Ile, ceiitq to u 4 and we plus. If, any paid. U. I. ANG E a: :•!,()N, l',•hti Thlrte,:ith -trt el., 1777X1117:1:JI, MEE HINKLEY KNITTING MACHINES, 0. 00. noi.t p••rr ct machine vot Itivenfeil widen nod lied( or point the tor. It will knit plate or rdilool. It will, knit 'dock- Itizii;7lrowei at., c. It I. cheap, and durable. It .eta tip If. own work, ‘,..4 but one noy illo. and require. no anju ll t a hatider. It will do the ”m•• work that the Lainh nurhtnu wilt do and etn.t• left tarn had' o. mulch and ha. not the tenth part of the mtelilnery to not of ordet. Circidaro and oaniple• mailed free on no- A.zetii. wattled. All inachlne. antevil. STRAW At.3IORTON GI:NE:IIAL ENT, No. 1.0 The Only Reliable Cure for Dyspep- sia in the Known World, Dr. i.harrx 4r..11 theriran by plaid Pale and ISne 7Y.c 7i, (braid( are a votive and In- Nibble e ani fur dyspepsia In Ito ninvi 11z . Zr.AVativg• rim.. and no nuttier of I • loot; iitaridlir. They vonetrine the wend abutle of this terrible and eXtt . rliiiltate it. rut awl branch furry They alleviat.• loom azony owl silent ttntTerin: Wan tunzue eats tell. tiny 111,31101,11 fit!' filth,. the 'pont tle•ttent to and Itnite rtowe, when every known 1111,.1114 Nth. to of roller. No form of tlysperoOn or Indigo-41m con 11,114 their pettetratill: fIoOW,T. 131 C. AVI!•;IIA I ca" Pine ' Tree Tar Cordial. 111% the N Ifni principle of the 19110 True, 01,1 lin ett its a 'torah tr p on t.. in the M. 1111,1.10,1 Of the tar, by .'ltch 11l luzlo r t nt.titt a properties are Irt tatut•d, It fun fzitattes th•• til4estln .3 or.:ans and restores Ito- upp Mr. It stren4tltt ns the titian ( tared 'yen to It liTirdl4, nod rnrit hes the 1,1 ,oa. I and t ,ts i. front the snstt.tu the corruption which 1 •Lrofta t brt ,a. at the long. It dl.-olv t 0 the ma cut or ph h 'rib wlllt h 1•11o1,4 III 1• air p lt , tet 'ell of the , :ax. I'n Iteatlo. , r'itt liar lets upon thr Irani- I tt onrf tee of the tang. Mid throat. pew •r ttlnz to anrlt et., 1 turt. 1111001(4 rill( 4(111 otillilt 1r,..1 10 • 1111(1I Itioli It t. the re-lilts of yea,. of prods and tsp lament or llt I. tot rt a to,ho :tenor,' with no-kite to.st.r,mee of Its p tuner to treth • f Mo. - in; arta pte,, If the {anent lute not too I ,Ig th I iy - , • tre • a.ll to the meat,. or,•ur.. • tbamanntion of the Lungs, (bithlt, Sore Throat anti Bre alt, Proneh it iv, Ltrer Onnplaint, _Blind and Idiot i lig PlieS,i4ll4lla,ll7olopilig ('Nigh, NA er 10 , i l l'. 1 nt died t