plice, he was privy to the whole affair. This last method of accounting for his knowledge would be conclusive on the sincerity and genuineness of the defence.
But the turn which Clingman gives to the matter must necessarily fall to the ground It is, that Mrs. Reynolds denied her amorous connection with me, and represented the suggestion as a mere contrivance between her husband and myself to cover me, alleging that there had been a fabrication of letters and receipts to countenance it—The plain answer is that Mrs. Reynolds’ own letters contradict absolutely this artful explanation of hers; if indeed she ever made it, of which Clingman’s assertion is no evidence whatever. These letters are proved by the affidavit No XLI, though it will easily be conceived that the proof of them was rendered no easy matter by a lapse of near five years:—They show explicitly the connection with her, the discovery of it by her husband and the pains she took to prolong it when I evidently wished to get rid of it—This cuts up, by the root, the pretence of a contrivance between the husband and myself to fabricate the evidences of it.
