Abraham Lincoin.

HIS LOVE OF TRUTH ILLUSTHATED, &C

In another letter from William 11. Hern don, Abraham Lincoln's old law partner, are some fresh reminiscences of the great war President, and also a letter of Mr. Lincoln's neycr before published. Some of tho stories ho tells about Lincoln are very interesting, 'hat me illustrate to you, he says, his love of truth. Thomas Lin coln, the father of Abraham, was twice married. His first wife was JNTancy Hawks, the mother of Abraham. His second marriage was to a lady by the name of Johnson —a widow with three children. Tho second marriage was in 1810, when Abraham was ten yeais old. Ho had a step sister, Matilda Johnson, nearly his own age. About the year 1825 these children had grown nearly to manhood and womanhood. Heretofore they had roamed in the wild woods together. But now Mrs. Linelon forbade Matilda going with Abraham, when he went to chop wood, or maul rails, or rive boards. One morning Abraham took his axe and maul and went into the forest to -daul raila. 'Tilda saw him start, and was determined to follow. So, after Lincola had been gone some time, she darted down tho path, stealthily over took him, sprang upon him, putting her knee in the small of his back, and clasping her arms around his neck, thus bending him backwards, and threw hnr to the ground. Iv the scuffle, Tilda fell on the shaep edge of tho ax and cut her foot badly. After stanching the blood, Abra ham said to her; ' What will you do now ?' ' Why,' said 'Tilda, ' I'll tell my mother that 1 fell on the axe, and tnat will be tho truth, won't it, Abe ?' ' Yen, that will bo the truth, but it won't bo the whole truth. 'Tilda, tell tho whole about this, and trust ycur good mother's forgiveness,' said Abraham. This little story needs no comment.

ANOTUEB STOKY. Again lot me give you another incidont illustrative of Air Lincoln's sense and love of justice. A gentleman named Chandler, now of Chandlerville, Cass county, 111., moved from New Y"ork to this state in 182!). He entered, soon after his arrival, under tho Acts of Congress, eighty acres of land, and it was then tho custom among tho old settlers—a custom as strong as law—that each man had a right to enter a3 many as 120 acres adjoining his first entry, and in addition thereto. About tho year 1832 a kinsman of Chandler came to Illinois, and stopped with him six monthsorraore five of charge. He was told by Chandler and others what was the custom among the people, and woe be to him who violated it ! I have seen the old setrlers arinocl to tho teeth, with riflu and . knife, to dul'end and enforce this custom. Woo to the speculator who violated the .law! By this custom Mr Chandler owned eignly acres u'ljommg his first-, entry. It was so rich, so fertile and lay SO fairly to tho sun, and was so justly and evenly divided between tho tree and pniirio, th'it his kinsman fixed his eye upon it. So, gathering up all that he could borrow, in addition to what he had honestly niailc, he started for the Land ofllco in Springfield ono morning by .daybreak. Mr. Chandler, when informed by liis neighbors of this plot against him, said it was impossible. He was soon, however, convinced of tho truth of their statement. So, catching his fleetest horse, he put spur for tho Land-office, about thirty-five miles distant. His neighbors gave him the money to enter his eighty acres. He ran his horse as rapidly as possible for about tweney five miles, and when within ten miles of Springfield, he overtook two young men —one a short red-faced man, and the other a long, tall, uncouth looking lad—both utter strangers to him. Chandler's horso was quite exhausted, and so was he. Ho halted for a few moments, and was asked by one of them why this hurry? Chandler told them tho story, wlicn tho tall young man who was riding a fleet horse, said: ' Stranger you take my mare; she is fresh and yours is worn out; put her under whip and spin- and she will take you to Springfield in one hour —won't she. Green ?' ' Yes, in a short sixty minutes,' said Green. • Beat the scoundrel to the Land-office, by fill means. We are all strangers, but your face looks right, and I'll risk the mare. We will all meet at Ileradon's store in Springfield, in two or three hours. Coino, be off, quickly,' said the tall young man. Mr. Chandler and 'the stranger exchanged horses. The kinsman, supposing that Chandler was ignorant of his purpose, rode leisurely along, conversing with those he met, so that Chandler got ahead of him, and arriving in Springfield in tho short sixty minutes, walked into the Land-office, threw his hundred gold dollar's ringing on the table, and entered his eighty acres of land, much to his joy and subsequent profit. Well, who was this tall, uncouth young stranger? Who was he? It was ono who loved justice and fair _ play, honor and truth—it was Abraham Lincoln. —' Boston Globe.'

A MOTIVE.

Pride of Henago, pomp of power, Heap liithoaoiu- ou ttio drone : lie hli ill loso Ilia (strength, who nover Uses it for fair (.ndcavour; Brief his hour.

Loud Lome,

The chatacter of a dry goods dealer can be measured by the yard. Before arithmetic was invented people mul« tip lied on the face of the earth.

Drifting.

TOSSED ABOUT ON THE OCEAN OF LIFE

Stie was a fragment —a bit of wreck or sea-weed, drifting about on a great ocean, whicli sometimoa bore her calmly forward, and again roared and raved around her and took malicious pleasure in dashing her against the cruel rocks. A girl of twelve or thirteen—ragged, forlorn, wicked, and drifting on and on and knowing not whero, oven if she cared. Sin there ; poverty there ; •wretchedness and misery there. Everything there in heart and mind but a bright hope. If she had ever seen one happy hour in her life, it was some hour when she sat in the sun, without tear of the foot of a brutal father or the fist of a drunken mother. If she had ever thought tls shade her eyes and peer into the future, as some starving, drifting sailor might draw himself up and scan the glassy sea for sight of sail, she had seen nothing but darkness—not one single hope that she would evor be belter fed or better loved.

Hearts which beat under rags sometimes almost cease their beating to think of the future. Eyes peer into the mist shutting down over the path—shadows spring up and make the way darker, and a sigh and a curse sets the heart free to boat again. It is awful!

It is terrible for men and women and children, each with soul to bo judged and punished and rewarded, to float on the ocean of uncertainty—to drift near to green shores—to be caraied by some current almost to the base of tho beacon light—to feel tho sandy beach under their foot, and then be carried to sea again, with night shutting down to hide them from rescue, Every city is such a sea. Every such sea has its bits of floating wreck and cruel rocks and reef.

Matted hair, ragged garmonts, the play mate of the vile and, an offspring of the wicked and depraved, sho heard a hundred curses to one kind word. There was no one on the green shore to cast her a line. There was no ono at the beacon light to understand her heart. There were scars where sticks and clubs had forced to obey. Thero was hunger and woe and wicked ness, and the tiny splinter, shivered from some great hull, was a toy for the vagrant currents and eccentric eddies and roaring whirlpools which beset tho sea of vice, Her offence was not great, yet why send her back to a basement den to starve and to receive further scars ? Good food might bring good thoughts. Better treetment might make her heart bettor. Imprison ment might be salvation. When the audience went out a hand had dipped down into tho bubbling seeth ing ocean un<i lifted up the bit of wreck. It was tired of floating, The treacherous reefs and jugged rooks were bruising and reducing it. It may drift again, but it will ba stronger, and its path may be more clearly marked.

The sun shone dimly through tho curi ous old windows whose panes look down into the court room. The shadows danced across the floor and played over the wall. There were dark shadows and light shadows. By and by, when the sun shone stronger and brightor, the shadows joined hands and held firmly to the wall in curi ous lines. A gray-haired old man, look ing from his reverie, saw that the shadows formed, words. He read:

' If yo shall save ono soul, your reward shall be eternal !' Wasn't it strange ?

Circumstantial Evidence.

SOME OF THE FAMOUS CASES OF HLSTOUY.

THE ENIGMAS IN THE ADMINISTRA TION OF LAW AND JUSTICE.

Wk doubt if there ever happened a more melancholy case of wknljis termed 'judicial murder' than the famous case of Eliza Forming. The tragic history of that un happy .young woman, though well remem bored, by old Londoners, is probably for gotton, or at least but little known, in the CJnited States. Eliza Forming was a fair girl of 22, of more than usual intelligence for one of her class, bright, coquettish, but well disposed and amiable. The daughter of a poor couple wuo dwelt in Hi«h Hoi born, on the very spot where Day and Martin's blacking establishment now stands, she was employed as cook in the family of a Mr. Turner, a law stationer in chancery Lane. That family cnosisted of the Turners, man and wife, two appren tices named Gadsden and King, Sarah Peer, a housemaid, and Eliza Penning, the cook. One day the father of Mr. Turner went to his son's house to dinner, and Mrs. Turner ordered Eliza to make some yeast dumplings. When dinner-time came the three Turners sat down at tablo, and began tp discuss tho savory dish. The dumplings had scarcely been tasted, however, when all three were seized with sharp agonizing pains. The dish was taken out to the kitchen, and there Gads den, one of the apprentices, partook of it. and also fell violently ill. Eliza herself uoxt ate of the dish, and was attacked by the same strange symptoms-. The appren tice King, and Sarah the maid, who hail dined earlier, did not taste the dumpings, and were not ill.

The physician who was called declared the symptoms of the sufferers to be those of poisoning by arsenic Then every component part of the dish of dumplings was examined. It was clear that the poi s.on. was npt in the sauce, of which the

elder Turner had not partaken. Neither was it in the flour, for a pie crust made of the same flour had been eaten by King and Peer with impunity. Some dough of which the dumplings were made was ex amined, and poison discovered therein. It appears that Turner used arsenic for killiu:? rats, and was in the habit of leaving it carelessly in an open drawer. Suspicion fell at once upon Eliza Fen ning, and she was arrested and arraigned on a charge of attempting to poison the Turners. From the first she earnestly protested her innocence. It was proved that she, and she alone had mixed and made the dumplings ; the circumstantial evidence went to show that no one else could have had access to them until they were served upou the tablo. She had been in the kitchen all the time they were, there most of the time alone. Here, then was proved, opportunity. It was shown that when the apprentice Gadsden was on the point of eating some of the dumplings, Eliza urged him not to do so, saying they were cold and heavy. It was in evidence that Eliza had not taken the poisoned food until she had observed its effects up on others, and it was thence inferred that she cither did it to coaceal her crime, or with a suicidal design. It moreover ap peared that Eliza's statements about the matters were inconsistent, contradictory, and in some instances untrue. She de clared that the poison must bo in the milk and not in the dumplings. Now the milk had been fetched by Sarah Peer. It was thence inferred that Eliza was trying to divert suspicion from herself to hor feUow servant. The analysis proved conclusive ly that the arsenic was in the dumplings and not in the milk. To further disprove the presumption of innocence raised by her eating herself of the poisoned food, it was shown that she had shortly before had a hearty meal off a beefstake pie, and, therefore was not likely to have eaten the 1 cold and heavy' dumplings, as she called them to Gadsden, because she was hun gary. Having tried in vain to persuade people that the poison was in the milk, she turned around and declared that it was in the yeast. The yeast was proved by analysis to be perfectly pure. Here, then, was a group of important circumstantial elements. Opportunity was proved, so was an instrument (the arsonic) at hand in a drawer to which she free access, and a deshe betrayed to con ceal her crime by diverting suspicion to another, and by telling untruths. Upon the evidence as we have sketched it, Eliza Fenning was convicted by the jury, and sentenced to death. The case however, created so wide-spread an agitation in the public mind, that justice hesitated to exe cute its fatal decree. The utter absence of a conceivable motive was a serious blow in the case. Why should this light hearted, amiable young girl, whose worso known fault was her coquetry with the apprentices, poison a whole family ? The great Irish advocate, Curran, then in the height of his fame, exclaimed in burning oloquence against the horrible cruelty of her fate. She was reprieved for three months, in the hope that new evidence would transpire to Have her. Nouo was forthcoming. She was executed amid the greatest excitement throughout the metro polis ; and on a warm July day she was borne, amid the sorrowing faces of ten thousand spectators, and her pall upheld by six young girls robed in white, from hor humble home to the graveyard of the Foundling Hospital. One who lived amid the scenes, wrote, long after : ' Poor Eliza Fenninjj! so young, so fair, so innocent! Cut down even in thy morning, with all life's brightness only in its dawn! Little did it profit thee that a city mourned over thy early grave, and that the most elo quent of men did justice to that memory. For more than half a century the guilt or innocence of Eliza Fenning was a disputed point. Then the confession of the real murderer, came out, and hor innocence w is established beyond a doubt.

We need not emphasize the imny examples in which the identity of an ac cused person has been mistaken by positive and honest witnesses. Those who are old enough to remember the trial of Webster for the murder of Dr. Parkman, will recall that several witnesses of the most perfect good faith swore very positively that they saw Dr. Parkman on Washington street, in Boston, at three o'clock, or thereabouts, on Saturday afternoon, when it wasproved, and appeared afterward by Webster's confession, that Dr. Parkman had ceased to live before noon of that day.

A singular case of mistaken identity occurred not very long ago at the Old Bailey Court in London. A young ram was arraigned for a serious crime. It was alleged that the crime was committed ou a certain day, which we will say was the 10th of March. A number of persons swore po-ilivcl7 that the prisoner was the criminal, and a very strong web of evidence clospd around him. The identity, fit least, seemed fully proved. The prisoner, who defended his own sasp, did not cross examine the prosecuting witness; and when the case against him was closed, he announced that he had no witnesses to call. He simply requested the Judge to order the records of the Court for the 10th of March (the day on which the crime was committed) to be produced. It then appeared that on that, very day he was being tried at the Oldßßailer3 r for another offence, of which, by the way, he had been acquitted. This indisputable proof of a perfect alibi of course, put an end to the case against him, and he was at once dis charged.

The illustrations of the various phases

circumstantial evidence are, of course almost numberless; and we can only select here and there one worthy of study for some peculiarity, ot incident, or character, remarkable either for rarity or mystery. Two cases entirely dissimilar yet both putting into bold relief the bearing of indirect evidence, merit brief narration. Motive to commit a crime, as has often been said, is difficult of measure ment, since crimes have frequently been committed from what appear to the ordinary mind very inadequate motives. The murder of Madame Pauw in France about ten years ago, shows on the other hand, how a conspicuous and powerful motive, in the absence of other conclusive evidence, sometimes puts justice success fully upon the track of the criminal. Mad ame Pauw was a widow with three children, Who^had an intimate friend in Count de la Pommerais. This titled personage was in need of money, and had a head for scheming. He planned a fraud upon eight insurance companies, and persuaded the poor widow to become his instrument in it. Her life was to be insured ; she was then to feign dan gerous illness; and, while lying appar ently in a serious atrait, the insuranca companies were to be pursnaded to change the life policies into annuities. The Count advanced the premiums ; the policies were made out transferable by indorsement. Madame Pauw was then induced to indorse them to him, and also to make a will in his favor. The next thing was for the widow to pretend to fall ili, which she did; but, instead of the policies being transformed into annuities, the poor lady died! It was a grave blandor of the Count to tell the doctor, when he came in, that Madame Pauw had fallen down stairs ; for not only was this denied by abundant testimony, but the post mortem examination betrayed the presence of poison as the cause of her death. At once thereafter the Count de la Pommerais came into the possession of the half million francks which accrued under the policies and the will. Here occurred a singular incident in the trial. It is clear that if the Count had intended the fraud in earnest when he proposed it to Madame Pauw, and really designed to obtain for her an annuity by it 3 means, thus securing to himself a life income, he could have had no serious motive for killing her. And this was actually his defence against the charge of murder. He declared, and tried to prove that he really meant to carry out the fraud, and that Madame Pauw's death was a catastrophe and an accident. Thus, in trying to clear himself of the grave crime, he confessed the lesser. But the proof contradictory of his case was too clear ; he was convicted and duly executed. It has been said that a very important link in the chain of circumstantial evidence is that of opportunity. To show want of opportunityjthatis, an alibi, is an absolute answer to the strongest indictment, and produces ! a fatal flaw in the chain, Opportunity to commit the crime must be either proved outright or inferred by the most conclusive presumption. There never was a more striking case illustrative of this then that of the young Scottish girl, Madeleine Smith, whose trial at Glasgow may easily be remembered byi many readers. It may be said that the ! trial was one of the most interesting in British judicial annals. Madeleine Smith had engaged herself to a'young French man named L'Angelier. It was clearly proved that she had tired of him, and was anxious to disentangle herself from the connection. But L'Angelier clung to her and refused to be rebuffed. There is no doubt that on several occasions, just previous to bis visits, she had purchased poison, or that always after these visits he was seized with severe illness. On the 17th of March, Madeleine returned to her house in Glasgow, after a brief visit to some friends. The next day she purchased some arsenic, ' to kill rats with,' as she said. The arsenic bought, the next thing she did was to write to L'Angelier, inviting him to tea on the evening of the I'Jch. He happened to be out of town, and did not, there fore, get the note until it was too late to accept the invitation. She wrote again on the 21st, urging him to come the next evening and saying: ' I waited and waited for y in, but you cimenot. I shall wait again to morrow night, same time and arrange ment.' This note L'Angelier received. So far the proof was clear. It was also in evidence that he started from his lodgings in excellent health on the Sunday evening, and that ho sauntered in the direction of Madeleine's house ; this was at 9 o'clock. Twenty minutes later bo called on a friend who lived out a short distance from hor residence. Here the evidence utterly failed, and left a blank for four hours and a half. At two in the morning, L'Angelier was found at his own door, writhing and speech less, and in a few hours ho was dead. The aulopsy betrayed a large quantity of aisenie in his body. But between twenty minutes past 9 and 2, no human being could despose to having laid eyes on him. Madeleine herself denied that she saw him at all en that niulit ; nor was the slightest proof forthcoming that she did. She was put on trial for the murder of L'Angelier, and, although her desire to get rid of him—that is a motive; her purchas of arsenic—that is, possession of an instrument similar to thst wh;ch was found to have been fatal; and her notes of invitation —that is, a fact from which a strong pi'obability of a meeting between them that night was established—were

fully proved, thTlSe^T^ said, in effect, «l ij^lift > you to prove it. Therefore r 6' **l The Scottish verdict of "ni^^J ber free bat did not c £^' tarns of deep suspicion air hefof, lhe story of the Danish „ mjud I dalrecords,audoSSi t is sometimes too quick^ appearances, and neglect «? s^i n, of fabricated evidence V^J clergyman of middle age, \ smaUprimitive parish mV2 6Jo ?ei and irreproachable in char!?' * generous and devout, he *J£ h a fiery and ungovernable Zl*»*\ was universally revered, aS!l^ pastonal cares, as i s n o t JiVa^d Scandinavian countries, by !>»t modest farm. Hehadall^ and comely. A farmer in aft & village, one Morten Bruns »?>: bad reputation, sought this I °ff'll marriage, but was Ejected » ?i by4he,paßtor' Soon after J? of his, Niels Brans, entered ft!1 * service as a farm hand wLi imprudent and quarrelsome^^ altercations occurred between!? e^ master. One day Soren fiJJ^ idling in the garden. A nnZiftt! when the pastor, his hot qSle»!: the bettor of him, struck sff«* times with a spade, savin? >7 Seti thee, dog, until houS}?l feet!' The man jumped d a^' into thewoods, and was not /J k f/Ti 6? SUltor ' Morten Jr brother had thus mysteriouslydi, * bo dly charged the>storw& and offered to produce coaS^' of the fact. Soren was therefor ?f when the following evidence 2? against him A man testiHediu night after the quarrel, he saw! I in us green dressing go n Jf nightcap, digging hard in thegi' was also proved that, search havin?i made in the garden, a body had \1 earthed, undoubtedly that of Nil his clothes and ear rings unon ii servant girl testified not .only to heard Soren repeatedly threaten t JSiels, but to having seen the pay out into the garden on the fetal ni his green dressing-gown and niA btill stronger evidence was p M L the effect that the parson had been ss his green dressing-gown and ni4 carrying a heavy sack from the near by into . the garden, cnain ot evidence was apparently cot against Soren: and the poor parson' sealed his own fate be declaring &, believed he had killed Niels | unconsciously. He stated that he wont to walk in his sleep. He had ft texts, written sermons, and visited church while in a state ofsonuamW He must, therefore, have found tlei dead in the wood while thus uaooosr and have buried him while in thiscoad- To be brief, Soren was found gA executed.

Twenty years after, Niehßranslu up again, alive and well, grown not gray. He recounted how Mj W Morten (now dead) had concocted a to fasten the crime of murder oe pastor, in revenge for the rejectee suit. A body had been disinterred dressed in NieVs clothes; the'dre gown and nightcap had been ater. used, as we have seen, and;rep's Morten, dressed in them, hadbrotgl corpse in the sack and buried it k garden ; and then, his plot carriedol had given JN iels a purse and bid begone, and not to return, or i; should answer for ifc. Mekhaikei: of the way till Morten's death andtal returned with this terrible tale.

The Man with the Extermins.

He smiled blandly as he halted fc moment in front of the City Ha!!, looked like a man who could palm 0! most anything on the public at 1% profit, and yet leave each customen grateful mood. He had a tin. trabkit hand, and as he sailed down,'lsij avenue the boys wondered wktktr trunk contained tax receipts or horse! raent. The stranger halted in front( residence, his smile deepened, §1 mounted the steps, and he palled the I

' Is the lady at home ?' Jie inqiiß the girl who answered the bell. The girl thought he was the■« taker, and she seated him in the p: and called the lady of the house, v the lady entered the stranger rose,lk and said:

• Madam, I have jusfc arrived in town after a tour extending clear dot Florida, and wherever 1 went I received with glad welcome.' * Did you wish to see my !husk she asked as he opened the tin traat ' No, madam! 1 deal directly witt lady of the house in all cases. A W will appreciate the virtues ol&]& minator and purchase a bottle wkeroil will order me off the steps without?

ing at it.' , ' Your—your what ?' she asked' 4 Madam,' he replied as lie placed a ounce phial of ddrk liquid on the pa^ his left hand ; ' madam, I desire » your attention to my ' Sunset Exterminator.' It has been tried?1 * aud. abroad, and in no case has it» to- 1 ' !

Evening1 June 24, 187G