The Wichita Daily Eagle

PECKHAM GIVES HIS SIDE
He Explains the Charges Made Against
Him in the Reeds Matter.

Colonel Peckham of Winfield who
was charged with misappropriating
$800 belonging to Judge Isaac Reed, for
the appeal of his case to the supreme
court writes the following letter to the
Winfield Courier concerning the matter:

Winfield, Kan., Aug. 26, 1895.

To the Editor of the Winfield Courier:

In your issue of Aug. 24, I find copied
from the Topeka Capital an article condemning
my alleged conduct in the
Reed murder case. In the Kansas City
Journal of the 22d inst. I have noticed
another article on the same subject,
based also upon a gross falsification of
the facts. At the time of the last trial
of the Reed case in the district court
of Cowley county, Mr. Isaac Reed, residing
in Massachusetts, and the father
of Judge Isaac G. Reed, had on deposit
at the First National bank of Winfield
$5,000 and out of that sum, by his
direction that bank paid to me the sum
of $800, to be used by me in paying the
necessary expense of procuring evidence
of non-resident witnesses, in paying
the cost of taking the case to the
supreme court, and in the employment
of additional counsel in the case if I
deemed it advisable. It is not true,
as charged, that the money was to be
paid to me upon certificate of the stenographer
or that the payment to me
was in any manner, clandestinely or
fraudulently obtained. As to the other
counsel in the case Mr. Elliott, of Wellington,
and Mr. Beekman, of Arkansas
City, it was entirely unnecessary to proclaim
that they were free from any
blame in the matter. It was impossible
for them to be charged with any responsibility.
Neither the custody of the
fund, nor any control in disposition was
entrusted to them, but solely to myself.
Out of the sum so placed at my disposal
I have paid $465 for the purposes for
which it was confided to me, and have
in my hands the balance, remaining
ready to be paid on demand to the person
from whom I received it, or to such
other person as he shall designate. Of
the amount I have so paid, $350 was
paid to Mr. R. B. Cook the official stenographer,
for transcript of the proceedings
upon trial, necessary to be embodied
in the defendant's bill of exceptions
and the bill of exceptions was
duly completed, signed and filed in
proper time and Judge Reed's right to
an appeal stands thus fully protected.

To take and file such appeal in the supreme
court the law allows two years
from rendition of judgment, and the
judgment in this case was rendered at
the September term, 1894, of the district
court.

The only remaining question in the
case is the perhaps natural inquiry as
to why I have not before this time filed
the case in the supreme court. I cannot
at this time without answers which
I have not yet received to letters I
have written to Judge Reed at Lansing
and to his father in Massachusetts,
fully answer this question for the reason
that they involve matters which
can only properly be discussed between
lawyer and client. I can only say at
this time that I had intended to file
this case in the supreme court about
the first of October of the present year,
and that in my judgment and for the
best interest of the defendant it ought
not to be filed before that time.

As soon as I knew of the attacks being
made upon me, I wrote at once to
Judge Reed and to his father, requesting
to be relieved from all further responsibility
in the matter, and to have
the money remaining in my hands and
its application to such use as they desire
confided to some other person.

I have in no way imperiled or sacrificed
the interests of Judge Reed in this
matter, and have faithfully stood by
him, without fee, during three trials in
the district court and one in the supreme
court, and do not believe that
the public or the editorial fraternity
will sanction the unjust charges against
me when informed of the facts.

That they have been misinformed is
evident, whether from sources prompt-