Similar testimony, to the extent of a page or more of finely printed matter, Mr. Lamon attributes to Col. Jas. H. Matheny, of Springfield, Ill., an old acquaintance of Mr. Lincoln, an able lawyer and of high standing in the community. Mr. Matheny testifies that he never wrote a word of what is attributed to him; that it is not a fair representation of either his language or his opinions, and that he never would have allowed such an article to be published as covering his estimate of Mr. Lincoln's life and character. Here is what this gentleman has to say, given over his own signature:-- SPRINGFIELD, Dec. 16th, 1872. REV. J. A. REED: DEAR SIR--The language attributed to me in Lamon's book is not from my pen. I did not write it, and it does not express my sentiments of Mr. Lincoln's entire life and character. It is a mere collection of sayings gathered from private conversations that were only true of Mr. Lincoln's earlier life. I would not have allowed such an article to be printed over my signature as covering my opinion of Mr. Lincoln's life and religious sentiments. While I do believe Mr. Lincoln to have been an infidel in his former life, when his mind was as yet unformed, and his associations principally with rough and skeptical men, yet I believe he was a very different man in later life; and that after associating with a different class of men, and investigating the subject, he was a firm believer in the Christian religion. Yours truly, JAS. H. MATHENY. It is unnecessary that I occupy more space with the rest of the testimony, as there is none of it given over the signature of anybody, save that which is given over the signature of W. H. Herndon. All aside from this bears evidence of having been manipulated to suit the purpose for which it is wanted, and is either contradictory, or fails to cover the whole of Mr. Lincoln's life. Judge Davis, for instance, is made to say: "I don't know anything about Lincoln's religion, nor do I think anybody else knows anything about it." Of what value can the testimony be that is prefaced with such declarations of knowing nothing about the matter? John G. Nicolay is made to testify, that "to his knowledge Mr. Lincoln did not change his views after he came to Washington"; and yet he states in immediate connection that "he does not know what his views were, never having heard him explain them." Jesse W. Fell either testifies, or is made to testify, to Mr. Lincoln's skeptical notions. And yet Mr. Fell admits that it "was eight or ten years previous to his death" that he believed him to be entertaining the views of which he speaks, "and that he _may have changed his sentiments_ after his removal from among us." All this would be strange kind of testimony on which to convict Mr. Lincoln of murder in the presence of a judge and jury. But with such evidence it is sought to convict him of infidelity.