The southern press. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1850-1852, 1850-06-21
From the N. o. "Delta. y
TRIAL OF GEN. LOPEZ.


an alleged violation Of the neutrality Of the
United States.
The Court met at 10 O'Clock Am. The
accused and counsel present. The lobby
hled with large and apparently Interested
audience. :, 81 ..ls''s 80 M
I. z. Sigss recalled by the District At
Question: Have you had frequent inter-
views and conversations with Gen. Lopez
since his return, to this city?
Answer: have. l3'' 7; z
Question Have you or not, heard Gen.
Lopez declare and admit, in substance, that
he was, in the month Of May, the leader Of
Auxiliary expedition against the island Of
Cuba, and that he had an engagement with
the Spanish troops at Cardenas? ssg@S
Mr.. Sigur objected to answering. This
would not only expose link, but the main
, fact, tending to implicate him. y y ,.rs,4.r.,
Mr.. Henderson further objected that Mr..
Sigur, having been the legal adviser and
counsellor Of Gen. Lopez, any statements
made to him were confidential communica-
tons, and could not be extracted from him.
The District Attorney read authorities to
show that the rule in regard to such commu-
rications is, that he must have learned the
matter as counsellor, attorney, or solicitor,
and in no other way. II be were a party to
the affair, the witness could not avail him.
self Of this objection. q
MIR. Henderson replied, showing that the
relation between Mr.. Sigur and Gen Lopez
was that of confidential counsellor and advi-
SER. 1t would be a base treachery for either
him or Mr.. Sigur to betray the information
acquired by them through the confidential
relation of attorney and client, and it would
be tyranny in any court to attempt to extort
such information. III ia TIA
Mr.. Hunton replied-The gentlemen
90 not meet the question, as they do not
meet any. question. They came here to
meet this charge, but thew have been avoid
ingit ever since the investigation commenced
He only asked for information, obtained,
not conhdentially, but publicly, and in the
presence Of others. Gen. Lopez has made
apublc speech in New Orleans. May not
Mr.. Sigur be called on to state what he
heard in the presence of others, at convi-
val party or elsewhere'
9 Mr.: Sigur replied District Attor-
ney did not seem to comprehend the rule Of
the law Therul is, do YOU know the
facts from your client @ince the relation COM
menced between you, of attorney and eli
ent3 After that, all communications rela-
ting to the substance matter are protected as
confidential
Mr.. Hunton read authority on the other
side, that where the matters were not of a
confidential nature, instancing several, they
coudsbe required from the attorney.
n Mr.. Hunton also contended that the fact
OF what Gen. Lopez stated to the witness
would not be link in the evidence to impl-
cate the witness. Does the fact that Gen.
Lopez said he went to Cuba on a military
expedition, constitute link in chain lead
ing to convict the witness? I It is only as
to what Gen. Lopez himself did, and not as
to what Mr.. Sigur did. This testimony
could not tend to duplicate him.
Mr.. Henderson. Suppose Mr.. Sigur
should say that Gen. Lopez stated to him
that he regretted that he had not followed
the advice of Messrs. Sigur and Henderson,
and given the command Of the troops to an
American officer, instead of to him, Lo-
PEI, would not that tend to implcate the
witness The witness himself must Judge
Of the tendency Of his answers to implicate
him. 4a sl 5
lf Mr.. Sigur contended that the connection
of the witness with the alleged offence be-
ing established, he must certainly be allow
ed to judge Of the tendency of his answers
to implicate him. a,.sf
/, Commissioner Baldwin thought that the
answer to this question would not convict
him, and that facts which were not commu-
nicated to him con6dentially as client to at
torney, ought to be divulged. He thought
the question should be answered.
} Mr.. Henderson then stated that he had
another objection to this question us5
Mr.. Hunton with much warmth) pro-
= tested against consuming their time in those
miserable technical objections to testimony,
! on mere examining trial Y5 49,
a.G Mr.. Henderson was surprised at the Ian
guage Of the District Attorney, Here is
stranger, sojourning in our country, charged
q with high misdemeanor; and yet, because
we avail ourselves, in his defence, OF the
rules prescribed by our laws, the officer rep
resenting the Government complains of be-
ing wearied.s How do your proceedings
. differ from those of the Captain G. General Of
, Cuba, from that detestable system OF gov
3 eminent which authorizes its officers to blow
. out the brains of an unarmed man on the
Island Of Mugeres, and to extort confess
sions Of guilt by hanging man up to the
I nasts OF vessel-of a government which
is a disgrace to the ages How do the pro-
ceedings Of our courts differ from those of
] Cuba, if we are not to be allowed to avail
ourselves of all the exceptions prescribed by
3 law Mr.. Henderson then proceeded to
6 argue against the question, as being Lead
9 ing and improper one. By orders of the,
I President Of the United States, this prose-
. cution was commenced 1t was based on
an affidavit of the Spanish Consular afi-
2 davit which he thought had been most lie
3 gaily and improperly sustained by the Court.