The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1853-05-26


Mr. FENDALL continued as follows
Ihe nexttopic is one which seemed 10 be thought
mailer oil some force by The gentlemen on the other side
They took The trouble to bring before you the forgery in
dictment, and TO read you the names OF the witnesses
VINO were before The grand jury, and on whose tesli-
mony the bill was found They complain that OF these
Witnesses TWO only have been before you ana that you
must be satisfied IRON what they have said The stand
that the indictment could not have been found on their
evidence. Very well Them il must have been found on
he testimony OF the absent Witnesses The grand jury are
charged by the court at every term not 10 find bill eY
cept on such testimony unconlradlced by the de-
ience would produce conviction and the grand jury
are entitled 10 The presumption OF having acted accord.
ing 10 law Then 1t follows that, besides the evidence of
the defendants guilt which has been offered 10 this jury
there is evidence which not abe 10 bring before
you which The grand jury, on the responsibility OF their
oath, declared 10 be sufficient TO convict him. Among
the items OF the alleged persecution was a notice given
the part OF the United States the defendant during
the progress Of this trial. for taking deposons 10 be used
in the chancery suits. They were 10 be made by wit.
who had been examed before you and anx-
ous go away They had been fully and strictly cross
examined by the counsel for the defendant, who were
thus appriZed of all that they could prove. We did not
expect that the counsel for the defendant could attend
during the whole time OF the Chancery examination and
named such hours would enable them, either before
the meeting OF the criminal court or alter It's adjournment
for The day, TO be present The testimony was all TO be
taken in writing; each party might al ills convenience
| attend and the deposons were to be kept open ti
both parties satisfied. Where the hardship OF
thsl Ii the gentlemen intended to asa any ques
tons OF the than had been proponnded before
you, what would have become OF the witnesses al the
end of the operation?
The only deposition taken under the notice that
of Mr. Navarro They complained that this witness was
writing during his testimony when they were not look
| ing at him. Now, however important this inspection
may be jury in trial before them il has not hereto
fore been considered material in chancery proceedings
You will recolect lha account OF some msunder
standing between counsel as TO casual observation on
the subject offered that all which had been done should
90 for nothing il the counsel would fix time Tor IFS
being done again, when they could be present
They rejected this proposition as they did an oiier OF the
nl, Vrlnnt tha m rnn
Some days after this they called up Mr. Navarro again
and asked HIM few questions You wall recollect The
amount Of the new testimony OF this witness We need
not dwell the Williamson episode You recollect the
full statements made when was first introduced 10 your
notice. and its remarkable reproduction n the form OF a
suggestion 10 the court founded some mysterious
comm unicaton by telegraph, that efforts had been made
to intmidate this witness, and invoking opinion IRON
the reassure him. which opinion was also TO go
by telegraph. The teegaphc opinion was given, and,
presume, despatched, for the intnIdaed witness came
safely Washington in spite OF the two conssrng gov
ernuens But he was not put on the stand He came,
and--be went back again.
Mr. BRADLEY. Perhaps he was kidnapped before we
had an oppoIiuny of examining him.
The DISTRICT ATTORNEY, Perhaps so. Well let
him pass.
4 "Oh, breathe not his name
] Let IL the shade"
There are several other points which had designed 10
touch on, but | have detained you so much longer
than ! intended preliminary topics that ! will
now pass 10 the main subject These which have
spoken OF all outside questions but still they the
subjects of such frequent comment or alus'oos on The
other side that thought ii due 10 you gentlemen
OF the Jury, say something by way oil explanation, 10
show that the criticisms which have been made upon the
lgovernment OF The United States wholly unounded,
repeat that il have failed in thsit even yon should
think cannot fear that sou wl that there ~ ground
Tor complaining OF any act acts OF the government or
of any of it's agents-sll feel Certain that you Will not
suffer that view TO prejudice your mind in coming to a
decision the which is before you II these iunc.
,onaries, any of hem have acied improperly. they
are not irresponsible. They cannot escape uDpun.
I.hed done against law, thew VIII
be held answerabIe the law. Ii they have done any
act which, though not rendering them amenabe TO The
law shows them 10 be unworthy OF public confidence,
lthey can be removed from Office. No man do any
thing wrong in this country, thank Heaven, who cannot
be punished IN some way or other And, knowing ttaf
whatever you may think oil this elamor Of persecution,
you will suller IL 10 warp your judgment IN deter
inning The issue which you are trying. sis the defend
ant guilty not guilty" on the evidence before us :
/ | shall now address myself TO the charge What is
ni II is that the defendant has taken false oath, IN
violation OF the following provision OF The act OF Con;
gress OF March, 1873, in addition 10 the act entitled
AN act the prompt settlement oil public accounts and
for the punishment OF the crime OF perury(3 Stat l.
i 77l)
shall affirm falsely touching the expenditure Of
ted States he she shall, upon conviction thereof suffer
as for wilful and corrupt peudry"
The questions for your determination are, Did the
cused the oath set forth 10 the indictment and
was tha, oath false The indictment before YOU Yos
will have no trouble with the law, that having been set
tied by the court demurrer 10 the Indictment Tor
the defendant, however camorously asserting his limo.
nence, sd however solicous II might be supposed that
he would be 10 manifest that innocence 10 all mankind
nevertheless desrons TO get OIL, VI he could de-
murrer Bui the court overruled the demurrer, and held
that be must be tried the facts by jury OF this
try. Is he guilty or not guiliyl The indictment sells
out in substance most OF the avermenls made IN the de-
fendsn,'- memorial, and goes 10 negative them
Mr. r. here read several portions OF the memorial and
| Indictment
Now, II - not necessary for the United States TO satisfy
you that each and every OF these averments is false III
they satisfy you that airy material avermeni in the me-
when he took the oath, be is guilty this indictment 1t
ia dthcu 10 prove negative, and yet that is the burden
which the United States have taken upon themselves in
This prosecution. Tney have undertaken 10 show 10
that the oath by this s false that he had
not the mine which he swears he bad; that he had
The money which he sweaTs be invested in the mine ;
tnat the whole story OF his memorial is wully false Ii
swear TO statement believing IL TO be true, and
il turns ool to be untrue he does falsely but
ii he swear TO false statement knowing il 10 be false
he does falsely In this case, the very nature OF
the facts 10 necessarily makes the OATH ii false
one, knowingly and wliully false.
Before going into The evidence the sutls"t, invite
your attention 10 the different accounts which this de
iendant gave Of the extent of his claim You will recol-
counsel for the defendant before the board OF commits
sioners, stated IN his testimony before you that he
drsughted. the memorial after consultation with the de-
PENDANT and after examining the papers relation to the
claim which the defendant placed his hands and that
in the dranght prepared, the amount invested IN the
mines stated between two hundred and fifty and
three hundred thousand dollars.
rne amount of Investments ia put down m the memo
rial fled a, 1880 3oo This memor al was filed the
Goth November, 1910 and the oi that the