The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1853-02-02

sioners and as / had been infsxmed, was not ,
lawyer; and that he (Gardiner) had certainl,
counsel enough. He replied thai that was his owl
judgment, and t!.at he would MOI employ him, AMI
with some strong asseveraiion tbat if tie commits
! sloners thought proper to rejfss his claim the,
might do it; that he had once wo sed for his Iivinf
ana DE would do it again. i left this citv abou
tue 7th or Sth of March, 1850, for South Carolina
and returned about the Goth of April. While wa,
absent Major Lally employed by Mr. Ed ware
Curtis, az MIR. Curtis informed me himself; hs
agreeing to divide with Major Lplly his fees which
were hye'per cent. submit copy of the origi
nal contract between DIR. Gardiner and mysef
which bears date the 28th Junc,s l849 The origi
nal was before the committee Of the Senate. The
copy submitted is a true copy, and is hereto an.
nexed, marked Exhibit No II. 1t will be seen bv
that contract that was to receive fifteen per cent
j on whatever amount might be awarded. said tc
Or. Gardiner that it became necessary to employ
other counsel would Go 80 without further charge
to him i employedth Hon. Thomas Corwir a.
assistant counsel, and agreed to pay him five per
! cent. out Of my own commissions. had no con.
sutasion about the case with Mr.. Curtis or Major
Laily; with the latter never had evena CONVEX
i saton. With Mr.. Curtis had occasional CONVEX
sations about The case, but never consultation in
the meaning of that term as used by lawyers
4 With Mr. Corwin had frequent consultations be-
fore ne accepted his present Office; any after
/ wards On one occasion, after Mr.. Corwin ac-
4 copied that ofhce,I called upon him to consult
4 about this and some other cases in which we were
engaged. He said that before he accepted a mace
in the Cabinet he had closed his connection with
i those cases, and washed his hands of them and
that ne could not in good faith even consult with
me in relation to them
/ Question by the Committee. When we're the first
i dispositions filed? Were they filed with the me.
mortal, or afterwards? 2.
/ Ans,cer II think they were filed with the me.
mortal; am certain they were filed about that
time am the more confident of this because the
only reason why the memorial was not filed imme-
dlately on the meeting of the Board in the spring
OF ls49 was that the copies and translation of the
! book of account of the mines and some other pa.
pers presented were not finished at that time, and
1t was desired to present them all together.
The first six dispositions, viz: Juan Soto, Antonio
! Marin, William Penn johnson, James B. Smith,
/ Sebastian Pacheco, and William Jackson, were
| presented with the memorial, or about that time,
to the best of my recollection and these were all
! the dispositions in the case when it was declared
| valid
| Question by the Committee DO you remember
when the dispositions which Dr. Gardiner pre-
sented after he returned from Mexico were filed?
Ans,cer.-I cannot give the precise date. left
Washington the 10th or 18th of October 1850, and
| returned en- the 10Th of November, 1850. During
my short absence DIR. Gardiner returned from
Mexico, and the papers had been presented before
| my return. My impression is that the titie-deed
was among the papers last presented; but the date
of the official certificate to that title-deed will
show whether it waa presented then or before.
In answer to question by the committee wit
ness says, that Mr.. Corwin was employed by me
| in May, l84S. Mr.. Corwin went into the Cabinet
| Of Mr. Fillmore on its first formation, in july,
1850; after that, so far as know, he had no con
| nexion with or agency in the cases, but refused
| even to consult with me about them. 1t is known
to everybody that prior to Mr.. Corwin's going in
| to the Cabinet he was member of the United
States Senate. The dispositions above referred tn
brought from Mexico by Dr. Gardiner on his last
| visit, were filed after Mr.. Corwin went into the
Cabinet.
Question By the Committee. the first de.
positions taken under your Instructions, or pre-
viousiy? 80
AnsUer.-I think they were taken subsequent to
| my instructions, and were brought here by a per-
son sent from Mexico by the agent of DIR. Gardi-
ner, who arrived here iust before the meeting of
Congress in 1849, which confirms my opinion that
thsy were presented with the memorial. 1873
Question By the Committee. Were the titIe-pa-
pers to the mine before the Board when they deci-
ded that the claim was valid? g
-Ansuer.-My impression is that they were not
in the complete form in which they were after
wards presented; but that there was short off,
cial certificate OF the existence Of such title.
Question by the Committee. WAS Mr.. Thomas
win consulted by you in reference to these in
structions as to the testimony required?
Ans,D9.-I had full consultations with Mr. Cor
win about the whole case. Mr.. Corwin and my
self, however, wrote separate instructions. | oh
tanned the originals of both instructions from DR..
Gardiner month or six weeks since, and handed
Mr.. Corwin those drawn up by him.
QUESTION By the Con.mittee.-What dispositions
or testimony were presented with the account
book and memorial of Gardiner to the Board?
dnstDer.-As well as I remember, the fret six
dispositions, above referred to, and think some
papers certified by Mexican officers relative to
Gardeners expulsion and the printed order expeI-
ling all Americans from the department, and the
protest of DR.. Gardiner.
Question By the Coumittee.-What papers did
Dr.. Gardiner submit to you when he first consult.
ed you? At.Y g
4nsacer.-The book of accounts, the order for his
expulsion, and the official certificates referred to-:
his protest. and mass of depostions, generally if
urifp
were afterwards presented, and stating substan-
TALLY the same facts afterwards put in the
form prescribed by the Commissioners. These
dispositions not being in the required form, others
were taken from most Of the same witnesses Some
of the witnesses to the dispositions brought by Dr.
Gardiner from Mexico, and first shown me, could
not afterwards be procured by him; but most, if
not all afterwards presented in proper form, were
brought with him when first met him here, but
not in the form in which they could be used.
Question By the Committee. = What was the differ
ence in the form? Il
Ansacer.-They were in the ordinary form of
dispositions, without any statement of the age,
residence, place of birth, and occupation of the
witness; or that they had no interest in the case
and that the officer before whom they were taken
had none; and other matters required by the rule
adopted by the Commissioners. f$ 5se
Question By the Committee.-Do you know any
thing of Mr.. Corwin's purchase of an interest in
this claim?
Ans,cer.-I do, as have heard it from both par
tleS i uo negotiation anu contract were DV MIR.
Robert G.. Corwin, in January or February, 1850.
l did not know until some months afterwards, that
Mr.. Thomas Corwin had any interest in the pur.
chase. DIR. Gardiner consulted me as to making
the contract. Iadvised him to do it. My reasons
for that advice were, that he was obliged to re-
turn to Mexico, and he had no funds; that thought
from what he had told me, that with the money
obtained from that sale he would be able to COM
pound with creditors in Mexico, who he told me
had extorted upon his necessities, and thus indem
Nifty himself for his loss on that sale The other
reason was that the claims presented to the Board
were three or four times as much as the amount
appropriated, and it was uncertain what the pro
rata payment on the awards would be. The gene
raj impression at that time was that it would not
be more than fifty per cent. The Messrs Corwin
gave for the fourth of the claim $22 900, and
relinquished, of course, their commission on that
fourth, and gave, as / understood from them, a
premium Of five or six thousand dollars for the mo-
ney they paid Gardiner. Of the money received
by Gardiner from this sale he paid me S 5000 on
my fees, and the Corwins, as understood, So, 900.
Question by the Committee.- You say the Corwins
paid FIVE or six thousand dollars premium for the
money they paid Gardiner. TO whom, and for
what purpose, did they pay that amount?
Ans,oer.-To Corcoran & Riggs, of whom thew
borrowed the money, or large part of it, as they
informed me. .a
Question by the Committee.-How much money
did the Corwins pay Gardiner for the fourth thev