The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1853-03-30


have been z? rs
4as. An in place of z
Mr.. CARLISLE. Did he say the proper way in
spanish-the Castiiian mode was to spell it with a
Ans. He does
Mr.. MAY. Does be say the Castilian model
Ans. There is a difference between the English
and Spanlsh-the Spanish nameis spelled with a 2.
Quss Did Guzman spell his name with z or g
on the documents which he (witness) saw?
ans. he always wrote it with z, because il
was spelled with z: and that Mr.. Guzman was
an educated man and wrote it properly.
spelled it with z 'e1
Ans. There is no doubt of it. Every Spaniard
VINO has middling education knows how to write
and spell Spanish; and Guzman being an educat.
his name.
CUES On those official documents he has seen
with Guzman's name to them was it spelled with
a or ans? -
ans. 1t always had a z.
CUES Where was it you saw the official docu
ments with Guzman's name to them?
Ans He has seen them in San Luis Potosi anc
| IN Saitiilo, where he resides.
CUES. Did he ever see them in the State Depart.
ment in San Luis Potosi?
Ans In the city of San Luis.
Raes. but did he. see them on the archives O
the department in San Luis, in the State Depart
| ment?
1dns. He has seen them there
Gues Among the archives?
| Ans. Yes, he has.
CUES. With Guzman's name to them?
dns. With Guzman's name.
Cues. Is that signature to this paper 1.-THE mining
tltie' &c in the handwriting of Guzman?
| ans. No; it appears to him to be not.
Cues. Is it his belief that it is not?
Ans. 1t is not, ii. e., the handwriting of Guz
| man)
Cues. Ask him is he acquainted with the seal Of
the State of San Luis Potosi?
| Ans. He knows it.
)1feQ Hou1 Ion no
has known it.
CUES. Has he seen it often?
ans. He has very often, and has document;
seaied with 1.-THE seal of that State.
CUES. Has he those documents with him?
seal. VA"
Cues Does be know the seal of the State as il
Ans He cannot exactly give the size of the seal
at the date named in the question, but he remem.
oers the seal which was lastly used in San Luis
Potos has not this (peinting to the seal the pa
perez line around it.
Cues. Let him examine this, (the seal On the
papers, and ask him If that was the seal OF
San Luis Potosi9
Ans. He does not remember having seen this
seal. If it was ever used there it must have been
many years ago.
CUES. Was it the seal used there in july. 1852
Ans He says ne can say it was not used as the
Mr.. MAY offered to show witness a paner con.
tanning impressions of the seal of San Luis Potosi
with certificate in writing from the Secretary of
State touching their genuineness. The object was
| to show whether the witness identity them 10
| made from the genuine seal. He would show them
to the witness with without the certificate as
| the court mig ht direct
Mr. BRADLEY asked if the witness had ever coon
this paper before?
Mr.. MAY said he had
MIR. BRADLEY objected to the evidence. These
| impressions were made in November 1852,
MIR. FENDALL replied, and MIR. BRADLEY re-
joined
The Court. The United States offer to show four
Impressions of seals of the State of San Luis Potos
1t is objected to- The impressions of the seal can.
not be allowed to be used evidence The seal
attacked as false was made in the year 1850. The
witness has said he has had seals affixed to doom
ments, and testified to his knowledge derived from
them. He has said that the seal attacked was not
The Impressions offered were procured in Noyem
Der, 1852. They cannot therefore be used to re-
fresh the witnesses memory of facts that existed or
did not exist before or in July, 1850. The impres.
slons OF the seals are excluded
Mr. May said he was now going to show tho
witness seal which was anterior in point of date
MIR. BRADLEY. (After looking at the proposed
paper) We object to that.
Mr.. MAY said he proposed to pursue the course
laid down by the court, and would offer seal dated
February 20, 1850. The other was like it excent
that it had later date, namely August, 1850
Both were ante fitenn motaan.
Mr. BRADLEY objected to them from the appear
ance of the papers themselves. They had the in
tias of several of the United States commissioners
upon them, and appeared to have been procured in
Mexico by them since this case had been pending.
The court had right to know how those initials
came to be there before the seals were exhibited to
witness.
Mr. MAY said the initials were put upon the ma.
pers In order to identify them, and it made not a
particle OF difference whether they were there mr.
not. All that the court had a right to know was
that 1t was paper anterior to the finding of this
Indictment in point of time. He proposed to ex.
hibit to the witness the SEAL and ask him whether i
was the genuine seal OF the State of San Luis Potos;
| in the year 1850.
Mr.. BRADLEY said he did not suspect the naners
beususe they bad the initials of those gentlemen
upon them except that their having those initials
| upon them showed that the papers were furnished
to them, and he did suspect any papers that were
put into the hands of those commissioners while
they in Mexico, for the purpose of being used
in this case He further stated the grounds of his
objections.
| The Court. The United States offer to exhibit
two impressions of seals severally bearing certif
Gates attached dated Goth February, 1850, and Au.
gust 1885, and to ask the witness they genuine
| The impressions cannot be exhibited as evidence
| They would, by themselves, prove nothing. A
| paper question of handwriting cannot be in.
troduced for the purpose of comparison; if paper
ia iegihmately in evidence for other lawful ends
on either side of the case, the jury may compar re
| it with the contested handwriting-U. S. vs Wall
March term, 1547, of this court. These Impressions
stand on the came foundation. They cannot be
| intended for any purpose but comparison with the
seal assailed, and are, for that object ipadmis.
| sibie.
Mr.. May offered to vary the statement of the
question by proving that the initials were put upon
the papers in the Office of the Governor of San Luis
Potos for the purpose of identifying them also to
remove the post hten mota,n gu posng that obiec-
ton would be raised
The CoURT did not think that, assuming the facts
stated by Mr.. May, it varied the objection. The
ground was that paper could 20 before the
jury for the purpose of comparison, and that was
the sheer purpose, 80 far the court could Judge
The court then adjourned
In the report of Mondays proceedings, pub
lIshed in Tuesdays paper, the following para
graphs occurred TEF
Mr.. MAY said that he had seen Yesterday for
the first time in the Republic account of the pro
ceedings of Thursday last, by which it anneared
that the court had directed its remarks an tn the
rritability and senstiveness of counsel entirely tn
him. ~
'Tbe CoURT said he did not a.nderstnnd ,n,,ch
about It; but he remarked to Mr. MAY that he was
too sensitve.'' ~
1t should read
The Court said he did not recouect much about
it; but, &c. o' "0oo'
EFFECTS OF MusIc.-The effect of music on the
/ al