The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1853-06-04

Wright Col Thomas, and Dr Dass-all, all are 10 DC
dscreded and 20 for nothing when weighed in the scale
against John Charles Gardiner Are living in the days
OF reality not Is possible that this witness
could have supposed Tor moment that his absurd
daciiy could impose on the minds OF any jury il lie,
however, illustration of the case. He before
you in the spirit il which this project OF public spo
alton was stsrteda determination 10 il out 10 The
bitter end.
Without going into all The details in relation 10 the
non-exislence OF the pretended mine, will call your
attention TO few only OF them. You have heard
something about steam engine, and there is charge
for II IN the mining book. which is supported by
statements IN one or two OF the false dispositions filed
with the commissioners, OF $500, including the cost
OF transportation The defendant brought witnesses
here, and you are 10 say how far their testimony
confirms this most extraordinary statement OF his
You heard the evidence in regard TO the impossi-
almost inaccessible county Suppose you mag inc these
steam engines could be got there, you see the enor
nous exaggeration OF price, which OF itself not only
likes the stamp OF falsehood on the particular state
ment. but throws suspicion OF falsehood on every
thing else contained in the mining book MI Jonas
Is. Ellis, witness Tor the defendant, went on !he
which could be made in Liverpool would cosl ABOUT
$12 600 Mr. William Ellis, another OF ms witnesses,
who was more familiar with the SUBJECT brought Tue
cost down to four or five thousand dollars all. how
ever far short OF the cost which this man put
down in his book and which was allowed and paid TO
him II there had been any steam engine, would there
not have been trace of it found IN these mines
which it said were found and explored by Abbott
and Slocum? 1t was said that everything has been
burned out surely the could nave
If the steam engine had been purchased would there not
have been some evidence Of that fact! II was said to
have been bought in Liverpool Ii that be true, could
have been got into the country without the payment OF
duties; and could evidence be obtained at Liv
erpoo that il had been sent, or at Ianpco Of It's hay
ing been brought thilher? The defendants own wit
nesses discred the statement in the mining book and
show that he has put the cost OF the steam engine down
at twice or three times and may be, four times what 1t
possibly could have cost There is not particle OF ev.
dence OF its having been purchased or carried TO Lagn-
nas; and, gentlemen, know all these statements
could be proved if they were true.
The accused has that he had 500 men employed
at his mines and in his protest he auds himself as pa
iron "who supports upwards OF 500 families" Many
of those 500 mast have had famllies SO that, ac
cordng to the usual statistics of population there must
have been sort of mning town there containing about
2 600 people, which would be population larger than
that OF any town in the neighborhood.
| Mr. MAY. Three times as large.
give the evidence we desired TO give on this subjects but
enough out, though of negative character to show
you the OF the defendant could not be true
II there had been 500 men there somebody other wosd
have known Of the aggregation OF SO many persons and
SO many families; Here were the commissioners who
went to Lagunillas--men employed on high and re-
sponsible du,y-who underwear, every species of hard
ship and privaon in order 10 faithfully discharge the
trust which had been contded to themcan you suppose
that they left any effort uned 10 get at the truth in this
matter that if there any evidence that 500 families
had been congregaed there, they would not have found
it? The evidence offered by of inquiries by the COM
missoners, and Of the 10 those inquiries, was
excluded by The court But allowed to question
the witnesses as to mining towns and you found that
not one OF the commissioners was ever able TO hear Of
any such mining town in all that country; though, II
seems, by Abbott and Slocums evidence, the commits
sones passed within five six miles OF the place Why
has not single one OF these 500 men been heIe' Why
has Of the persons who signed those dispositions
been here' WHY'S it that there is nobody here who
can say he the mines when in operations II
was. Of course expected that this thing would strike
fendant: "You will not let the United States prove
anything by hearsay and why do you not bring before
to testify 10 that fact i" He does not bring solitary
witness of that description We know OF one ind-
vidual in court, and of one only, who can be sup
posed TO have seen the mines in operation; bat they
do not ask him question about them. Why are none
of those "men OF science" here' Why do they not
come here and tell the Jury that they have seen the
deposilons' What is the answer 10 this Why, that
the Mexican government Is in conspiracy with the gov
eminent OF the United States 10 punish this man. and 10
prevent him lrom making out his innocence here; and
that they induced the project OF Rio Verde to issue an
order to prevent him from entering that department and
procuring testimony. That they say, is the why
they could not bring their witnesses hitber Presidents
! Fillmore and Arsa put their heads together and made
Francisco Fernandez issue an order which prevented
them from getting any OF those people here You Ieco-
ect that the order never executed even supposing
to have been genuine, of which we have proof The
witnesses for the defendant say that the acade showed
il 10 Them but we have not particle OF proof that Francis
Fernandez signed it, There which
lead TO infer that he did not sign it, We have seen
his forged by the defendant TO the mining title
/
the order, be would have that it executed
Nothing practical came from the ORDER false.
II was shown TO the defendant, and that the end
OF IT, He did much afterwards he had done before
he went TO the department and into the mines. AT all
events, that the only thing done the part OF the
Mexican government to prevent his bringing some one
OF his five hundred laborers men OF science" here
Why did he not bring the New Leon witnesses here
| Where is VIM Penn Johnson , where VIM. Johnson
where James Boswell Smith They are not Mexicans,
bu; foeigners-the two first Eng shmen and the last
Scotchman. The defendant has assortment of depo.
nenls from many countries-England, Scotland Ireland,
Spain, Mexico &c Why OF them here IN proper
person Are they sf flesh and blood or men OF
straw Why did not the New Leon witnesses come be-
fore you Fernandez had power them. 1t does
not appear that the authorities oil New Leon issued any
order TO stop them from coming or The defendant from
going after them. And such effort, il made, would
foreigners, not amenabe 10 the Mexican govern.
ment And besides, they reside TO the United
States. There is evidence of any attempt made TO
bring them, any one OF them even here. Now gen
tlemen, let look at the celebrated order of Francisco
Fernandez
| 1.-THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY read the order, and pro-
ceeded Il
This order stops Gardiner on the supposiiion tina,
be would not obtain the necessary requisite to enter
of that sort. Me.srs. Abbott and Socum might
have got letter OF that character application
TO our minister, and have brought some Of these wit.
nesses here for Gardiner even If the Mexican govern
ment were unwilling TO let charged with the crimes
imputed TO the defendant enter it's territories One OF the
offers on the part OF government 10 The defendant
TO procure Tor him sale conduct through the Mexican
Territory. The order, notw outstanding the application
OF for passport, TO travel anywhere in the State
nm nrdp IN tn h..