The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1853-03-16
THIRD DAY.-MARcH IA.

THIRD DAY.-MARcH a.
IT the opening of the court, Mr. Bradley proposed TO
proceed with the argument 10 the court upon the point
raised on Saturday by Mr. Carlise against the admission
of the memorial and Iurdt testimony before The Jury
The prosecution ntialed that il had mol concluded with
its testimony; and after some time, il decided TO go
on first with the evidence the prosecution desired TO in
troduce; accordingly,
George Evans was called and sworn. and testified as
follows: was one OF The commissioners appointed 10
settle the claims against Mexico according 10 the
walton of the treaty of Guadalupe Hdago.
Mr.. Fendall. Were you president OF that board
Ans. Strictly speaking, there was not president Of
the board The law recognised no one as president
was first named, and therefore acted as chairman.
Cues. Was the claim OF George A. Gardiner before
the commission!
Ans There was a claim in the name of George A
Gardner
Cues. Look al that paper, 1.-THE memorial,l and see
whether it was before the board
Ans. have no doubt that that paper before the
commissioners. wish 10 say however, that it has not
been in my custody, and that there marks OF my
own upon IT, was very familiar with all the papers in
this case, but only speak OF this paper from It's gen
era appearance. | have manner of doubt that this
paper acted upon by The board.
Cues. Was there any other memorial of George A
Gardiner before the board, on which they acted
Ans Toward the very close of the commission, a
paper presented after the had been adiudcaed
upon. confident IT was after the adjudication, be-
1t requested that certain portion OF the amount 10
Mr. Bradley Unless the United States produce that
paper, We would rather not hear any OF lis contents
be called memorial at all
Mr. Bradley. Yes, sir but we would frs, like 10 see
the paper.
peri
Ans. 1t was stated just now, that according 10 my
recollection was near the close OF the session se
moral was presented. by the date of the filing that
i must have been about year before have recol.
lection OF seeing the paper produced until about The
close. 1t appears 10 have been filed before
Mr. Bradley. The only material point is whether it
filed before alter the ADJUDICATION
Ans. think It was II never came 10 my knowledge
before that have recollection OF that second memo.
rial till about the close OF the session.
Mr.. Fendall. | will now speak of the third paper Is
that one Of the papers which were filed
Ans. 1t is. This was paper filed by Corcoran
growing out of the transaction, showing what was
Corcorans interest in the claim The date OF this paper
is March /, 1850
Mr. Fendall. Then, that is The only memorial on
which you acted applying 10 the merits OF the case
Ans II the only one OF which have any knowl.
edge.
Cues. Will you state TO the court whether George A.
Gardiner examined before the commissioners on the
subject OF this memorial
Mr. Bradley 1t would hardly be fair 10 ask The wit
ness whether he was examined the subject OF the
memorial, unless his attention was specially called
toit
Witness. Mr. Gardiner was examined once before the
commissioners, and several OF his counsel present
Mr.. Fendsl When was that3
Ans ! cannot be precise as to dates but think il
must have been in the spring OF 1850.
Cues. you recollect who his counsel were
nus ulhN osb Nduug thompson was one, M r.
Curtis, OF New York, and think Messrs. Thomas and
Robert Corwin.
BY the Court Any one else
Ans il is possible that Col Allen was present bur
cannot say positively whether he was or not
Mr.. Fendall. How long did Gardiner remain befoe
your
Ass, ! cannot state very precisely, br think for an
hour or
Cues, Was he sent for by the commission
Ans; No. ! can hardly say he was sent for Ii was moi
usual Tor claimants 10 before the
and either be examined testify in person. Had this
been allowed there would have been no end to our PRO
ceedngs, This, however, a case OF considerable
magnl'ude-one about which the commissioners were
anxious 10 aiuve al The whole truth. We were in The
habt OF admitting counsel before the commission for an
nouf every morning to answer obviae any difficulties
mat might arise We had, on former OCCASION asked the
counsel several times regard 10 particular
OF The claim, stating points of difficulty, expressing our
might entertain. Sometimes they would explain and
answer and sometimes they would express themselves
unable to answer until it suggested-I do not know
by whom whether by OF the commissioners by the
counsel-tha DR. Gardiner would be able all
these questions which the counsel could not answer.
After little consultation among the commission Il was
ntimated to the counsel that DR. Gardiner might be adj
United If he fit subject himself TO such inquiries
as might be put to him. Accordingly on future day,
DR. Gardiner appeared before the commission This was
exception usual course OF proceeding DR. Car
diner attended, his papers before ia, his memorial
and all his proofs believe that that occasion the
counsel did not cay anything AT all believe that one
OF The counsel undertook to ask a question, and That
checked him. and sad that the question was not mat.
for discussion that Gardiner there 10 answer