The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1853-01-26
CITY OF WASHINGTON WEDNESDAY MORNING JANUARY 26 1853

iairest cases in The world Il did his head credits and
will not doubt his sincerity in The basis upon whscn nc
placed it, During the delivery OF his speech imaglnea
myself criminal court, listening to The defence o.
criminal, and that the gentleman was Trying 10 make
appear not that his client guiess, bui 'nat 'ne
prosecution malicious IL seemed thai ne wahlsu ~
mitigate the sentence OF the court the Judgment Oh tue
jury by pleading that The prosecution was ohe
without at all looking to the merits OF ihe case az.
And we ind too that is done very adfonly IN tbis
connexion, by assocatng the idea OF malicious pfosecu
lion regards Mr. Corwn. Says he 81 am not ms Zoe
nor is he my foe the member from ONO Mf ULpsl
say much J" Do you not the course which he IN
tended this thing 10 take, as 10 impress upon e pup
lie mind the idea that there was enmty and iii-ieelns
| existing between these two gentlemen and that lhe
whole proceeding here malicious the part oil tue
member from ONO, Mr.. OLDs Is 1t not evident that
be desired TO give that direction to The public mind
do not know what the relations between those two
gentlemen. have met and received them both as gen
tlemen, and know nothing OF their personal and poi
ica differences. have looked upon them heretofore as
equals, lar those matters were concerned Nor do
intend to inquire into their personal difficulties. But
| can say Tor myself as the gentleman from Connec
iicut Mr. CHAPMAN did, that | am not Mr. Corwins
Toe, and hope he Is not mine. have no reason TO
be his foe, have received anything IRON him
but kindness have met with him and passed The usual
ciyiles of gentlemen, andlnolhing unkind has passed
between The reason ! make this remark is that
am in as favorable condition 10 speak OF this
! transaction as the honorable gentleman from Con-
nectlcut Then, why do you not acqnt your man upon
The merits OF the not by nnuendo, by lndrecion
and by making false before the public mind, and
there your case! What was the other ground upon
which the gentleman relied IL was this, that the pro-
ceedngs were er parie. All A malicious prosecution
based upon an e1 pars examna'ion OF The witnesses
How does that fact stand: Was not Mr.. Curwin before
that committee! Did he not have the witnesses sum
moned, and did he not examine them9
MIR. CHAPMAN. The gentleman from Tennessee
misunderstood if he understood TO say, far
Mr.. Corwin concerned. that this was pa,ts
examination. made such iniimatlon; but said in
express terms. that far Dr. Gardner concerned
it was due 10 him to say that was er pars with the
single exception 10 which have adverted.
Mr.. JOHNSON. intended TO come TO that. The
impression made by what the gentleman said, that
was an er pa'se proceeding do not know what his IN
MI CHAPMAN. The intention was TO make myself
distinctly understood
and not his want OF clearness, and will let go
in that way but the impression calculated TO be made by
his speech that II an eI pa's proceeding. and
that the witnesses had not been s-examlned Well,
so far Mr. Gardiner concerned, there was no CT
pars proceeding Mr.. Gardiner was not on trial before
that committee, and this bill contains provision that
would punish Mr. Gardiner, so far as know. Mr.. Cor.
win the with whom the committee had 10 do; !;
and his connexon with the Gardiner claim was what the
committee investigating The gentleman from Con-
necticut mods his This is the true state OF the
case Mr.. Corwin present al the investigation,
cross-examned, and had most OF the witnesses sum.
moned himself So far Mr. Gardiner is concerned,
he upon trial at ali, but to get al Mr. Cor
wins connexion with the Gardiner claim That is what
we are trying TO do and how does the matter stand SO
far as Mi Gardiner is concerned He not trial.
and he was before the committee bat he was heard
by his counsel About the close OF The investigation,
MIR Gardiner writes letter 10 the c0mnilee IN WniCn
he speaks OF the investigation as being an eI Pa,s pro-
ceedlng and claims the right OF being heard. Dad not
the committee notify him that he could be beard and fix
day for him to come Did Mr.. Gardiner comei
Do you not that the two main grounds upon which
the gentleman from Connecticut Mr.. CHAPMAN relies,
show that his Argument is speclous made IN true law
mere Is no merit in his case That is the position which
he occupies We find IN this connexion that there has
been something said by gentlemen about the committee
going beyond the record What does tins resolution
say
Whereas strong suspicion upon the public mind
that claims been allowed by he late Mex
that Thomas Corwin Secretary Treasury been
| properly connected Therefore" &c.
How does the fact stand We are no, 10 investigate
whether Mr. Corwn knew that IL fraudulent claim
! (Which will come 10 drecty,) bat we are 10 investi-
gate whether Mr.. Corwin was Improperly connected with
The Gardiner claim. That Is the point Does not this
inyestis alton show that he connected with it, and
that he got par,--eghiy odd thousand dollars OF IL
think it does Is not bis connexon, then, with the
claim improper' We say that il was an improper con-
nexion, that was speculation, and thai was NOR
| ally wrong
| In the bill before what do propose TO dol We
intend say that legally such connexon is wrong, not
binding him more than ANYBODY else who has been guilty
OF the like offence The offence was improper
Why was it so! Dir. Corwin senator of The
/ United States, placed there BY the people 10 guard
the peoples treasury 10 take care OF their mpney and
also, one OF the Senate, with the President OF
the United States, make treaties with foreign gov.
ernmen,s. We find when this very treaty was con-
cuded between the government of the United States and
Mexico. on the 81 OF February, lsis, that Mr. Corwn
was m the Senate himself, aud acted IN his capacity
senator We find in this very treaty, remarked be-
FORE that three mil ions and quarter were sci apart TO
pay the claims of citizens of the United States against
Mexico We find that by this very treaty a board OF
commissioners was established We find that while Mr..
Corwn was seEator, when he acting upon the treaty
which made appropriation OF three and quarter mil
lions to pay these Mexican claimants, be received fee
prosecute claims before the very commissioners which
he assisted in creating, and got portion OF the money
appropriated out Of the treasury
/ Mr.. STANTON, OF Ohio | wish 10 know OF the
gentleman whether he considers that the committee
bound to inquire into anything beyond what had been
prsctsed by all OF The members OF Congressi whether
] he did not think they bound 10 show that there
something peculiar IN the case OF MIR. Corwin from
| that OF others
! Mr. JOHNSON. The gentleman from Ohio desires 10
know II Mr. Corwn acted differently iron other mem
luton he will there lind what were appointed to do,
and that was TO ascertain Mr. Corwn's connexion with
the Gardiner clam, and whether that an improper
1 connexion We have found out what his oonnexion
was with that claim, and II IS for the country and the
House to determine whether II Is improper
consider il such, from the fact OF his being
the time the treaty made voting Tor the appropra
ton to carry outihe provisions OF that treaty. and pros
ecung claim against the government provided Tor by
that very eaty and think that the county will so de-
| termine IT, . 80
do moi intend TO find fault with the report which the
committee ma ke here but | wish 10 refer 10 IT, The
committee 20 on and do what They have ascer'aned
| Mr. Corwn's connexion with the claim. They have
shown what it was, aud the country understands H.
This committee, alter going on ana summing up ue