The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1853-04-08

Mr.. FENDALL. i know that that was used as al
argument to the court the other day, but that wal
not. apprehend, the ground Of the decision Of tht
court
The CouRr. Can anybody suppose that if one o
our Secretaries should choose to any indi-
vidual of crime in Of his reports TO the Presi-
dent or to Congress, such document could be given
in evidence to prove the guilt Of the party thus
cused? Such suppostion ia the most abhorrent
thing of which l can conceive.
Mr.. FENDALL. We do not offer this document
with any such view. We merely offer it to show
that such and such duty was performed by a
Mexican official, in pursuance of law of that
country requiring the performance Of such duty;
that that duty was performed and that il was per-
formed with certain result ia fact for the con-
sderaton of the jury. It is not offered with the
view of proving the defendants guilt.
ted as evidence to prove his gui9 And, if that is
not the object the court ia at loss to perceive what
other object. the prosecution can have in view.
Mr.. FENDALL. According to our view of the
as it goes to prove the negative which have to
establish What will be the effect of that proof is
not matter at present under consideration.
The CouRT. If that is to be the law OF evidence
in the United States, ! would as soon live under
the government of Turkey, or of any other the
most tyrannical government in the world.
Mr.. MAY. Your honor will perceive that this
is IN act OF the supreme government of the State,
and under the law of the State, and before any
controversy begins, it should be remembered that
it is an act which the law requires to be done This
we have proved by the witness.
The CoURT. know all that.
MIR. MAY. Our law does not required any thing OF
The CouRr. Our laws require Secretaries to
make reports to Congress-; and now, suppose that
any Secretary in one of his reports should de-
nounce any individual as being guilty of theft or
murder, is it possible to conceive that such de.
nouncement in such report could be adduced as
evidence of the mans guilt?
Mr.. MAY. In such case that would be a mere
opinion of the Secretary making such report, and
of course could not be evidence.
The CouRT. And wherein is the difference? Is
not this link in the chain of evidence? And must
it not be proved by the same legal rules as any
other link in that chain?
MIR. MAY. This is merely report of certain facts
There is nobody's name mentioned in it, Nobod y
is impeached. The officer, whoever he is, is merely
reporting to the proper authority in such case
tain statistical information, which he is called upon
to do without alluding to the name of any one
and all desire to prove is the facts contained in
that document. We think the evidence is peril
nent to the ssue but of course it s for your honor
to decide.
The CouRr. / understand that it ia offered as
negative evidence of the defendants guilt, and as
such it should come to the court under the rules
which the acknowledged laws of evidence have
prescribed.
Mr.. CARLIsLE. If your honor please, it is exactly
the case of the Shanghai chickens.
The CouRr. Before decided this question the
other day took the whole matter into full con-
sideration, and cannot now reverse the decision
then made. The court therefore has already de-
cided that, if authenticated with all Formally this
paper could not be evidence.
Mr.. MAY, Ito the interpreter.) Show the witness
that red book, (the book of mining accounts,) and
ask him to read the fret and last pages. (Wit.
ness having examined them. Ask him if, under
the laws of Mexico regulating the duties of projects
in San Luis Potosi the original of such document
is to be found in the offices of projects?
ans. According to the existing laws of San Luis
Potos, the projects have faculties more than in
the administrative or political order; and this be-
ing book of accounts, as is supposed, of the bust
ness, which was deposited at the request of some
creditor, which undoubtedly gives origin to ju-
dicial continuation between the creditor and the
debtor; it is also evident that this same book
not be found legally in the possession of any pre-
feet. nor could this functionary legally put upon
it the monstrous certihcations which are found on
the first and last pages of this book.
Cues. Ask him to say why he terms them 'smon-
strous certiications?
Ans. Because, he says, political authority GER
hfying at the request OF some creditor to it, he
keeps the book of accounts in his possession
is to say, he sees that political authority certies
to having mixed himself up in judicial business.
On the last leaf he observes another inaccuracy not
less great, and it is the same project who certies
the amount Of what he calls "totaI debts"
Ques. Has pref ect the faculty to certify to any
such thing under the laws of that State?
Ams. The project that has certified this has com
mited 30 great an abuse that he merits the forma-
this extremity has laid aside the laws that exist
in Mexico.
Cues. Ask him how that paper is authenticated;
if it is authenticated like the deposition which ne
examined yesterday?
Ans. Asthe certifcations of the declarations and
those certihcations which found in the book re-
fer to business of a distinct nature, it cannot be
said that the forms Of the certificates are Identical
Cues do not ask him as to the forms, but if the
names of the persons are the same?
Ans. He says no. Here is Don Manuel Verasti-
gui not mentioned in the declaration which he saw
yesterday; but Mr. J. Pho Gutierrez is the same
that authenticates the document called the "min-
ing tite; and he says the same with regard to the
secretary of the project of Rio Verde.
Ques. Ask him if the Governor of San Luis Po
tosi certifies that book?
Ans. He says he does not see any signature of
the Governor of the State of San Luis Potosi to it.
Cues. Ask him whether, under the laws of Mex
leo, the books of private mining transactions or
accounts are kept by an officer of the government
or has any government officer supervision of
Mr.. CARLISLE. By the word except" suppose
you to mean care the entries to be made?'
Mr. MAY. Yes.
An.: According to the laws of Mexico. as ma
ton, the supreme government comedies the owner
ship of mines in favor of the party who denounces
them, or acquires them legally. The owner of the
mine conseque ntly has the privilege or liberty of
keeping his accounts in private, apart from any
thing else, wihoutthe necessity Of the books being
kept BY any public functionary.
Cues, Now ask him whether, by any law in force
in the State of San Luis Potosi, the books OF ac-
counts of mining transaction required in case
of the failure of concern or of the owner being
expelled from the country, to be kept in certain
public place. or by certain public officer; and if
30, where. and by whoms @
Ans. He says he will speak Of the case of failure
of which he knows the laws. In the case of expul-
sion he does not know in reality If there be any
law which comprehends the case particularly.
Quss. Does he know Of any law which requires
such books to be filed in the manner described?
Mr.. BRADLEY. Do you mean in the case of ex.
pulsion, or not?
Mr.. NAV. Yes. sir, in the case of expulsion.
ana. He says by no means in case of expulsion:
that to take mans papers in such case would be
conRscation OF property, which ia clearly and posi-
lively prohibited by the laws of Mexico; SO that.
in case OF expulsion. should person leave the coun
try, he names bis agent or attorney who takes
charge OF his Interests, completely independent of
the authorities, who do not. mix themselves IN In
that matter This practice ia confirmed by the
case OF expulsion Of General Bustamente. General
Canaiizo. and General Santa Anna, ali men of
property, who have been expatriated. and The
government have never taken possession Of their
Mr.. BRADLEY. But these are all Mexican citi-
zens -~~~- o''1
& Mr.. MAY. How. ia it in The case of foreirners7
Ans. In the expulsion of stranger the anne
tning would take place. In the case of failure in
buslness il would be different.
0nea Then ,,rdnr.t.,I