The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1853-05-16

i
suppose we were going castsrly or southessteriy.
l cannot be positive about the points OF the con-
| pats, but it went nc r6ss our course. 90
| Qwes Where did you strike the river again!
| Aps We cassed a little brook near La Florida
We saw the river again between La Florida and .
| place called Alamos. - !. y sd. COS 81
Qae. Could you see the general course OF the
Ams. Yes, sir; we saw 1t of to the left OF US.
Qses. Do you remember the next stopping-Placs
| after La Florida! Us er..1 i.s,a afi
Ans. think it was among the mountains
| Ques. Do you recollect the name. OF the placer
| Ans. do not at this moment. 60, ...,..,t
Quss. Did you see any peach trees there?
fAns. Yes. sir. ~
| Qs&s. Did you see anybody shooting wild
| pigeons therel -.ss-ro - ~
| Ans. Yes, cir; recollect that it was in gorge
W. W. Coreoran, recalled. 4fs
| Mr. MAY. Did you pay any sum of money to
John Charles Gardiner after the award OF the com
missouers was made payable to his brother
| George3 - - +f rE Ia
| ms presume we did. There was a credit Of
$40 900 in bis favor granted by his brother; $4,000
! of which, think. were drawn.
Cues. Do you know Of any other funds which
biz brother had beaides thisl
| Mr.. BRADLEY. II that rebutting proof?
The CouRr. You can only show the money paid
4 to George A. Gardiner after the award, and whe-
Their any was paid to his brother.
MIR. BaADLEY. Was not that evidence in chief
| if evidence at ALP .5el t.
The Couar. You asked John Charles whether
| be had any interest in the claim of his brother,
and he answered that he had not They may sat
sfy the jury, if they can, that he had an interest
| in il.
Witnsss. George A. Gardiner had $4,000
with us before the award was made.
| The CoUar. That was the amount arising from
the sale of one-fourth of this claim before 1t was
! allowed
| Ans. Yes, sir.
Here the witness read the letter which he had
written to Mr.. May, stating that George A Gar.
4 had rtv hr,fh er nhn Churl Of -
| Of credit for $40 0O0.1 .. -.,.
Ques When was the letter Of credit given, and
| when paid3
Ans. do not know when it was paid, or how
[Tbe witness wasthen requested to produce an
extract from his books with reference TO the mat
| ter.
Examination Of James X. Partridge, resumed.
| MIR. MAY. understood you to say that you had
an interview with Don Manuel Verastegui at Rie
| Verde!
Ans. Yes, sir
CUES Handing the witness GARDENERS red
book Of mining accounts presented to the board
| and on which his claim was passed Did you see
this red book and this paper shown to Don Manuel
/ Verastegui at Rio Verde?
| Ans. did. -. Ill
Qws. Did you show him his signatures to ,hem
Qu<s. What did he say about them?
/ MIR. BRADLEY. Do not answer until the cour
tells you. will submit to the court that the ex.
animation OF MIR. Partridge in that respect is not
Mr.. MAY. We propose now to prove what We
rastegui (who ia the author of these paPers) sale
about them.
The court will recollect that we only offered two
passages in this red book for the purpose Of show
ing the precise location of the alleged mines. Tht
book il signed by the ytraverser, and was used BY
him. Alter this proof, We road the two passages
gui's certificates. They were read BY the couuse
on the other side; and they alec offered tho certf
cate and letter of Verastegui affixed and annexed
to the alleged order Of expulsion.
We now offer by evidence of equal degree anc
authority that this book and this order were bott
invented and fabricated by Verastegui. We offe
his own declarations, made TO the commissioned
of the Senate upon view Of those original papers
We prepared to show by Verastegu,'s owr
statements, made under these circumstances, tina
he made those papers for a sum Of money whict
the traverser promised to pay to him for the ser
vice; and that there il not word of truth in
them, eitherofthem bot that they wholly fals'
and fabricated. We wish in this Satisfactory way
to show the jury that they ought to repudiate and
discredt these papers, nov relied on by the deienc'
as genuine and trustworthy. -.... 81.
will further say that We intend to offer to thu
jury the full narrative history of this fraud,
given to by Don Manuel Verastegui. HI
in ths atrocious business. He has made, volun.
arily, full confession Of the affair from the egg
who got it up, who vas concerned in it, and ever
principal and Interesting fact connected with it
II from the beginning to the end-and that the who'll
claim is utterly fal e and fraudulent, and neve
bad the least foundation to rest on. al.
We offer, with this vera'tegui history, letter
written to him by the traverser since the claim
was passed by the board, showing continuation
of the conspiracy between them, and thus con
Meeting these men together In the defence OF thi
than that presented on the admissibility of To
letters Of John Charles Gardiner. We do no
think that decision embraces the present propo
sition.
h<>ln f IN; ~
part the court may see fit to admit to the con
sideration of the jury.
do not intend to argue these questions, neithe
will 1 argue another question Of evidence In thi
case. have done with argument. have merel,
stated our proposition -,
Mr. CARLISLE. II we assume that the red boo
has been invented by Manuel verastegui, We can
not but declare that bis invention 10 boundess Al
can say is, that he was the project when ne cert
fed and sealed with the seal Of the prefecture ID
book referred to. 1t was not only signed and Ger
tihed by him, but By the person who IL the secre
tary TO this day. The declarations Of Manus
Verastegu. of all others, could not be admitted i
q court Of law. They are mere hearsay.
The CouRr. 1t lie proposed TO AJAX the witne,
what Manuel Verastegui said about the red boo
and paper Of expulsion. With these are ofere
letters Of defendant, said to be addressed to Ma
The answer TO the argument Of the United State
. 10, that NJ. Verastegui has not been witness o
this trial The evidence offered cannot be RI
, ceved. because, even If verastegui was q consp
rator with the defendant, the declarations offere
, in evidence were all made long after the accom-
plishment Of the purpose they are supposed to hav
conspired to effect. The proposition il precisel
, the same in this particular with the one decide
. upon a day or two ago.
| A regards letters Of defendant himself, if the
contain any thing That will prove facts connecte
With this issue, they may be evidence if precsde
, by proper preliminary proof-that IL, Of the hand
writing, &c. lt t.r a.. -f-l- 6.-.-.
4 Mr.. MAY. w hen Ibis witness left home his vii
vas in IA health, and he 10 exceedingly ana
tous to return. ] want to serve his con vsnience b
altowiug him to do 20; and therefore desire pr
! a question to him ~ to whsiher the date on I'd
: decree Of tho Mexican judge. Domingo Chaves, Z
, the end of the petition Of John Charles Caroline
| e. the 10Th or the list. But, n, doing do M
: vtsh to be considered a. waving any point {
+, practice. We. regularly. ought not 10 offer sv
dspcA 70 support paper until IL IL attacked; b.
AZ ve expect that it viii BE- attacked, want III
| i,cnsat OF Mr. PArtrid gee testimony, ~ he hs
some know led 70 upon The subjecti feF, II he be q
I | loved TO 70 home, be cannot DO called back on
sing 10 point like that
. Mr. IN Aptf " objected. " taa
: TIE Court should Be glad 10 sccoMDods'
hin: but wbsn mstter IL pot upon point of ias
and vhe counsel on Ne other side object, The cou
: Mr.. HrAprsY. II the counssi on the other I'D
4 have sesttmony TO oder, asttbem ODER n. >l-T
Mr. MAY viii risk the question, n all event
\ ru. rdtn witna0o the petition of lob