New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1853-05-18
The Gardner Trial.

~
The counsel having agreed upon the OILS of e1c~vtoax
me District Attorney, at O'Clock commenced summing an
to the Jury He was grStfed that which had oc
cuped two years since the finding Of the ndcmeat haa
been brought conclusion lie began Av r.
errng the great objection OF conspiracy II the two
Governments against the defendant II the Uaed Stses
copspired President Fillmore arch cOnSpisaor Tor
whatever done. done through bis agency IS f
from cousprng against him. Government aiured the de-
fendsnt every facility for subssantistng his claim The
Senate Committee and the President when about 20 send
out Commission TO search for the mines made vsrioas
propositions Gardner 70 Join them, aud point oat The
mines all of which, the evidence showed he refused
Nor WAS there any substantial evidence that Mex.
leo was cOAspirAior Had she been IA that aittals
she might have imprisoned snd severely punished the dc
fendant instead II which her conduct toward him vas
enitnt in the An aliache of her Legation here
not legally bound 70 testify has come into Coar and
desyored 70 dsCrodt of the witnesses for the United
States The hardship complained of in requiring Nge0t
for the defendant take testimony Alexandra last sun.
ner be showed unavoidable, in consequence OF the
engagements of the Judges and the Mayor Of Wsshnxoa
He advered 10 the secret mission Of Capt Bar Next
Co under assumed name Of Edward Smith, as being
necessary the ends of Justice and fa justified by prece
dents AS 20 the prosecution paying a. gal ana eHIrtvA
CANT compensation 70 witnesses, nothing had been
stipulated to them beyond their reasonable expenses
snd thst necessary TO get them hare. Many
desirable witnesses could not be induced 10 leave
their business ia Mexico and come here, d any
price lie called attention 20 the tact that this iadlct
found against the defendant on the testimony VI
ten witnesses only of whom could be- obtained 70
ty al this trial which should be daily considered by the
Jury in addition 10 the evidence AZ this trial Aner noticing
several other objections raised by dtense he proceeded
to address himself to the charge The law said II any
person shs affirm falsely touching the expenditure
any money, in support Of claim against tho United
States he she shall suffer tor Slu aud corrupt PERU
~" The defendant had made oath 90 n memorial setting
for large claim The question was, that oath true
or falsel II not necessary tor the United States 10
satisfy the Jury that every ~ the avermens in the
mortal was false. IL they proved ANY one statement
material TO the truth Of the oath, false, that was
enough He called attention to the derent accounts, the
defendant had given Of the Of ms claim stating TO
Niles that it was 100000 100000 10 johnson that
$4,000 10 $4,000 and that could Ike il what We
pes sed " 10 Thompson that Il s2500OO 10 100000
and finally setting forth in the memorial sJJO000 and
ANXIOUS was he get the claim called up Al that
was willing to give fee of 100000 $4,000 Why give
such fee II il just claim Il was remarkable thai
even thing in this every incident IN the conduct u
the defendant had tObe explained lie read the
rial and protest show the motive Of the defendant In
taking oath These papers sh first that the defendant
WAS possession Of large mines second that hts personal
presence necessary 10 the management OF the bas
ness The says in the protest third the existence Of
mining title fourth, that he owner OF the mines II
then they could establish the alsity of any ot hoss
propositions the defendant guilty. Tie would under
aketo satisfy the Jury from testimony that each aud ever
proposition was false. Ii would How \ eorOllsry, that
il the defendant had mne he expelled from
the mines.
Without concluding Mr. Fendel, at o'clock, gave way
to an adjournment
,f,s...hu.au. IeaI.lature -DIuraer Trial ne,,a