The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1853-03-26

q fact well remembered; who was there here VIII
had never heard Of it, though it occurred befor
thousand times x the period ofcertain facts BY Ii
time when the British came to Washington.
Why woui1al6ta like occurrence be remembers
.insfagu inillas? Ifit occurred it would have beef
remembered; the fact would vebecome deeply i'm
pressed on the minds of those people, and it woul
have gone down from father to son as q most re
markable event in the history of those uncultiyate
people, inhabiting that remote and quiet region
The Government now propose TO prove. By the de
clarations Of every one in Laguinillas, that the,
Mr.. CARLISLE. Bring them here to prove it, ant
let US have the opportunity of cross examining
them; but do not give US their hearsay. -
Mr.. MAY. And if we had brought them her,
you would have called them Camanches, as hae
been already one. For that reason, no witnesses
had been brought here from Mexico except Eng
lishmen and our own countrymen, and even ma
tives of the city OF Washington. g.
Mr.. CARLISLE rose to what, in another place
would be called a point of order. It wa. wba.
ther it was allowable to argue question Of
the admissibiity of testimony which this court
after solemn argument, had decided was not to be
admitted? This court had positively decided, AZ.
ter full argument, that no hearsay evidence. ma,
litsm motam could be offered. Was any further ua,
argument on that point to be allowed?
Mr.. MAY said the decision of the court was no,
So The decision of the court was that no hea rsa
post htem metdm should be admitted as to the cues
boundary was
the one before the court, and which had been de-
cided by the court. When did the decision of the
court ever extend beyond the question immediately
before it? .s..-Ee
Mr.. CAaLlsIr objected to the argument pro
ceeding. The court would say if it had or had not
already decided this point. He objected to any
argument before the jury on facts which were not
given in evidence and which the court had decided
were not to be given in evidence. Such an argu.
ment would compel them to follow it I'D by r..
ply, or to submit to the impression on the minds
of the jury which it must create.
The CouRT. Mr.. May will proceed, but will
please not to state any facts not given in evidence
Mr.. MAY said he had not stated any facts not
dant set forth these allegations of facts and all he
had stated was that the United States would prove
they had not taken place. How else was he to
state the question to the court?
Mr.. CARLISLE renewed his objections to the zen
tleman's proceeding with his argument. The
point had already been decided by the court. The
gentleman was making statement of facts not
given In evidence; he wac stating what CAPTAIN
Barry had heard in Lagunillas, which was hearsay,
obtained post Htem motam and could not be eiven
in evidence.
Mr.. MAY desired to know if be was before the
court or the gentleman?
ME- CARLIsLE l am before the court; | am
stating my objections to your going on with your
statement, which is. take it, point to be decided
before you come before the court with your argu-
ment -
The CouRT. Mr.. Carlisle, sit down, if YOU please.
In parliamentary language, Mr.. May is strictly
Mr.. CARLISLE. But, if your honor please-
The COURT Mr. Carlisle, you will allow the
counsel to 60 on with his argument would ra.
Their hear counsel than dispute with him.
Mr.. MAY. do not like that observation of the
court.
The CouRr. There is nothing in it. Mr.. NAV.
intended to be offensive. You have displayed un
usuai and uncaied for sensitiveness, not only now
but throughout the trial. l never saw 80 much
l1rrltability manifested anywhere where / have
been.
Mr.. MAY. If the observation meant nothing. I
DO not think there was any occasion for max.
The CouRr. Perhaps not. The court meant no
thing BY it, Mr.. May, and you will proceed.
Mr.. MAY. There 10, then, an end to it.
Mr.. CARLISLE again commended that this peint
had already been decided.
Mr.. MAY said he thought it had not. The dec.
~, and did not extend beyond that He then bro.
ceeded to argue that in the fact whether any
troops OF the government of Mexico had ever visit
ed that place and destroyed such a large estab.
lishment as this or not, there could be no is mota
rs nota could only exist in questions on
which men would divide in opinion. This visit of
troops was fact, and men could not divide in
opinion as to ts taking place. 1t either did or did
not occur. lit did, then it would be known il it
did not, then that would be known It was a oues-
people could no more divide in opinion than they
could as to the existence of one of those mountains
IN that region, which had been there since natures
morning. 1t is public fact, on which no lis mota
could exist.
Did the court, in deciding that there could not
be hearsay evidence given post Hteaa NOLAN on
question OF boundary, decide all questions of hear
say evidence or general reputation in the case?
He thought not.
He respectfully submitted to the court, that be
had not commented on any facts before the iury
not given in evidence. He had stated nothing but
what was contained in the memorial of George A.
'ardlnsT, and not one word beyond them.
The Court. The question proposed to be asked
the witness is-Did he hear in Laguinillas that
troops of the government of Mexico had visited
that country, SC. 1t is objected to, and the court
overrules the question.
Because the fact referred 30 in the proposed
question is distinct single matter, which is sus
cePtlble OF better proof, by somebody who was
there at the time of the alleged passage of the
troops through that country. 1t is said that resi-
cent witnesses, If brought here, would be called
they ought to be here is that they may be subject
to the observations of the jury while testifying,
and to cross-examination And secondly. Con.
sidering the question as an inquiry about pub.
knowledge of which was acquired post htem mo.
tdm long after the prosecution was instituted.
Cross examination resumed.
Cues. Do you remember where your goods
which you took there to trade gave out?
Ans: can't tell; traded the most of them in
Rio Verde, or the department of Rio Verde,
eeues. You did not then trade any of them off in
LaRuinillas?
Ans: had some goods when got there only
traded away some extra provisions in Laeuinillas;
had disposed of my goods before got there
Cues. You did not then pass yourself off az a
raider in Laguinillas?
Ans. 1 represented myself there, as a trader
mat my business was to buy cattle and to look for
coal mines. 'O'
Cues. Do you recollect any other place in the
outh part OF Laguinillas where you inquired for
mining town, or village, containing five hundred
Ans did in ell parts of Laguinillas, north and
outh, wherever found a man.
Cues. Did you inquire at any place, town or
'illage, in the souths
Ans. / saw no towns there-there were some
anches.
CUES. You say you saw herdsmen in LaguinilIas;
What hocks were they tending?
Ans. They had f1ocks of goats.
Cues. Were they men or boys?
Ans. Some faocks were attended bv men and
ome by boys.
CUES. How large were the flocks you SAW
Ans. Some focks had as many as a hundred or
more goats, and others had less
CUES. Did you see any hacienda in that mart
"nere there was any considerable number of
mules? "
ans. did not.
CUES: In your inquiries did you ask for towns or
ans. inquired for towns and mines both.
Gse': Did you not tell us yon inquired for towns