The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1853-02-02
Vol. ".
Toe Commissioners By false testimony and forged

< :
| the United States Ofthe amount awarded, $93,.
Oo0. on deposit, in stock and money, with Corcorar
Riggs, to the credit of Gardiner, subject to two
| charges-one a letter of credit to George A. Gar.
| diner on George Peabody, of London, for E2 900
and one his letter of credit to his brother, John
| Charles Gardiner, for 0,000-have been en-
Joined; and also 100, 500 deposited to the credit
| of George A. Gardiner with the Life Insurance
and Trust Company, in the city of New York
have been enjoned at the suit of the United States
and are now retained under injunction. The sum
OF $94, 582 was paid to counsel, and $l07,187 sc
paid to the assgnees of the one fourth of the
| claim originally sold to Thomas Corwin and Rob-
| ert G. Corwin''
In relation TO the other branch of the investiga.
| ton, the committee say:
SIN May, 1s49, the Hon. Thomas Corwin, then
| member of the United States Senate, was en-
ployed as counsel in the Gardiner claim by Cen e.
| raj Waddy Thompson, the original counsel of Gar
diner, upon an agreement that Mr.. Corwin should
have Tor his fee five per cent. on whatever sum
| should be awarded to Gardiner by the Commission
| ere. In February, 1850, Thomas Corwin, in com.
| pany with Robert e. Corwin, ESQ.,, purchased one.
| fourth part of the claim of Gardiner and this
fourth part of said claim was assigned, on the 18th
| of that month, to w. w. Corcoran, ESQ.,, who
| loaned money to the Messrs. Corwin to purchase
it, and held the claim of Messrs. Thomas and Ro.
| bert g. Corwin, in equal shares, as collateral Sc
| curlty tor the payment OF the loan. The Messrs
Corwln paid $4,000, and reiinquished their fees
| on the one-fourth of the claim purchased by them
| and paid part of Edward Curtis's fees-whaj
amount does not appear-as the consideration fol
| the purchase.
| the Senate, and accepted the appointment of Sc
cretary OF the Treasury, in the month of July
| 1861 In the same month, and previous to his
| going into the Cabinet of President Fillmore as
rest in and alec of his half of the fourth par
of the Gardiner claim, was negotiated through the
| Intervention of Governor John Young, Of New
York, to George Law, esq, of New York. From
this time the said Thomas Corwin refused to act as
counsel, or consult with the other counsel who had
been associated with him, in relation to the same
and took no further part in the prosecution of the
said Gardiner claim. The assignment of his fee
interest, and his interest in the fourth part OF
the Gardiner Claim and all his interest in all other
claims before the Board of Commissioners (thirty-
seven in number,) was executed by Thomas Cor
win to Jacob Little, of New York, in November
1850, and the money for the purchase was then
paid by George Law, to whom the assignment to
Jacob Little was at that time transferred. The
| money for the sale, SSO,357 was received by
Thomas Corwin, and on the 23d of November was
deposited by him to his credit with Messrs. Cor
coran Riggs.
81 No testimony has been adduced before the
committee proving, or tending to prove, that the
Hon. Thomas Corwin had any knowledge that the
claim OF the said Gardiner fraudulent, or that
false testimony or forged papers had been or were
to be procured to sustain the same''
Now, sir, it is said that this report does not ac-
quit Mr. Corwln of the charges preferred against
him, II Is difficult to determine what charges
were preferred against him. But in the opinion
OF the committee, they involved an INQUIRY into the
merits OF the Gardiner claim. No express autho-
rty was given to the committee to inquire into the
character OF the Gardiner claim But the several
matters set forth in the resolution could not be in
vestIgated, they thought, to ascertain whether
Mr.. Corwin's connexion with that claim was i'm
proper, without first ascerainng the character of
the claim itself. If the committee could have
made the investigation required at their hands.
without inquiring into the merits of the Gardiner
claim, they ought by all means to have done 80.
His case is before the proper judicial tribunals of
the country. undergoing rigid investigation.
criminal prosecutions are now in prepar alton for
trial The whole policy of our laws and the whole
spirit OF our criminal jurisprudence are against
any investigation into the merits of his claim by
this House, while those suits are pending against
him in court. He is entitled to a fair and an i'm
partial trial, and any Investigation of the merits
of his claim here is calculated to defeat that con-
stltutlonal right, or at least to prejudice it, &
But as high public functionary of the Govern
ment was charged with improper connection with
the Gardiner claim, public policy imperiously re-
CURED that any prejudice that might result to
Gardiner from an investigation into it's merits
should be disregarded, in order that the conduct
of the Secretary of the Treasury should be inquired
into, and either exposed or vindicated
The committee, therefore, thought it to be their
duty to inquire into the character of the Gardiner
claim. They determined that the proprietv or
improperly of Mr. Corwin's connection with it
depended, in the first place, upon the honesty or
dishonesty OF the claim itself In this think they
were right; for it is evident that unless the claim
be fraudulent, the whole charge falls to the ground
This view s further sustained by the fact that
although Mr.. Corwin was connected as counsel
with thirty-six other claims before the Board of
Commissioners which are not questioned no one
has pretended that his connection with them was
improper. s@' a s5--8 =
Having decided the Gardiner claim to be fraud
uient, and sustained by perjury an forgery, the
committee next inquired into Mr. Corwin's con-
nexion with it, and after stating the facts showing
the nature character, and extent of that
they found that there was no evidence before
them proving, or tending to prove, that Mr. Cor
win knew the fraudulent character of the claim
Ii, then, MIR. Corwin has not been exonerated and
acquitted by the committee, of the charge pre-
TERED against him, he has been improperly con-
nected with the crimes of perjury and forgery, and
instead OF being Secretary of the Treasury of the
United States, he ought to be within the walls Of
the penitentary of this District. 7 his position
cannot be avoided. The committee have either &C
quilted him, or they have shown facts that make
him part'eeps crinas in the crimes of perjury and
forgery. From the facts exhibited, it is clearly
shown that bis connexion with the claim, if i'm
proper, is 80 because the claim is fraudulent and
sustained by perjury and forgery, and for no other
reason. 45I s.
This is grave charge to be brought against
any man. The committee report that there is no
evidence going to show any such guilt; that there
is not particle of proof tending to show that be
ndu any RnOWlfOge Whatever OF .the fraudulent
character OF the claim, IF the proofs adduced
to sustain it. Yet my colleague (Mr. OLDs) says
that is no acquittal. =
have had some experience in practicing law
We have an action in my State, and suppose il
ia an action in use throughout the country, and
not only so, but in every country where the COM
mon law obtains Gt was truly said by the gen.
tleman from North Carolina Mr.. VENABLE) the
other day, that liberty exists nowhere except where
the common law prevails)-I repeat, wherever the
common law has obtained, the action for malicious
prosecution is known. Where person ia charged
criminally by another and trial the prosec utor
fails entirely to sustain his charges by proof, the
person charged has a right to an action for mali
cious prosecution IT, in one of our courts, citi-
zen were charged with heinous offence, and the
cutorehould fail to produce shadoto of proof
to sustain the accusation, and afterwards upon q
trial Tor malicious prosecution between the same
partes the defendant should fail to produce evi.
dence, either proving tending to prove the truth
OF the charge he had previously preferred against
the Plaintiff, what would be the conduct Of the
jury IN such case? / hazard nothing in saving,
that DANA ges would be awarded by jury in any
court IN the country. Yes, sir, actions for mali
clous prosecution are known to all of u.s. and they
are always sustained, where party has brought
charge against another " hich he has prodIced
no proof whatever to sustain. Where party nrn.
duces evidences showing that he had reasona BILE
cause to institute the prosecution, in such case
there would he evidence