The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1853-05-31

\ Va 'ao7t VI luc pal'c'o otS ih hiS "o"u
"oqss Are you acquainted with the hand ~rt0g of
Ans. am. have seen him write |; have seen let
ieis written by him. know the handwriting of J, b.
Haley his name is John always called him John
school 10 Mexico | have seen him write a, the school
ana al different places do not know the handwriting
this. that you can recognise from having him or
| them write. i
Ans. | recognise but the two Halseys.' and DR..
| dnsr.'
"tAnother paper shown) Irecognise but one sigma
lure 10 'his II Is George Gardiner's. .e.aA II eg
"(Anoher shown) | recognise three OF the sigma
tures-George Gardiner's and the two Halseys'."
MIR. Wright also testified that, during conversation
pc had WIN The defendant in this city in May 1852 the
latter said that the mining company near Morelia chad
broken up;p ",hat after the company was broken up
failed 10 Morelia. the mining company had broken
up, be had started Oh TO San Luis Potos LaguHias,
where he had denounced the mines which be laid his
claim" thus admitting that he had been director OF
mining company a. hoseia, aud cooboating the tes,-
amiaed witness q regard 10 the handwriting and
what did he tell uss He gave j. ~ his opinion that the
to G he S dated as y. 2Ss and sst Of Az
the defendant, but that the body of them was not IN bis
handwriting Hewas OF opinion that the signature Jorge
Gardiner TO these regulations was in the Handwriting
The witness came here on the sh Of April to correct
bis testimony, and this is the way in which he did It;
III 10 question WuciutI ut GU tuCcC
papers, the Moreia papers. with the papers file in
the Stale Department. he said but he supposed the
question referred 10 the Gardiner papers.
Mr.. BRADLEY. understand the gentleman to say that
DR.. Macke has corrected his testimony. object TO his
reading that correction but he has taken notes OF il
himself and proposes 10 read them, oi COURSE cannot
object
The CoURr The District Attorney, understand. is
saying what Dr. Mackie told him Of the stand Tor
that would be wholly Irregular, but what Dr. Mackle
actually understood TO have said in the correction oil
the report, which he has perfect right to do
Mr. BRADLEY He says that the witness has since cor.
rectsd IL and understand he proposes 10 read that cor
| Iection.
! The DISTRICT ATTORNEY. When the printed
report satisfied he had not answered the question
which had been put to him in the way In which 1t was
reported Then he came to correct his testimony, and
made statement which | showed TO MIR. Bradley, aud
that confirmed me inc in my recollection as to what ne
The CouRr. The gentleman cannot tell the jury any
thing which told him off the stand; but You have
right to show wha, your recollection is
say that he dad compare the MoTela papers; and that
he said he had not compared the papef he referred
TO the papers which bad been before the board OF com
missones. and that he had come to the conclusion thai
The signatures 10 the Morela papers were in the hand
writing Of Dr. Gardiner.
| MIR. BRADLEY. That is not evidence.
The CouRr. Anything he told you is no, evidence to
be stated to the Jury. 1850 E. rs 5.I atx#
| Mr.. BRADLEY. If the witness said be derived his
knowledge OF The handwriting from comparing the papers
with anything else, that comparison would not be ev-
dence. sE"s rtE
! The DISTRICT ATTORNEY. The question was put 10
him whether he knew GARDENERS Handwriting and
whether. IRON his knowledge, he believed those papers
were in hi, handwriting! he said that he did; and
then he 10 state that be had examined them be-
fore.
Mr.. BRADLEY. My question was, whether he had com
pared them with any other papers for The purpose OF be-
ing enabled 10 appear as witness on that stand Ills
answer that he did not compare them he came
back correct He said that be did no, understand my
question when he gave his answer, and that he did CON-
pare them the day Oeios with the papers IN ,hs 9es ior
il the comparison had been made for the purpose OF CIV
ing evidence in this cause, |, would be ruled out
The CouRr. II would but i be had seen the defend
ant before and received letter from him. and then
looked The paper 10 refresh his recollection, that
would not be comparison. The District Attorney can
only show what said on the stand. You have a
right, well they. 10 state what the witness was un-
dersood 10 and the jury are TO decide between YOU
Mr.. BRApLrY. am willing 10 abide BY that
The DIsTRicT ATTORNEY. DR.. Mackie after having
stated his means OF acq knowledge OF the handwri
ng OF the defendant said that he had 70 examine these
letters before he could give opinion whether hey Were
in the handwriting OF The defendant or not lie gave MS
opinion with few exceptions, that these papers were
in the handwriting OF Gardiner. The gentlemen on me
other side sought to impair The force Of hs evdenceo oy
presenting hm other documents, which he gave as ms
opinion were in the handwriting OF Gardiner, but which
tanned out not 10 be in his handwriting. He said that
there points OF rese nbance but did not give posi-
tive opinion. | will here gentlemen, mention mai al
though we cannot offer evidence Of comparison of hand
writing you may compare the Handwriting OF papers OF
iercd IN evidence with any other paper already evidence
OF those which have been presented and proved or ad.
mltied be in the Handwriting OF the defendant to as
sis, our minds coming conclusion whether they are
in his handwriting or not Mr.. Wright saw The defend.
ant write aod again lie saw him write IN
Spanish and that important considers a,on. II you
will get a person who understands Spanish TO wne
sentence in that language and then TO translate y INTO
Engish you will find tha, there is but little resemblance
in the handwriting There are sequences OF letters
do frequently in Others was surprised when saw the
experiment. made the other day This shows the supe
ror force OF The testimony o the witness, who bad seen
this man write in Spanish in which language these pa
pers were written the testimony OF witnesses who
have seen him write in English only. ft
What 10 the evidence offered The other side TO show
th al these papers not in the Handwriting OF George
GarJncri Many persons have been familiar with
his hand wiring, and il these papers no, genune u
mony Yet the only witnesses he has brought are Col
Pickett. and Capt Marriott The Morea papers, you
will recoIlect were written in the years ls44 and lsio
i Now what is Capt Marriors testimony
| "Ques Have you had opportunities OF acquiring a
kno wiedge OF DR.. Gardiners handwriting
| Ans have corresponded with him.
| "Qnes Have you seen him write
| "Ans. have.
"Qaes. Could you recognise his handwriting
| ssAas. think could. .... ....... :, 3.
"Qnes. Handing witness two letters inviung zen.
Waidy Thompson and Mr.. Mayer 10 public dinner IN
| tsia / Ia that the hand writing Of DR.. Gardiner
| Ans. have those papers before. recognise
this as the handwriting Of DR. Gardiner.
"Qaes Handing witness the Morel'a papers DO
you recognise that as his handwrillng'
Ans have examined these papers, and do not rec
ogni.e this az the handwriting Of Dr. Gardiner
| "Ques Can you recognise he signainref
i \ hat