The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1853-03-23
The Gardiner Trial.


Al the opening OF the the question raised yesier
day BY the defence against The admission OF heaisay tes
tmony 10 define the boundaries OF the district or county
Mr. Carlisle argued that whether in reg ard pedigree
boundaries the oaly hearsay evidence that could be
admitted that OF dead parry, and who could Dol DC
supposed al the lime the declaration made 10 have
any object IN misEepresennng he qnoted variety o.
authorities 10 support OF his position Tie hoped thai lha
would be the FIRST 10 claim for itself the unenv
able distinction OF establishing such precedent as the
admission OF heaTsay evidence
Il Mr. May replied and coniended that the evidence the
prosecution offered was in s nature The best that could
| be offered, and in strict conformity with the cases
cited by The counsel on the other side. -
! Mr. Fendal sustained the position taken by Mr. May
and
Mr. Bradley reoined showing that all The cases cited
clearly those that under The ruleall the IN
stances 10 which hesrsay evidence was admitted being
instances OF declarations OF persons who were dead ante
item paoiaH. There evidence sufficient OF higher
proof which the counsel commended ought TO be produced
on the part OF the United States.
The decided that, a general rule, boundaries
might be decided by declaration reputation. but that
that not the question raised By the counsel Tor The
defence. The question raised naked question OF
law, which must be decided BY existing rules II was
conceded tna according 10 the English rule and pracce
hearsay evidence could not be produced post em oan
although IL commended that the American practice
differed II The highest in the United States had
not recognised the English rule the court would bave
paused before venlurlng 10 decide. BIZ, the Supreme
Court oil the uned States bad fully acknowledged the
rule laid down IN The Berkeley peerage and that
decision would govern the court in this instance. The
court therefore was OF opinion that The question could
not be asked.
4 Capt. Barry recalled.
Mr..May | will ak you If you know where is the
norhera boundary OF the county OF Lagunlllas
Mr. Bradley objected 10 The question.
| MIR May. Do sou know where tine north boundary
stone Of the county Of Lagunillas is
/ MIR Bradley. Doni say where il is vet. want to
i know what means Of knowledge you have.
Il Witness | saw II.
Mr. Bradley How do you know that was the north
\ boundary
Witness was told 50.
Il Mr.. Bradley. hope The court, in conformity with the
decision as announced viii instruct The witness that he
is not 10 repeat here what be has told.
i Mr. May. We have spen, The whole OF the day in
discussing visionary lines, and we have al last go
thpg tang bie-,he monument OF the boundary sup
pose the witness state what inquiries he made in
gard TO this monument, and what answers be received
The Court He cannot state anything OF the kind. II
you ask what the witness asked tor and what answers
be received come back 10 the question have beea
discussing all day.
Mr.. May 10 witness Do you know the general ap-
pearance OF boundary stones IN Mexico?
Mr. Bradley. How do you know that
Ans Because they similar IN all cases.
Mr. Bradley VIVA, do you mean by smilar'
Ans They are similar IN conformation, though they
Mr Bradley Were you ever in Lagunilas before
D this indictment was brought!
:. Ans | was not.
Mr.. Bradley. Then, hope the court will no, allow
evidence indirectly IN consven,on TO the rule the court
i Mi Fendall We simply ask The witness whether he
hes seen these boundary marks
. AR Casle. But how does that tend 10 this issue !
The Court cannot tell.
Z Mr. May, Are you acquainted with the boundaries Of
LasnDilss3 or did you acquire knowledge OF Them
Ans / did.
Cues Did you see this pile Of stone previously pointed
out as divisions between States and counties
aas. Do S1 you know the location Of the stone on the
4 northern boundary
! Ans do
III Ia
. Cues, Did you explore The country thoroughly be-
r tween the stones
Ans. 1 did, thorough y-moun,ain hill. and valley.
Cues. DID you md any mine there
Aus found no NINE OF any description.
' Cues. Can you say witness here after that ex-
ploalon between those boundary stones, whether
{ there Is a mine between them.
Ans can stale positively that there is not.
, called Lagunillas'
! Ans There was, near the southern boundary; BY a
direct ne should say, from four 10 Ave leagues.
4 Cues. What - the distance between the north bound.
airy sIoae and the southern boundary stone
! Aus. Between len and eleven leagues
Mr.. MAY. We'll 60 on, and tell US everything you
did
Witness 6rsi visited Llgunilas on the evening Of
October 10, 1852 commenced my explorations the
morning Of lite 2Oth changed my guides five different
. tines told no one what my object explored the
place from one end 10 the other. Near the village OF
Lagunlas, the only place where found any digging IN
: dIcaiing mine, was an old cave about mile and a
o a work Of Art Of nature II was about ten or
twelve feet in perpendicular height and driied of 10 the
east some ten or twelve feet. There few other
little holes-l could not call them caves-n that imme-
date vicinity They within few hundred yards OF
: the There no building OF any kind N the
vicinity OF the cave little 10 the south oil the village
" Is mountain called Laguna Colorado. la that noun
tain there were scmf old appearances Of diggIng-very
! old should Judge made les han hy years ago.
from The grUwa IL lhe v.cnry AlcT thorough exam
naon, could lad Indication resembling inine. !,
would have been impossible, Il there had been a mine
there. that should not have found i.
The witness then went on 70 state The route he took il
going 10 Lagunias. map was shOx IN 10 hfm, made by
the seat out by the Senate committee; and
objection taken BY Mr. Bradley 10 evidence being
taken upon that map as basis t0r boundaries, &c.
Al this stage OF the proceedings the couu adjourned