The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1853-02-02

last embarked his (Gardiner's) uniform success,
and taking him into favor, offered him his credit
to carry forward any of his undertakings Of
these statements think he produced proofs, in the
shane of correspondence between himself and
Perez Galvez. Its extent cannot speak Of. ] am
not sure that it established any thing beyond an
intimacy between Perez Galvez and Gardiner.
Among the general proofs there were some which
made particular impression upon the Board as OF
character lxing the unavoidable authenticity OF
GARDENERS mining operations, and chief OF these
the register, or book of accounts OF the mine ITSELF
kept by the government commissary
Upon the register or book OF accounts refcrred
to being shown to the witness, he says that, upon
inspection he si II continues of the opinion that it
was kept by the government commlssarY
Quest on by the Committee. Did the Board ever
take any means, by dispositions or otherwise, to
obtain any testimony from Mexico touching the
Gardiner claim!
Ans,oer They did not, either in that case or any
other. The counsel in the Gardiner case was as
well as recollect, originally Gen Waddy Thomp.
son, who was understood to have prepared the pa
pers. Afterwards Mr.. Thomas Corwin was intro.
duced into the case; then Messrs. Curtis, Lally,
and Robert G.. Corwin.
Question by Mr.. Cor,cin Did ever appear be-
fore the Board after went into the Cabinet?
Ans,cer.-Never. The practice of he Board
was, after having settled the principle OF an award
to make up the amount of pecuniary da rnages on
those principles; but the latter were not disclos-
ed-the former only was communicated to the
public-not known even to the secretary himself
but this is not because he could know but vol
UNFAIRLY.
Question By the Couamittee.-W When the decision
in favor of DR.. Gardiner was first made, was the
amount to be awarded him, az well az the validity
of mis- claim, determined by the Board?
Austcer.-A definite amount was then awarded
of course he (Gardiner) did not know the amount
nor his counsel; and understood at the time tina,
an intmaton was given to DIR. Gardiner by the
Board, that If he could satisfy them on certain
points where his proofs were insufficient his
ri yUOnld he oil II,
case it CHANGED that heard the amount of the
award before could quit the Board, as usually
did, to avoid learning the amount of the particular
award. This is the only instance in which the lik,
happened. The amount originally awarded was
think, 100000.
1t was the practice of the Commissioners to keer
each memorandum-book, in which he entered
the amount of the award, and the particulars O
which it was made up. These books were KEEP
under their own personal lock and key; and when
they left the city, took that they shoule
be sealed up by themselves.
Question by the Committee. -W hen was tn,
amount determined to be awarded, upon the frs
decision of the Board TO the validity of the claim
announced to the claimant or the public?
Ans,oer.-ln this instance, in all others 1T wal
communicated to neither the claimant nor the pub
lie, nor anybody else, as long as was in Office
and only made known when the awards were al
published together, 80 far as know
After the thorough sitting which the Board gave
to the testimony, after repeated examinations O
arguments of counsel, the Board came to the con-
yiction that the case, as TO its merits, as vel
made out, as little to be suspected, any which
was before them. This conviction was gradually
reached in spite of the original prejudices of the
Board, which were slowly, and only upon complete
examination, abandoned. | do not think that any
case before the Board was more jealousy canvass
ed. Originally, they of course extended to the
person OF DR.. Gardiner the prepossessons which
they entertained against his case; but the doctor
himself gradually forced himself upon their esteem
by conduct SO remarkable for its decacy and pro
priety, that have heard the feeling expressed
again and again, by all the members of the Board
that not only had DR.. Gardiner shown in the pro-
ress of bis great sense, but that unquestion-
his case had been sgnalized by its exact propriety
| may state, further, that the impressions which
have narrated as those of the Board, were closely
followed by my own; for both went upon the same
circumstances and, of course arrived at the ga me
conclusions. In myself this is the more to be re-
marked, because had personal difficulty with
the junior counsel of DIR. Gardiner; and this
at the period when ] was prepossessed against
the claim itself, of course had individual dis
like to overcome in addition to such prejudices as
the Board itself entertained. Yet, by the conclu-
sion of the case, / had ceased to entertain the
slightest suspicion against its complete fairness,
its full establishment BY proofs.
Question by the Committee.-In how many cases
the amount determined upon, when the va
lidity of the claim was decided, changed in the
final award?
many cases. think there were several cases in
which awards were chang ed-as many as four or
five, perhaps.
Question blythe CommiHee-W When did the Board
decide TO increase the amount of award in the
Gardiner case, and determine the amount of in
crease?
Ass,cer.-I do not know-ths books do not show;
but presume it was when the Board made its final
award, which did not occur till after resigned.
1t was the practice Of the Board to suggest doubts
TO the claimants to the validity of their claims,
to give them an opportunity 10 improve their ties.
hmony, or to argue points oflaw, This was often
done.
Question by Mr.. CortDin.-Are you sure the
amount of 100000, which you understood to be
the first award to Gardiner was the gross sum; or
might it not have been S 100000 with interest
from the date of his expulsion to the rendition of
theaward?
Ans,per.-I was endeayoring to get out of the
way, and only hea I'd the sum of S 300 900 named.
Whether more said or not cannot saw
EDWARD VIM. JOHNSTON.