The Perrysburg journal. [volume] (Perrysburg, Ohio) 1853-1861, 1854-05-06
THE PERRYSBURG JOURNAL.


These malicious efforts appear to be especial
win, who in the early stages of the case was
connected with it as assistant counsel; and
though the testimony taken before the above
committee of Congress, as we'll as various
other publications, have fully and truly
stated all the facts of Mr.. Corwins connex-
ion with this case, allow me, under the re-
newal of the injurious inuendoes or indi-
rect charges which have recently been re-
vlved with so much bitterness in various
quarters, to give you the correct facts SO far
as Mr.. Corwin was concerned, though 1t
may be only a repetition of what you and
most of your readers may have previously
known.
In the first place, though it is not very
material to the merits of the question at is
sue, Mr. Corwin was never employed by
Gardiner, nor was he to be paid by him
Gardiner originally placed his case in the
hands Of the Hon. Waddy Thompson, of
South Carolina, agreeing with him as to the
fee for his services, and it was Mr.. Thomp-
son who employed Mr.. Corwin as associate
counsel, and was to pay him portion Of
his own fee, without any additional allow
anCe from Gardiner.
These gentlemen, with their other legal as
sociateS in the case, NJ ossrs Curtis and Lally,
were in the spring of 1850 engaged in the ex
animation of it, and submitted brief and ar
gument to the Board Of Commissioners, who
made the usual preliminary decision, that the
mature OF the claim was one which, II sustain
ed by proper proofs, was of the class eni
llled to indemnity under the treaty with
Mexico; but no investigation or decision
was had as to the real merits of The claim or
~ l.. - Il Il,
The case remained in this situation with
out further progress, at the death of Presi-
dent Taylor, in July, 1850, when Mr. Fill
in his Cabinet, which was promptly but re-
spectfully declined +; and the reason assigned
by Mr.. Corwin was that he was engaged as
counsel in numerous cases (more than thir-
ty, of which the Gardiner claim was one)
: before the Commissioners under the Mexican
treaty, and, as a matter of delicacy. he could
g not prosecute those claims before gentlemen
who held their commissions at the will Of
the President whilst he (Mr COrwin) was
one of the confidential advisers of the latter
Mr.. Corwin's political and personal friends
were however, very anxious for him to en-
ter the Cabinet and in order TO remove his
scruples finally induced him, though with
considerable reluctance on his part, to sell
f out his contingent interest in all the claims
he represented before the Commissioners, at
, valuation to be made by disinterested par
= ties.
In addition to Mr.. Corwin's contingent
! fees in the numerous cases he represented
before the Commissioners, he was directly
interested in the Gardiner claim, having pur-
e chased portion, and only portion, of one
! fourth of that claim, from person to whom
Gardiner had previously sold it. Mr.C S share
in this fourth was of course included in the
/ sale of his other interest in the cases before
the board, and the purchaser Of the whole was
George Law, Esq, of New York, to whom
the whole interest of Mr.. G. was duly as
signed, and the purchase money paid in cash,
without any reservation or contingency
| whatever. Mr.. Law subsequently sold out
t to another capitalist of New York, who was
, the owner of the same when the final decis-
ion of the Commissioners was made, and re-
ceived the amount awarded, which was not
until May, 1851, fully ten months after Mr..
| Corwin had ceased to have any interest in
the business. All these facts as to the nego-
tation of the sae the details of it, the par
ties concerned in the negotiations, terms,
&c, are fully stated in the testimony before
| the committee of Congress and that Mr..
!; Corwin made the sale and divested himself
Ioc &bo l>oCn bo &bo raI