Washington sentinel. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1855, 1854-10-14

claims, although they may not be cognizant Of
The frauds committed.
The Liability OF the parties who purchased
one-fourth of the Gardiner claim, procuring an
assignment and an award in the name Of w.
W. Corcoran, would seem to stand upon prin-
ciples somewhat different from those which
govern in the case Of attorneys receiving their
Tees Thomas Corwin and Robert G. Corwin,
being at the time employed as attorneysof DR..
Gardiner, purchased one-fourth Of his pretended
claim for the sum Of twenty-five thousand five
hundred dollars, the avowed object being to
furnish the means necessary 10 procure testi-
mony, and make out the case. There can be
little doubt that at common law, this would be
case of champerty, and the contract would
not be sustained by the courts, 1t may be fur
Their alleged that the consideration paid was
wholly inadequate, being less than one-foprth
the amount of the part purchased. There is
reason to believe that at this early day the par
ties knew very nearly what the award of the
commissioners would be and with this knowl.
edge the purchase of 100000 for So, 500, in
the case of q valid claim would be such
transaction as would carry on its face the evil
dence of fraud and imposition. But this fraud,
il it existed, was between the parties them.
selves, and it is doubtful whether, in this view,
any one but DR.. Gardiner could take advantage
oft. And inasmuch as the whole of DIR. Gar
diners claim was fictitious in point of fact, and
had no existence whatever, it cannot be said
that this purchase was an imposition upon
him. Nevertheless, the circumstances Of the
purchase would seem to be such as ought to
have excited suspicion and vigilance on the
part of those making it. The holder of an
honest claim could scarcely be expected to
make SO great a sacrifice; and if any exigency
rendered it necessary, his attorney should be
the last to take advantage of his necessities.
1t may be considered doubtful whether upon
these grounds the amount assigned to Thomas
and Robert G.. Corwin can be recovered. But
there is still another principle, not depending
upon the good faith of the parties to the con-
tract of sale, but going to the very substance
Of the thing sold. What did these parties pur-
chase? They purchased one-fourth Of the fc-
titous claim, which was to be supported, and
which was afterwards made out, by fraud and
perjury. Could they derive title to anything
which DR.. Gardiner himself did not possess
If they could not, then, even after the award,
they could not stand in any better position
than DIR. Gardiner himself If they had pur-
chased part of the award after it had been
made in favor Of DR.. Gardiner-after it had as
sumed legal existence-and the money had
been paid to them upon such a purchase made
in good faith, it is probable the amount could
net be recovered from them. But they placed
themselves, to the extent Of this purchase, in
the shoes Of DIR. Gardiner. The award was
made directly to them, or to their agent; and,
inasmnch as the award is subject to be annuled
for fraud and the money recovered, the pro-
ceedings can only be against the parties for
whose benefit the award was made and the
money applied. If they were honest in the
purchase OF this claim, as is admitted they may
have been, it was nevertheless their misfortune
to expend their money for that which had no
valid existence. The award made, even though
considered in the light of judgment, cannot
help their case; for the judgment itself is vi
tiated by fraud, and, if avoided at all, must be
avoided as to those who were parties in interest
1t would seem, therefore, that Thomas and
Robert G. Corwin are responsible for the
amount Of SlO7,lS7, awarded to w. w. Cor
coran for their benefit, and by him paid over to
them.
In view of all the circumstances of these
extraordinary cases, the committee are Of
opinion that public Justice requires an effort on
the part Of the United States to enforce the
liability of all the parties who may by any pos.
sibiity be made to refund the money SO uniustly
and fraudulently distracted from the treasury.
The committee, therefore, report resolution
requesting the President to cause the necessary
proceedings to be instituted:
Resolped That the President be requested to
institute proceedings in law or equity against
all such agents, attorneys, and confederates, as
may have assisted in prosecuting the claims Of
George A. Gardiner and John III. Mears, or
either of them, before the board of commits
sioners appointed under the treaty Of Guada-
lupe Hidalgo for the adjudication Of claims on
Mexico, in order to test their liability to refund
the amounts paid them, as agents, attorneys,
confederates, or assignees, out of the awards
made by the said commissioners to said Gardi-
ner and Mears.