The daily exchange. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1858-1861, 1860-02-10

considerable quicksilver mines, which are all that
are known to exist, and the second, in point of
richness and productiveness in the worlds. as
the public is doubtless aware, in litigation in the
Courts of California; the title of the Company
being disputed by the UNITED STATES, upon the
ground that various documentary evidences re-
lied upon to sustain it, and purporting to be de-
rived from the Supreme Government of Mexico,
were fabricated at period long subsequent to
their dates, and are, consequently, false and
fraudulent In order to repel, if possible this
allegation of fraud, the Company desired to have
the testimony of various official persons in the
city of Mexico, including, among others, the
Prime Minister of the Republic, and the Commits
sioners who negotiated the treaty of Guadalupe
Hidalgo AS the personal attendance of these
witnesses at the trial could not be procured, ap-
plication was made to the UNITED STATES District
Court in California for commission to take their
dispositions. This the Court declined to grant,
upon the ground that the act for the regulation of
land titles in California furnished no authority
for any such proceeding. Accordingly, under
the statute Of the UNITED STATES, (passed August
Is, 1861 authorizing secretaries of legation and
and perform notaral acts, "such as any notary
''publc is required or authorized by law to do or
'perform within the UNITED STATES" the counsel
for the Company gave notice to the Government
of their intention to take the dispositions of the wit
nesses referred to, before our Secretary of Legation
or Consul, the city of Mexico. Immediately
upon receiving this notice, the ATTORNEY GENERAL
mil 10 thp of CIR A.
diplomatic representatives and consular officers of
the UNITED STATES in Mexico, to take any depo-
sition, or have anything to do with the
proposed proceeding, which he pronounced to be
"not only illegal and unauthorized, but wrong
'iand Just to the Government In accordance
with these views and wishes of the ATTORNEY
GENERAL, the SECRETARY of STATE issued his in
structions to Minister, Mr.. McLANE, who, in
turn, communicated them to our Consul, Mr.. BLACK,
who, in answer to an application from Mr.
BARRON, one of the parties to the suit, wrote-'T
'shall not be able 10 take the testimony required
''by you" From the SECRETARY of STATE and
the ATTORNEY GENERAL, after some further CORES
pondence, the counsel of the Company (Messrs.
REvERDY JOHNSON and J. A RocKwELL) appealed
10 the PRESIDENT. Mr.. BUCHANAN writes in reply
that he cannot consent to be converted into an
appellate jurisdiction from the decisions of the
'heads Of departments" or to ''interfere with
''the ATTORNEY GENERAL in the performance
''of his professional duties, either in the
'New Almaden or any other CASE" where
upon Messrs. JOHNSON and ROCKWELL apollo
gise for troubling the PRESIDENT with any
communications upon the subject, and the pre-
sent publication is, we presume, their appeal to
that tribunal in the last resort-the tribunal of
public opinion. Upon the facts as they at present
appear, We hazard little in saying that the deci-
sion of that tribunal will not be favorable to the
action of the Government. Whatever may be the
value Of the testimony which the Company wished
to take, their right to take it in some shape or
other would seem TO be incontesable. lis admis-
sibiliry, when taken, would be a question for the
Courts to determine, as its credbity, if admitted,
might be Il question for jury. Assuming the
refusal Of the UNITED STATES JUDGE in California
to issue commission in the case to be in accord
ance with law, the method prescribed by the
act Of 1856, above referred to, would seem
to be the correct and proper, as it
was the only available one, of obtaining the test-
mony. The assumption of the State Department.
acting at the instgaton of the ATTORNEY GENERAL,
to forbid the diplomatic and consular representa-
fives of the Government in Mexico, to exercise
their powers under the Act is stretch of authori-
ty only paralleled by that anciently claimed by
the Kings of England, of dispensing with acts of
Parliament. And if as MACAULAY observes, in
reference to this latter claim, the power exist in
relation to one act, why not in relation to another?
"Why not in relation to forty as well as one'?-
Besides-t should not be forgotten that the very
case in which the SECRETARY of STATE has thus as
sumed TO suspend an act of Congress- is one to
which the UNITED STATES is party. Having
through one of its departments called into question
the title of the New Almaden Company, the Gov
eminent exerts its power through another--to
deprive the Company of the of obtaining
the evidence upon which it relies for its defence.
Surely such conduct, to say nothing of its
legality, is scarcely in accordance with the
character of great and magnanimous nation
The reasons assigned by the ATTORNEY GENERAL
to justify the interference of the State Depart
meut are as fimsy and unsubstantial as the action
of the SECRETARY was arbitrary and oppressive
to Government of the intention of the Company
to examine the witnesses in Mexico was not in
sufficient time-that it should have been served
upon the DISTRICT ATTORNEY in California, and
not upon the ATTORNEY GENERAL at Washington
that the accompanying statement of the points
upon which the witnesses were to be examined
was not full enough-that the Secretary of Lega-
ton was not in the city of Mexco-that the Con-
sui had no authority to act-that the testimony
should have been taken in California before a
commissioner or District Judge All these
objections it seems to u.s. are questions
rather for the Court before which the
the dispositions might be offered, than for the
ATTORNEY GENERAL or the SECRETARY of STATE.
Mr.. BLACK further speaks of the time requisite to
farm the Government with the knowledge ne
'cessary to detect the falsehoods of twenty Next
lean witnesses, swearing their utmost for an
association of men, who have fifteen millions of
'dollars staked on their oaths' Considering the
official station of some of the witnesses, all of
whom were connected with the Mexican Govern
ment, and the principal of whom has been twice
Prime Minister of the Republic and has represented
his country at the Court of ST. James and in
Washington, this is pretty strong language for
high law officer of the Government-a
Cabinet Minister-to use. But if General CAss
acted upon insufficient grounds in complying
with the wishes of the ATTORNEY GENERAL, the
PRESIDENT stands upon ground hardly more suffi-
cient in declining to interfere for the correction of
the error of his subordinate Certainly, control |
Of some sort the PRESIDENT must possess over the
acts OF his Secretaries, for whose conduct he is
The instructions which were issued |
to Mr.. McLANE, and under which Consul BLACK |
acted issued not from the ATTORNEY GENERALS |
office but from the State Department, and surely |
Mr.. BUCHANAN can with much proprety assume |
10 direct the action of the SECRETARY as can the 4
ATTORNEY GENERAL. But it is idle to waste words |
upon point which is too plain for argument.
The Government-PREsIDENT, SECRETARY and
ATTORNEY GENERAL-stand before the public in an |
awkward position, as seen by the revelations of this
pamphlet. That any explanation can be offered |
which can make their conduct seem less indefn- |
siole, we cannot conceive and whatever NAV be
the merits or the fate of the New AImaden case
about which we say nothing and care nothing
one thing Is certain, that their conduct has not
been such as 10 strengthen in the public estimation
the cause of the UNITED STATES
The resolution previously reported as bav;no
passed the Second Branch of the CITY Counc;l -