IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-5) 1.0 gK£ ta 1.1 l.'"'^° — A" Photographic .Sciences CorporatiQn 23 WIST MAIN STMIT WnSTIR.N.Y. USM (716) I72-4S03 CSHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHIVI/iCIVIH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical iMicroreproductions / Institut Canadian da microraproductions historiquas TMhnieal anil ■ibllo y pW c NotM/Notat taehnlquM m MMIoflrapMquM TiM Inttltiit* hM sttwiiptad to obtain ttia baat original oopy avaNabla for mmlng. FOaturaa of tMa ccHiy wMch may ba bibUograpMeaNy unlqua, whieh may altar any of tha imagaa in ttia raprodwetion. or which may significantly changa tha uauai mathod of filming, ara chacltad balow. □ Colourad covert/ Couvartura da coiilaur I — I Covart damagad/ Couvartura andommagte □ Covars rastorad and/or iaminatad/ Couvartura rattaurAa at/ou pallicuiAa □ Cover titia misting/ La titra da couvartura manqua □ C9iourad mapt/ Cartat gAographiquat an couiaur D D D D D Colourad inic O.a. othar than biua or black)/ Encra da couiaur (i.a. autra qua biaua ou noirai I I Colourad platat and/or iiluttrationt/ Pianchat at/ou iiluttrationt mn coulour Bound with othar mctarial/ RaliA avac d'autrat documantt Tight binding may eauta thadowt or dittortion along intarior margin/ La rt iiura tarrAa paut cautar da I'ombra ou da la dittortion la long da la marga intAriaura Blank laavat addad during rattoration may appaar within tha taxt. Whanavar pottibia, thate hava baan omittad from filming/ II to paut qua cartainat pagat bianchat ajoutiat lort d'una rattauration apparaittant dant la taxta. malt, lortqua cala Atait pottibia, cat pagat n'ont pat 4t« fiimiat. Additional eommantt:/ Commantairat tupplAmantairat; L'Inatltut a microf ilm4 la maWaur axamplaira quH hil a *t* poaaiMa da ta procurar. Lat ddtaHt da aat aRampMra qui tant paut-Atra uniquaa du point da vua bIbNographlqua, qui pauvant modifier una imaga raprodulta, ou c|ui pauvam axigar una modification dant la m4thoda normala da fHmaga tont indlqudt d-daatout. o fi I — I Colourad pagat/ Pagat da couiaur Pagat damaged/ Paget endommegAet Pagat rettored and/oi Pagat reetaurAet et/ou peilicul4et Paget ditcoloured. ttained or foxe< Paget dAcolorAet. tachetAet ou piquiet Paget detached/ Paget dAtachiet Showthrough/ Trantparence Quality of prir Quaiit* in4gaie de I'imprettion Includet tuppiementary materii Comprend du matiriel tuppMmentaire Only edition available/ Seule Adition ditponlble I — I Pagat damaged/ I — I Pagat rettored and/or laminated/ r~7| Paget ditcoloured. ttained or foxed/ r^ Paget detached/ r~l^ Sho%vthrough/ r~1 Quality of print variet/ ^~^^ includet tuppiementery material/ I — I Only edition available/ ot fit tl or D Paget wholly or pertially obtcured by errata tlipt. tittuet. etc., have been refilmed to enture the bett pottible image/ Let pagat totalement ou partiellement obtcurciet per un feuiliet d'errata. una peiure, etc.. ont M filmAet A nouveau de faqon h obtenir la meiileure image pottible. Tl th Tl Ml dif en bei rig rec mi Thit item it filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document ett film* au taux da rMuction indiquA ci*dettout. 10X 14X ItX 22X 2SX 30X y 12X 16X »X MX 28X 32X ^^KmTi 1 Ths copy fllincd hwc hM bcMi raproduo#Q uimmi to Hm gMisratlty of: oinAroalti da: « *--**- Ubrory of tho PubNc U MbHothAqua daa Arehhwa •Mil* Mdu Arehivot of Canodo puMlquaa du Canada nodiftor IT una Tho imogoo appoarlfig hoio aro tho boot quollty Laa imagaa suKraMitaa ont 4tA raprodultaa avac la Mmag* poasiblo considoHng tho condition and toglbllity plua grand soln. compto tonu do la condition ot of tho original eofiy and in kooping with tho filming contract spacificationa. eonformiti ovoc loo condltlona «!u contrat da filmaga. Original copioo In printad popar covora ara fNmad Laa axamplalraa originaux dont lo coiivorturo on baglnning with tha fnant covor and anding on poplor oot Imprimoo sont fHmaa an common^ont tho loot paga with a printad or INiiatratad impraa- par la pramiar plat at an tarmlnant aoit par la •ion, or tho bacic covor whon approprlato. AN othor original copioo ara fllmad baglnning on tho dimpraaalon ou dlNuatration. soit por lo second f irat paga with a printad or ilHiatratad impraa- •lon, and anding on tho ioat paga with a printad orlginoux sont filmAs on common^ant par la It or iiluatratad impraaaion. pramMra paga qui comporto uno omprointo d'impraaaion ou d'illustration ot on torminont par la damlAra paga qui comporto uno tollo omprointOa Tha iaat racordod frama on oach microflcha Un doa symbdoa auhranta apparattra sur la shall contain tho aymboi -^ (moaning "CON- damMra Imaga da chaqua mieroficho. colon lo TINUED"), or tho symbol ▼ (moaning "END"). caa: la symbdo -^ signlfio "A 8UIVRE". lo whichavar applias. symbolo ▼ signlfio "FIN". Maps, platas. charts, ate. may ba fllmad at diffarant raduction ratios. Those too larga to bo antiraly included in ono sxpoaura ara filmed beginning in the upper left hand comer, left to right end top to bottom, es meny frames es required. The following diegrems illustrete the method: 1 2 3 Lee certee, plenches. tebloeux. etc.. pouvont Atre filmAs A doe taux da rAductlon diff Arents. Lorsquo lo document est trop grand pour Atre reproduit en un aaui cllchA. ii est fHmA A portir do I'engle supAriour geucho. do gauche A drohe. ot do haut en bes. en pronam la nombre d'imeges nAcesseire. Lee diegrammee suivants iilustrent ie mAthode. 1 2 3 i 4 5 6 SPEECH or HON. EUJAH WARD, OF NEW YORK, ON THI IMPEACHMENT OF JUDGE WATROUS; DILITERED IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, DECEMBER 14, 1858. r-'"^:: ■r.-x'^^ „' « ' -»•.; ,v T-.J. ■V.'"^' ■;..-.: -V; WASHINGTON: PRINTED AT THE OFFICE OF THE CONGRESSIONAL GLOBE. 1858. '.-rZ:^^-. ''"■i>*f^«3tf 4i i '> i ' i * ll g| t « l .> i-4^,tr.,*«W1[^ ■'^ff»V*^'^''i^'*»»- "■ -Q .8:iTl^vAr; %y.m I m^»lV,ttt:v^m,^ •»^«t^^* .' ,. ft^^J . '"»>■..■ rtj ft'. SPEECH. "1 •at Tke BoDM htvinf moaud tbe eouMention of Om imo- taHviif rcpoiUd by tba ConainM on the J«4ielMy, to itf- •raiiM 10 llM impctchniMil of Jadge Waumii— Mr. WARD wid: Mr. Stbakbr: 1 approach tkia aubject of the propoaed impeachment of Judge Watroua with a due aense of ita importance. I ({ave to the re- Sorta and evidence that consideration which waa emanded by my duty aa a legialator, during the iNlerim between the ae8aiona,to enable me to ar> rive at a Just conclusion in determining my vote, but without any intention of takingpart w the discussion. If the advocates of Judge Watroua had been content widi their vindication of him from the chaigea preferredi I should have remained silent. But aa some of them have thought proper to as- sail the accusers, I feel it my duty to address the House, for reasons that will appear in the course of my remarks. Sir, no member haa a higher respect for an inde- pendent judiciary than myself. I would do noth- ing to impair it; but I do not believe in that inde- pendence wbichtia characterized by tyranny and oppreaaion. I believe in that independence which is governed by an honest heart ana an integrity of purpose, without fear or favor. In no country ia an independent and fearless ju- diciary more important than in ours. The pecu- liar atructure of our Government, divided, aa ita Ainctions are, into executive, legialative, and ju- dicial, the latter assumes a hien character and « position of vast importance. It may be said to stand between liberty and despotism, and ia the great bulwark between legislative encroachment and the riehta of the people. If the CRtngress enact an unconstitutional law, the court can declare it void. This great power that it possesses, renders it necessary that tne ju- diciary ahould not only be independent, but pare, honest, and without taint or suspicion. I do not propose to follow the course of Ihis debate into an extended investigation, oran analy- sis of the evidence againat Judge Watrous. There are some points, however, in this proceeding for impaachawm, t» which I woald invite the atUao tioB of ike House. I insiat that we ahould hold the right of petition sacred, and that the exereiae of this gnat repab> Mean privilege of the eiliien ahould be treated with proper considantion by those who represent the rights and inltreata of the peopk. It is not praper for a member of this hononble body to reproaeh any man for the ezeieiao of thia right. It la not for tha Houaa to go beyond the suojeot-matter of the petitian, to Msail tha ehar- acler and motivea of tne citisen who seeks to ss* cure his rights, and invoksa the aoastitational power of Congnsa for the redraaa of grievanees. Sir, if the right of petition— if one of the moat important guaranteea of oar libert iea is to ba subverted, made a aouroe of invective againat tha character and motivea of eitizena who approach Conereaa. in a proceeding of thia nature, it ia of but uttle benefit to the people. For myaelf, I hava been taoght to recard the right of petition as one of the moat aacredaecvred to ua by the Conatitution, and intimately con« nected with the libertiea of the people; and I be- lieve it ia the duty of the Houae to eonaider the matter of the petition preferred, and the evidence adduced here for the impeachment of a Federal judge, aolely on ita menu, and with a view to determine the gnilt or innocence of the aeeuaed merely; and not to permit the iaaue to be changed by an attempt to place hia accuaera on trial in nis stead, by allowing their character to be assailed. I have noticed, with regret, attempts made to draw the attention of the Houae from inqniriea into the grounds for the impeachment of Judge Watroua, by attache upon the motivea of the me- morialiata, including the honor and integrity of tha people of Texaa whojoin in the deaire for the trial of the accuaed. Tne memorialiau aeek, and properly applied for redreea; and I do not wiah that the attention of thia Houae ahould be led away from inquiring into the grave chargea made againat a judicial officer of thie Government. It muat be borne in mind that it ia Judge Watroua that ia arraigned , and not Simon Mussina ; it is his mmmtm* MMki oAeial charaeter that hu to b« pronounced upon, and thia inreatigation should proceed upon in merita; tba Houm mutt do iia duty to the coun- try* detarmioinf whether there ii reasonable sus- Sicion of the gtiilt of Judee Watrous, and if he I impeachable upon the allegations that have been slanainc against him (he last ten years. Let tna House determine this ouestion on the evidence, and the evidence alone. The dignity of the Houae forbids that it should descend to vitu- perate priTate and unaccused citizens, who have appealed here for redress of wrongs, and not for inquisition and Judgment upon their motives. From the course of a portion of this debate, we should suppose that Mr. Mussina was on his trial, instead of the real parly. Th« nam* of thia gentleman has been drawn into this debate unjustly. He comes before this honorable body underi|| well-defined right, and is entitled to our protection. The distinguished member from Tennessee, !Mr. Rbadt,] particularly, exhibited a prejudiced leeling in hia remarks against the memorialist. He seems to regard it as a species of effrontery in him toaak for an investigation into Judge Wat- rous 's conduct. The House must ba sensible that a great wrong has been done to the cause of justice in permit- ting the inquiry to be thus diverted from Judge Watroua, and that an eoually great wrons has been committed towards Mr. Mussina, in allow- ing aecuaations, without evidence, to be made on the floor of this House against his character and motivea. Sir, I do not conceive that these proceedings furnish any occasion for going into an investiga- tion of Mr. Mussina'a claims to the respect, con- fidence, and good opinion of honorable members of this body. In reply to the assaults upon his character, made on this floor without warrant and in lan- guage I deem not proper, on the part of the advo- cates of Judge Watrous, it ii but just that I should say Mr. Mussina is a resident of the city of New York, which I have the honor in part to represent, where he has resided upwards of two yeara; and it ia due to my convictions to add that from personal acquaintance with him, as well as frord a knowledge of the part he has borne in this proceeding, I am persuaded of the integrity of his motives and the entire right he has, and the pro- priety of his conduct in askinfx the investigation of the conduct of an oflicer, who, he conceives, has oppressed, betrayed, and defrauded him. I do not consider this a proper occasion to apeak ftirther on this subject, except to remind the House of the fact that Mr. Simon Mussina, the active prosecutor in this proceeding, is con- tending for the recovery of his own direct and personal rights i)i the Cavazos suit— he being jointly interested in the land transactions of his Brother, agaihst whom the judgment was ren- dered; and that the right and integrity of the pro- ceeding he has instituted, for the punishment of the accused, has nevet' before been questioned by aay authority to which he has submitted hia case. On the contrary, he has received the indorsement of public bodies, and a sovereign State has united in the prayer of his petition; and he stands to-day asking for justice, and justice only, from this hon- orable body. In the proceedings of the Thirty-Fourth Con- gress it will be seen that the matter of Mr. Mus- sina'a^ petition was made the subject of carefbl investigation, and that the Judiciary Committee unanimously indorsed it, granted his prayer^nd recommended the impeachment of Judge Wat- rous, for high crimes committed in a series of acta of oppression and fraud upon the memorialists. The report of this committee slates in a conve- nient and concise form the leading facts of Mr. Mussina's case, and I will read from it as tar aa it roav be necessary for the House to be informed in this particular, in order to show the grounds upon which the committee unanimously determ- ined the guilt of Judge Watrous and recom- mended his impeachment: << Tlie committee would, however, Mate very briefly the aubtunce of the chaifoi In the petitioni, and the |rouod« npon which they have remlved to repoit the retoloUon. The eomplainu ia tlie petition of Jacob MoniBa, amoaf oUieri, are founded upon the condact ofimifa Watrooi ia a chancery lult litigated in hii court at Oaivedon, and cliarae that throughout the progren of the cue he wai op- prei)>lve and paitial ; that he emtiely dirngarded (he well- aubiiilicd rules of law and evideace, and the rt^ti of U(i- gant«. "The cante at fialveaton wai commenced by one Cavaso* tt ml. w. Btillman el al., January 19, 1649, for partitioa aiaong Ibaeomplainanu, ofa large tract of land ii(aated upon (be eai( bank of the Bio Grande, which included the town of Brownsville, and to quiet (he tide a« agalnnt the claim of (hose who were made duftndanta. The bill of complaint, which was verifled by oath, alleged thai all the complain- anu were citizens of (ha Republic of Itfexico, and that the defendants werecitixensof the Sute of Texas, which gave (he Uni(ed States court Jurisdiction. Afterwards it appear- ing upon the report ofa master that the suit was commenced by the attorneys ofCavaao* without (he knowledge or eon- sent of several of the parties made complainants, the court ordered that the names of such parties should be struck out of the complaint and inserted as defendants, upon the agreomen( of an B(tomey to appear (br them, and place upon the record in the cause, by answer or e(herwiae, such Bvermen(a as would recognize the jurisdiction of the court, by acknowl«dging themselves citizens of the State of Tex- as, although it was well known (ha( they were citizens of Mexico, and not of the Sute of Texas, and. although no notice had been given (o any of such fairties, one of (hem being a married woman, and ano(her an innin( fhr whom no guardian ad littm was ever appoin(ed, (heir righ(s were llnatly passed upon in (he decree in (his irregular manner. These iBcta might not have been cause of serious complaint, if the iudge, in the subsequent proceedings, had shown a disposition to administer Justice with an even hand. " The petitioner, Jacob Jtfussina,wa8 not made a defend- ant In the cause until after these proceedings were had ; but his interest afterwards, appearing by (he alfldavit of one of (he delkndan(a,aI(hongh hi) was not a citizen of Texas, but a citizen of Louisiana, he was made a defendant by an amendment to (he bill of compiain(. The comini((ee find (ha(, during (he progiess of the cause, the well-esublished rules of law and evidence were repeatedly disregarded by (he court, and in all cases In (kvorof (be complarnan(sand against the defendants. The testimony of Interested wit- nesses was allowed against the objection of the defendants ; and the deposition ond sflldavlts of an attorney for the com- plainants were received in evidence, against the objection of the defendanu, altlmugh it was shown by his own testi- mony that he was prosecuting (he suK under an agreemen( of champerty— that is, |ie was to share in the proceeds of the tale of (he property after it should have been recovered and sold.' " The court allowed the use of translations of importan( documents tending to prove the title of tlie complainants to the property in question, which had been made out by the i^ taaa ■uorniiy wbo wai by urcement to ilinre in ihe oroflu of iha mil when lite land anuuld b« recovered ana ioM, wlUioM acting nndcr the MucUoua efan oatU.and wIUmmii Um uanilaliotti bcln( verllcd bjr oaib. And ui« court alio overruled Um obicciion of tiie defendantt to Ihe IM« of lueh iraMlailoot. There i« inine record tenUinony befbre llic comnltiee tbowtni thai theie trandaiione were false in «onM reepeeli, wiUioul ihowlng in whalreipecu lliey were falw. ! " A ilioft lime previous to the January term of Ihe dia- ; trict court oTOalveelon for 1859, Judge Walroui cauied h ; to be undentond by nimorf , and by declaration* given out i by Mmifir ^bUcly, ibal he would not hold a January term ai OalveaUM, whlvb came lo Uia knowledgu of Jacob Mui- •ina and prevenied hia attending that court, and taking (ueh atepa aa might be neceiiary to lecure the benefit* of an appeal. But notwilhilanding hi* declaration*, he did iiold the January term alOalveeloa, and rendered a decree in the (aid chancery cauie, declaring the tiUe of IMutaina ^ 10 the property in controveny to be null and void, and en- 1 Joining liim forever from further a**erting any claim lo the i •amr, remarking ai the time thai be had seen or converted with the parties at Aaalin, and that thev bad eonieirted | 10, or were latiilled with, the decree : which declaration of tlie Judge prevented an aiiorney of Jacob MuMlna, then happening to bu in court, from taking Ihe necessary elep* for an appeal ; whereas in truth and in Ihct, Judge Wal- roui had not seen or conversed with Jacob Muisins Oalvetton, or Msewhete, or any person representing his interest; and the pretense thai be iMd consented lothe decree, or wu laiisfled with it, waa without foundation nr excuse. Five of the eight complainants, wbo were male- rial and necessary ptfrlies, had been made defendants in an eariy stage of the cause, and without any answer or alle- gations on their nan, eioeptlwo ofthem, a decree was nn- dered in iheir favor against Mussina ; and lo perfect an appeal, a notice ihoula have been given in open court, at the lime the decree waa rendered, ur, in case of appeal be- ing taken afterwards, by the provisions of the twenty-aecond section of tlie Judiciary act, the appellees muatbe served witii a citation of appeal ; and as one of the parties was a married woman, andanotber an infant, all ofthem residing out of the Jurisdiction of our courts, being citizens of Mex- ico, it became very diffleuit, if uol impossible, to perfect an appeal after the court had adjourned. " It further apiiean, that afterwards, on or about Ihe — day of January, 1854, Judge Watrous,upon the application of the solicitor of the complainant* In Ihe chancery cause at Oalveston, cited said Jacob Mussina lo appear la court at that place to answer for a contempt of court, in contin- uing to assert Uiat be had an interest in the said property at Brown«ville. The acts charged to be In contempt of court were, first, that he had commenced and prosecuted a suit in Ihe city of New Orleans, against some of Uie panic* and tolicilors in the said case of Cavaso* el «<• e>. SUIIman e( at., for conspiracy, in the proceeding* in said case, to de- fhiud and cheat, under color of legal proceedings, the said Jacob Mussina out of bis interest in the propeny at Browns- ville. The suit at New Orleans waa commenced Ihe year before Ihe decree was pronounced at Oalveston. That de- cree did not notice the suit at New Orleans, or in any man- ner enjoin it. The other act charged to be a contempt, v^^os the filing of nrotesla by said Mussina in the office o*' t^m Secretary of War and IntheQuanermasierGeneral's' -n-'«, at Washington, against the payment of money b, ■.w' Depanment to the succeasftil litigants for the rent of lii - Brownsville properly. The court declared Jacob Mussln to be In contempt, and issued an order for his arrest ; and because he could not be found, not being a citizen of Texas, hut a resident and citizen of Louisiana, an order was issued lo sequestrate all bis properly. The comniillee deem the proceedings for a contempt lo have been irregular, unjust, and illegal, and, taken in connection will the previous pro- ceedings and rendition of the decree, oppressive and tyran- nical. I '■ In Ihe case of Cavazos tt al. v$. SiJIIman et al., the | record affords sufnclani evidence to satisfy the committee i that there waa collusion between the solicitors for the com- 1 plalnants and a pan of the solicitors for the defendants, and ' that a pan of the defendants, or one of them at least, Jacob Mussina, was defVaHded and betrayed by such collusion. They would further state, that there is evidence to satisfy i them that a port of the defendants were concerned in the i conspihicy, and that Ihe Judge of the court knew of the I collusion during the pendency of the suit, and that he al- > luded to a conversation beiwerii bimtelf and one of Ihe d«- ftindanto' ■nliellors, who waa cnnecnNd hi Um eoilusioa, when be remarked Umi Um dafeadMit* WUM — itrtid wMh ' lie decree. The defemUnl M iisahia cmmmmoI • mU M (ialvi^ston, agaliul the other delkadani* uil lolicilon In the cnnw, on the ISlh of March, 1890, ftwanell eoii*pirMy ( but owing to contiRMl olMiaele* and dalufi ia Um pwat cution ofihaianit atUalvesion, Maeaiat aAeiWMlai h«i before Uia readitiou of ib« decree !• Um ekaaoanr cauaa, commenced a lull against Ihe aama panie* Ibr toe sama cause at New Orleans, and Judge Walrooaafterwaid* de- clared laid Moasiii* to be In eonumpi tot hnviof com- menced and ptiwecHied ibia suit al Naw Oflaans, and «r. dered him to b« Imprlaoned, and beeanaa ha could not ba found ill the Bute of Tezaa, ordered bis property to be *e- qucsiraled, as above stated. " The committoa havaaxUDtnodnuniatowtaearda, con- sisting of piaadinp, ordar* of court, afldavil*, and depoal- tion*; and, after a paUentand laborious raseareta, they have reluclantiy come lo Ihe conelusion Ibat Ihe coMluet of Judge Wairau*, In the caaes abova reiened io, canaM l« expTained without euppoaing that he waaacMUedbyoihar ihan upright and Jnai motivo* i thai in hi* diaragard of ihe w«ll-e*laMl*bed rule* of law and evidonee, b« basuul In Jeopardy and aaerlflced the rtebta of Htlgaat*. and in ac- quiring a title lo property in Hiigatioii,arbeld by advone po« ses i l o n , be baa given Juai eau*a of alnmiiaifca eitlBaM of Taxu, for Ihe aafety of private riabu and property, and of thehr public domain, and bu deoarred thein from Uie rlghu of an impanial trial in the Federal court* of their own diitriet In view of the above-rarliad Iheis, and Iha con- cluaions of the committee, ibey report Um avideaoe, and the following resol ution : •' RtMlfi, That John C. Wairaus, United Bute* district Judge Ibr the di*irict of Texas, ba Impeached of high erime* anamlademeanon." . It ii eapecialljr to be remembered , Mr. Speaker, that thia report ii baaed entireljr on record teati- mony. I deaire to call the attention of the Houae eapecially and emphatically to thia fact, and to the further and crowning fact that theoe recorda of Judge Watroua'a court, on which all the mate- rial chargea of Muiaina were baaed, were before the committee of the present Congreaa, aa like- wise the parties who made them, and no attempt was made to impeach any one of them. These same accusing recorda, on which the Judiciary Committee of the Thirty-Fourth Con- gress came to a unanimoua judgment of the guilt of Jiidge Watrous, are before the House to-day as witnesses for his impeachment. It is worthy of the observation of the House that the report of the committee of the last Congress, to which I have just referred, does not partake of the character of mere assertions or argument onl v, but rests upon a most careful exanunation of tne evidence. We find, in the abstract they have annexed to their report, which I make a part of my remarks, the date assigned and the page given for every material item of evidence in the case. (See Ap- pendix No. 1.) I would call the attention of the House to the approval which four members of the Judiciary Committee of this Congress have given to the judgment so deliberately made of Judge Wat- roua's official misconduct towards Mussina by the former committee of the Thirty-Fourth Con- gress. This approval comes to us with such authority and with such extraordinary evidences of truth as to constitute, in unbiased minds, a chain of evidence that leads irresistibly to the conviction of the guilt of Judge Watroua. It is known that the present Judiciary Com- -■ *:-^«,»awTt-*^^*"' ■^'^-'^■- • V> JJ'.'^.Jl ,■ ' > * n W^SSatSMlilii i' niltMal ibalHt Mftion iDTeMic«i«d tha conduct ttJttift WatrmM with Um malMt paU«ne«,an4 with Ml •▼UwM Mid Mrneit dMira to utrin at the tfuth. For Ire noathi thia inrtitiniion wu MMdiljr puiWMdi for a mat part of this time the eonmiUM wtra in dailjr aauion oMupying in their exanimtion of witneeiM even the houra of the dajr when the Houie waa eittinf. NocinaBMtaaoeawere wanting, nopaina were ominad, nothing waa denied, to inaare a full, im pftrdal, and trathfbl inTeatigation. Evary oppor- tunity ofezplanalion and deiiinae waa afforded to Judge Watraua. He waa indulged in a tedioue deftnae by tha aommitteet he had able counael to eonduet the inveallntiont and in a apirit of liberality, aa I think, the oonmittee went eo far aa to reniae to allow hia witnaaaea to be im- Thia, I wy« ■i'l *» undue liberality; for it en- abled Judge Watroua to make a defenae firom the teatimony of the ofieere of hia eourt, and alao the partnera in hia iniquitv. But notwithatanding all theae citeumatancea or advantajj[e on the part of the judge, and after the moat patient and compre- henaive examination of all the facta, no matter how remote, in hia faror, we find, air, a portion of the committee affirming, in the atrongeat and most unreaerTed termB,the aame judgment of hia guilt that had lirat been pronounced, on the aame charge which Muaaina had aubmitted for inTea- tigation in the Thirty-Fourth Oon^^reae. That jttd|;ment of cenaureandeTidence of guilt ia affirmed in the following clear and decided lan- guage. Summing up the proofh in the caae, they say: " Bveiy lrr«cttlar or wron|fUI deetiinn of the Judje wu in tkfot of the compUiBMU and aninit the derendant, Munlaa, and dioaa oeeapjrlng a ilmUar poiition, and wai to Uieir particular injury. By nainttinlni the urocaedinf •I one ruhtAilly brought on the chancery iTde of the court, thaM denndaati were illepliy deprivea of their right to ■ trial by a Jury, and were compelled to aubmit to an adjudi- eaUoB apoD tboir righu to the property in auch a manner that the deeiiion would be llnal and eonciniive ai to the title of the property, initeadofone upon the right of poageuion, which would at enee have been pronounced, on the law aide of the court, in an action of ejectment. By maintain- lag Jurladictioo over the caie, when a portion of the de- fondanla at well aa the plaintifl* weraalieni, these defend- anta were deprived of their rights to have the queitioni ihvoived in it decided by the courta of Teiai, to whoee Ju- riidiclion they were rightfblly amenable, and whose lawi were to govern in that decision. By admitting incompetent witnesses to testiQr, their rightt were atfected by evidence given by persona who had an interest in the litigation ad- verse to theirs. And, Anally, they were prevented from having the deehrion aninst them reviewed in the appellate court hy the Dtilare of the Judge to perform his full duty to tliem in flicilitating the exercise of the right of appeal, given to tliero by law, fVom motives of public policy, for their own private advantage, and that, too, when there is some reason to believe that ibe decree by the court Is not in conrormity with the principles of law, as recognized in Texas. Buch a coune of action, continued t ' .rough the whole progress of a cause, in fhvor of some of t' .e parties and against others, is, to our minds, conclusive evidence of the existence of a purpose, on tha part of the Judge, to fltvor one party, or set of parties, at the expense and to the injury of others, which is mconslstent with an upright, honest, and impartial dis- charge of the Judicial function. And this, we believe, con - stitutes a breach of the ' good behavior* upon which, by the Constitution, the tenure of the Judicial office is made to depend." A 51 to that portion of the charge asaigned by r ' ina, in relation to the judge's prosecution of him for alleged contempt, the report of the com- mittee of thie Congreaa, from which I have Joat read, alao aflrmi the former inveetigation, to tha effect that the action of the judge waa tyrannical and oppreaaive. Thia matter, air, of unaathor- ited, relatione, and wrongful peraecution of a citiaen for alleged judicial contempt, ia no liehl anbject of complaint. It muat be eonaidercd tnat in auch a caae there ie no appeal to the Supreme Courti and a corrupt and malicioua judge may practice hia tyranniea with impunity, under dia- guiae of such proceedinge for contempt aa were authorized by Judge Watroua in the caae of Mua- aina, unleaa Congreaa, aa it ia now invoked to do. shall interfere to eatabliah a precedent that shall hereafter check judicial tyranny. In raferenaa to tha aoiMaai^ aaae, the report already referred to as that of a portion or the preaent committee, says: " It also seams clear, when thn pleadinp in the suit in- stituted by Mussina against Btlllman, Balden and Ailing, and Baaae and IIord,in the Iburlh disuiet court of New Orleans, are considered, together with the Judgment rendered in it upon the vardiot of a Jury, and tile evidence in the con- tempt case, that there was no foundation whatever for tha proeeeding against him for a contempt, and that the action of the Judge with respect to it was unauUiorised by law, and waa intended to be vexatious and oppressive. How any other eoBciusion can be arrived at, when it is remembered Uiat Uie suit in New Orleans was instituted by Mussina against bis co-deAndants alone and their counsel, and re- lated to rights growing out of Uieir own transactions, it is not easy to conceive. " It appeara that the report from which I hare been reading ia signed by the honorable membera from PennayWania, [Mr. Chaphan,] Wiaconain, [Mr. BiLLiMGBUMT,') Louisiana, [Mr.TATLoa,] and Alabama, [Mr. Hovitoh,] gentlemen diatin- guiahed for legal learning and talents. In addition to these two reports, the former made to the Thirty-Fourth Congress, and followed by the one just referred to, made at tlie last ses- sion, both adjudging the accused guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors, we have acopynf tne reaolutions of the Legislature of Texas, adopted in 1848, branding Judge Watrous with " one of the most stupendous irauda ever practiced upon any country or any people, "and urgently request- ing him to resign his office. This comes to us as an expression of the voice of Texas ten years ago. The same appeal lingers here for justice, and the resolution still stands unrepealed upon the statute-books of the State. I will read the resolutions: " Whereas it is believed that John C. Watrous, Judge of the United States district court for the district of Texas, has, while seeking that important position, given legal opin- ions in causes and questions lobe litigated hereafter, in which the inieroats of individuals and ot the State are im- mensely involved, whereby it is believed he lias disqualified the court in which he presides from trying such questions and causes, thereby rendering it necessary to transfer an indefinite and unknown number of suits hereafter to be com- menced, to courts out of the State for trial ; and whereas it is also believed that the said John C. Wntroiis has, while in office, aided and assisted certain individuals, if not directly interested himself, in an attempt to fasten U|ion this State one of the must stupendous frauds ever practiced upon any country or any people, the elfect of wliich would be to rob Texas of millions of acres of her public domain, iier only hope or resource for the payment of her public debt; and whereas his conduct in court and elsewhere, In derogation of his duty as a Judge, has been marked by such prejudice and injustice towards the rights of the State and divers of .i^i-.tL'i^f^iJM : m tM cMmm, m lo ilMW ibM b* iloM bm Jwtwri Ik* Mgb ■tailoa h* eee«Bt« i TiMMftM*, _ •• RacTiMi I . Br M rtMiMri »• «U £«|; .:ertificates being made, said Judge transferred said suit for determination to the United States court in another Slate, after shaping the case and influencing that court in such a manner as to obtain his desired Judgment ; and where- at said Judge, since his appointment, has interested him- self in a class of eleven-league land claims, which cIosb of claims cover millions of acres of the best lands of the Slate, generally regarded as invalid, end his vast interest in sus- taining said class of claims, and means of accomplishing Ills purpose, owing to his station and influences with tbe nlBcials and Juries of his court, render him obnoxious and dangerous to tlie general welfhre of the people ; and where- as it is believed by very many good citizens that said VVal- rous, in connection with one Thomas League, and ntli«r ' compeers,' are directly or indirectly interested in most of the important suits brought in his court ; and whereas it is believed that said Watrous is now in Mexico, engaged in *f thai eiaat of lead aiataa, ki order w Mi- •> al Ik* ennM* of kl* eo«»- aad t m m wkoi k* *> dlt g ia*ilk H > f uMu i sad wk*»a- aa Ik* period of kia adaUafiuaitoa fca* h**« ■Mik*d by a r*«wtt*d, aad tmi W aaaiaia ar* laauaeMd, la at* *v*r| I*- gufanaia meoaa la ikali power to procai* ut* nbovh of taM Joka O. Wauow ftoa taid odto*." I vish the House moat serionsljr to coi)«ider hetherthisarravof roua, pronouncea in I whether this arraf of verdicts aninat Judfe W at- in the most deliberate manner. and under the moat imposing eirenmslances^ bj Rublie bodies, does not peremptorilT call for a ill investifatton of the ease bjr refufar and ftnal trial at the bar ot the Senatii. It will be rtcol- leelad also that a reeolution ot the Taxaa Lagis- latura was pressnted at the last session, request- ing this honorable body to inTeatigate the omcial misconduct of Judge Watrous. Sir, in arriving at the conclnaion that the inter- ests of public justice and the peeuliar dutf of the House, in aproceeding of tnis nature, require that Judge Watrous should be committed for trial before the Senate of the United Sutes, I have not neglected to examine all the defenses and evi- dence urged in his behalf. I have sought to do full and impartial Justice to the accused, to the extent of my ability to Judge between truth and falsehood, right and wrong. I have not omitted to examine the report emanating from a minority of the committee and made in his defense, and which ia indorsed by my colleague, [Mr. Clakk,] a member of the Judiciary Committee, who has urged the exculpation of the Judge in a forcible speech. I examined that report, sir, with some anxiety to discover in it some ground, some recital of evidence, or some circumstance to excuse Judge Watrous, or to justify a charitable doubt, which I should have been glad to entertain, of his guilt. But I found that it amounted to nothing more than a broad assertion of the judge's innocence, slighting the evidence, and even failing, on its own showing, to examine into a portion of the charges. I would direct the attention of the House to an instance of omission in this minority report to inquire into the merit* of an act of Judge Wat- rous which was particularly compiainea of, and which was strongly censured by the unanimous voice of the Judiciary Committee of the Thirty- Fourth Congress ana by a portion of the present committee. This instance of omission may well serve to illustrate the want of proper consideration of a material part of the charge. Referring to the process of contempt issued against Mussina, the signers of the report declare: " If it hod been followed by actual orrett of perton or sequestration of property, the undersigned, out of tender regard for the rights of the citicen, might be disposed to inquire into its merits with care." What a strange avowal is this to make ! The merits of the contempt cose have not been inquired into with care, because the executive officer of Judge Watrous 's court failed to capture the victim #1 m-' - '•• ■ SB SffW i f n i V„ybi, I -^ -* *♦ . t'*;^ . V -•»■** —t.. «,^«. , B ui datpoil him of Ilia proportjr. Wu it lew un- iMM, l«M uBtolhoriMd by few, Um eriminal in iIm J«4(* to iMHM wriu of amM Mi4 MqMslntiun from tbt Ami llwt thtj happenad to b« nturnad ■matiaiadf Hia oAnaa waa tha aama, whether tkavritaaaeoaipliahadhiaobJaeUorBot. Hevio- ktad law, aboaad hia power, and proatltatad hia «o«ft to privata malice and enpiditvs and forthia, it mifht be auppoaed, a Federal fadfe would be held anawerable to tha offended and outraged lawa of hia eoantrjr. But no s the aignera of the report weuM not aven laqulrA into the conduct with care, beeauaa thafpoor hunted victim of Judicial tTranny had f&t, for the time, beyond the reach of hie per- aeeaion. It moat bo remembered, too, that theae tyranaieal wriu atill hang over Jacob Muiaina, who, a eitizen and reaident of New Orleana, can* ?Si»*ees%«m^ the execution of the tyrannical aentence of Judge Watrona. In what a poaitioadoeathiaeireumatanea place the contempt eaae, ao alightlr and careleaaly dia- roiaaed by the honorable ffentlemen who have aub- acribed ine Judgment " fliU and entire acquittal" of tho aeeuaed I Here ia a eitizen of Louiaiana pre- vented from entering the bordera of Texaa, die- qualified from holding property there, and actually forbid to go into a State or the Union; and yet we are told by thia branch of the Judiciary Commit- tee which exculpate Judge Watroua, tnat '■ there ia nothing in it deaerving the attention of the Houae." I do not conaider it neceaaary, Mr. Speaker, after pointing out thia instance of failure of duty and diaregaid of right and juatice in the minority report, to eatabliah by further and detailed criti- ciam ita unreliability. I do not conaider it necea- aary to indicate further the abaence of a full and proper eonaiderationofthepointa involved. They are aufficiently obvioua ttom the judgment and temper manifeated inexcuaing and protecting the tyranny of Judge Watroua, oecauie hia malice had fallen aomewhat abort of ita aim. But, air, before diamiiaing thia report, I cannot refrain flrom offering aome general remarks on the viaionary auggeationa it makea, that " there it nothing in the affair but the reaentfulness of dis- appointed litiganta;" meaning, I suppose, Mus- sina and Spencer, who had preferrea distinct ac- cusationa against Judge Watrous. Sir, the idea is simply preposterous that private citizens, flrom mere " resenwilnese," should subject themselves to years of toil and harassment, and to an enorm- ous expense, in order to bring a judge to a trial if it could only result in his full and entire ac- quittal ! It is entirely improbable that any mnn of common prudence would, merely to gratify bad passions, undertake the impeachment of ajudge, and follow it up through all the tedium, difficulty, odium, and expense, that he must necessarily en- counter in bringing him to the high judicature of the United States Senate, with a conviction that an acquittal must eventually be pronounced in favor of the accused. It should be considered to what pains and haz- ards a party subjects himself in taking ground against a United Suua judge in aeeking hia im- peachment if thia judM ahould be really inno- eant. Cbargea of Juoiaial aormption art Rot likely to be nude, at least not likely to be fbl- lowed up with real zeal, regardleaa of time and axpenaa, and through all the difleultiea thai the official and hia aurroundinga amy threw in the path of Juatice, merely fW>m penoaal apiu, and without any foundation in faet. I think that it ia quite improbable that ajudge could be peraecuted to this extent by reaentnil auilors in hia eourtt and I may say fbruer, that it ia not probable auch a motive or private malice could originate a pro- ceeding againat Judge Watrous, the truth and Justice of which have oecn affirmed in moat of the preliminary invuatigationa of the ease made by public authority. , .XiMM-teveattoBtlona iMve covered the whole ground of tha judge 'a official miaoonduet, and not only on chargea to which I ha ve referred in these re- marks, but in numerouaand multifhrious chargea of other acta of Judicial corruption he ia deemed guilty, and in conaequence of which he haa be- come repalsive to the people of his district, who now, in conjunct' ■n with the memorialists, seek the iuterposition of thia honorable body. The limited time allowed to me under the rule* of the House for thia discussion, does not permit me to enter at any length into the land frauds and land apeculations which Judge Watroua ia charged with. But centlemen who have preceded me in thia debate nave aufficiently informed the House of the material facto on which the charee of Eliphaa Spencer ia preferred in accusing the judge of^ cor- ruptly lending his court to sustain his own title to a grant of land, and of complicity in the pro- curement of an alleced foreed power of attorney, upon which his title wholly depends. I cannot now do more, for want of time, than to refer generally to these important and apparently sus- tained charges, and to invite a careful attention to the majority report of the committee on this important point. 1 would invite the attention of the House to the character of the testimony by which it has been sought to absolve Judge Watrous. It appears that there were brought nere a number of friendly and interested witnesses to give evidence in favor of Judge Watrous, consisting of the officers of his court, Love, Cleveland, Jones, Shearer, his agent,JohnTreanor,and of his partners in alleged land speculations. League, Lapsley, Frow, and others. The Judiciary Committee refused toollow these witnesses to be impeached, but I beg the House to examine their testimony with just sus- picion. Numerous contradictions appear. You will see evidence of collusion; you will notice Judge Watrous refreshing the recollections of these witnesses, (see Appendix No. 3,) and the variance in their testimony from day to day, to suit his case. You can then give proper credit to men naturally prejudiced in nivor of the accused and interested m his crimes. Mr. Speaker, in conclusion let me indulge the hope that this House will not hesitate to execute the high duty it owes to the country in subjecting ••'.^-^<^l;5■^:^■^■*"^-•".:* -.•- ■*■ m .!>«« «^««> »t N > ii>^wf«ww>i^-i ■'it^i^mi "S«*iw»5^ I to the been to trki bafor* th* Sanato of Ik* Uniud SutM • j jodc* who aumia Man «■ ahaffid vith hifh • crimMuid aMMMWwn, which Immii th« hiih character of, and our respect for, the bench . Thle ; inpeachment i« due to the dignity and purity of juoicial poeition, to the people or Teiaa— to the | memoriaUet whoae right* aave been trampled j upon, and to the eountry; and moro than all| it ia ; due to the aeeuaed that he ahonld Tindieate himaelf i before the high court of impeachment, that if in- 1 nocant he may be aequittea. Until that is done, ; his vseAilness as a Judge is gone, his honor tar- i nished, and his integrilr impeached. The House may reflise to put him upon hie | trial, but it cannot obliterate the reeora of his alleged crimes and misdemeanors, aor remote the stigma under which he rests; nor will sueh arota restore the eonlldenee of tbe people of his own district or the country. [APFBNOU No. 1. •tMracI •/iMMaMMi r^/krralto in tttptft •/ CtmmMf •/ U* AMy- AmM OMfrwt. In the Cansoa eaae, rail ww iBMiiatad Januarr 19, 1849, by B. AllM uA WUItiun O. Halt, loUeiion, elalmlnfl to reprcMni aldit clttsaiia of Maiico, igainn eitlMiw of Teiaa, Ibu |l*liig tta« nnltad 8uum eourti Juriadlction, (p. 15.) Motloni 10 diMilM the Mil of eomplaiiit aa to flv* of tba eomplainanu, aa having baaa Alad ay tha tald Allen and Hale wlUioui authority, (p. 3S.) Motion to dlimiM, rararied to a nuw tar in chancery, who, after ciUng and hearing the partiei, reponed that no author- ity to eommanea tha iolt on the part of five of Uie com- plalaantt had baan r Don OonitantinoTar- nava, Dolta Angela Garcia Lalbn de Tamava, hU wife, Don Ramon Lafon. Don Manuel Priato,and DolSa Feliciana Goseaicoche de Tigerina, made paniei complainant In the bill of complaint in thii eauie ; and upon fiirther coneider- ation of the leveral affldavita filed In reipect to the lald motion and tbe Mid bill of complaint, and the argument of conniel, it ii now hereby ordered that the lald motion be luiulned, and that tha oUier panlei complainant in the •aid bill named have leave to amend the aaid bill by making the abovenamed partiea complainant deffcndanta to the ■aid bill ; and they, the said partiei, io to be made de- Ibndania, now appearing by R. H. Hord, their attorney in fkct, in open court, do agree that, being lo made partiei de- fendant, they will place upon the record in thii canae, by answer or otherwise, luch averments aa will recognice the Jurisdiction of this court, by acknowledging themselves citizens of this State for the purposes of tliis action, and the costs already incurred and the liabilities accrued to be burnc by the parlies remaining cnmplaioanti." Jacob Mussina's interest appeared by affidavit of S. A. Belden, (p. 43. ) Bill amended, making him, as a citizen of Texas, a party defendant, July 7, 1849, (p . 49.) Filed his answer, which was under oath, and in said anawer act forth that he was a citizen of Louiaiana, (p. SO.) !• aiaMa all peikagis af ttaaa, ethibHa. uaMariMaafaay aonaad dasaripMea wbai- aoavaf, dapaadaat Ibr dieir adaUaslon apoa Um dapoeiUons orafiJMriliorMrilMaMO, r— - - r.. . of tfca lamplalea M i, oa ovainlad, (p. 118.) Cieaa-laiamiuoriaa aad Ma laHNal, (as. UB. 1] ■la., one of Um soUrlior* It af hla laitraat, (p. 119;) lorWHUaaiO. Uaiaaa M Ma l awwa l , (pa. UB, M.!^ lat,) wDaMlahaadnMa UM ka ImU ■ dead Mr parlaf dM pNfeHv la IMaattaa.and thai be aad Ma paiiaar waaa t» riMfs M fee pmiediar ika sale ef Uwareaaity wlwa laa a aaied. lofdMiNfafijr B s«rai « j»>aiaM»i r a/ riiNan O. JToia, fpaga U«.) " Boa* HaM BAar sMMag af ika otIgiBal agraaoMnt, and after Um ao aaa ww ca a Mat of tMa aanta, Um eoMolalaaaia ancMad coavayMwao to Mr. ABea sad aiyaalf ofaeartaln aadtvldad ponlaa of Uieir dlatribWlTa iliaiaa oTUm tmtt of ' la Um bill, bat ikaea aouvayaaeaa wart Boi land, la e lad i ag Um town aiiaa beltan Mated. Tha convey- aaeae wan laiaadid aa a lecarMy ftir ear p w H ea H an, and to give aa alien or power la aaibrea tha aareeaaeat belbre waUonad, aad waie ao aUpuMed fctia the origlaal agiac- ■aalHaair k~— - •• -a- •• In aaawar to the aaeend ewea-la t ene g a t ei f , I refbr to my I b naar aaawar, aad dlaUncUy lay, that I iliall not ra- eaiva. Is eoaacqaanea of tha agreemeat rafbned to, aay grioMreonipmiaiioa, In tba event the complainants re- cover, dwa If the dahndaata prevail, aaeept In so (br u my ponaar and mvaalf will than have done a pan of what we aadaneek to do, ead will eo a aeqa ea tly have laaa labor befttre ua t whathat wa ihall sMka anytUng In addidoa to Um amoont abeady paid ua by oai eliania, will depend an- ttrely upon tba aaeaaaaAil liaae of die othar aalia to ba ooBimenead, aa waU aa of diia, and Uia (tarther aala ef tba land 10 rar. '>rad. <• In am ' to Uia third croaa-latanogatory, I rafbr to my Ibregoing aniwera. Aa to tha land, Ineluding the town liu of Brownsville. I have ahraady aald that I am npt, by any agreement, to have aay portioa of said land. In aay event, nor any intereat In sueb land, but only a poraoa of tha proceeds of sale, ahould tha aame be Baally recovered and sold." William O. Hala'a deposiUon, read In support of Uia UUa of Uie eomplainanu, (p. 135,) and ha waa received aa a general witness throughout tha prograia of Uia caaaa. (See pp. 65, 71, 88, 69, 80, 110, 111, 117, 140, 145, 146, 147, 148,149,150,151.) »''»»''-»»» See also his affldavita in law eaae 134— tha aama iMe being in Issue, and same counsel, (pp. 635, 655, 650, 657, 659 i) alio, contempt cue, (p. 337.) Tbe principal pan of the documentary evidence of tbe complaiaanta conaisted in what purported to ba tranala- tions flrom tba Spanish. Thaaa trandaUons were made by William O. Hale, Esq., and not awom to, as shown in Uie obJecUona and excapUons of tbe defendants, which were overruled, (pp. 109, 110, 153.) Translationa were In soma respecu false, (p. fWO.) Hee exceptions of Jacob Mussina, (pp. 95, 108, 109, 114;) ovenruled, (pp. 915, 918.) See, also, p. 317. Tbe court permitted Robert H. Hord, counsel for defend- ants and witness covertly interested, to testily at the hear- ing of said cause, and sustained his refUsal to anawer tbe following proper and legal queiUon, intended to show Uiat be bad a collusive Interest adverse to Jacob Muaainai "Tbe solicitors of Jacob Mussina put tbe following ques- tion to Mr. Hord : " ' Have you, or have you not, any understanding or agreement with the complalnanta, or either of them, or their agent or solicitor, in relaUon to the determination or setUe- ment of this cause, or of any of the matters involved there- in, adverse to any interest or right claimed by Jacob Mus- sina, in any property or rights involved in this suit ? Are you or not ioterested in any such understanding or aprr .. ment?' " Which question Mr. Hord declined to answer ; and thereupon the court decided that the quesUon need not be answered. " And Uieteupon tbe said Robert H. Hord, being sworn in chief by Uie court, deposed and said as follows." Hord'a testimony taken by leave of the court in support aNN im-^ri^. B yn »i*i>4i iW>-->l< Mttcilw for the eofflpltimnu, (p. 119-) Tb« dMTM (p. II*) eovfn • mneb lainr met of taad ibM Um fiaM r«Ue4 upon In eTldeaea, and adopM difltmnt u4 aon csiandeA bMUHUifns il>u tlioM dMcribed in tiM ■mm and laehMM in Ik* imKommv •ipMninf Um Mrrm made by the holden oTiIm giant, (pp. IM, IM, ITl, US.) Jndie Wairona MMdd It W b« andanteod, kv AMlara- tion glvM out by bimaair pabUtlx, Uwt ha wiHrid not bold a laaitaijr um at flaivotion. " " Pottor.D. v. ,aad.iobn8, i0«o nport, p. 9| M« depaddoM,M. M. Pott«r,p. O. ^leUwa, F. H. Meiri' nan. B. 0. Franklin. and-Jobn 8. Jonw. pp. 180, 181, 183, 185, 187, 190, and 195 ; Intanoiaiorioi, 11, U, and U, and arnwan tbarato.) Tranaeilpt, tkanecry dooket, Jaanarjr term, 16S9, ibow- ioftbai ibere wip no eibef chaMer^b^iM*! done at (aid Noraaiber 1, 1851, Jacob Moaaiaa inalitated a anit in the court of bia domicile— New Orleane a g ainat WiUiam Ail- ing. Cbariea StUlnan, Siuaual A. Belden, Elfadia Baae, aad Robert H. Hord, amonc otber tbingi for a oontpiraejr in tbe Cavacoicauaaiodafraad and cheat, under color ofiegnl proceeding!, the Nid Jacob Bf UMinn out of hie intereM in tbe property at BrowntTllle. For a full traaaoript of all tbe proceedingi and leatimony in tbat luit, eee pagae 418 to 888 incluii ve. Tliia luit reiulted in the followlnc verdict, rendered May 91, 1853, and which verdict waa a virtual flndiag of guilty aa cbaiged, except aa to Btilbnaa, on wboa service waa not had. JniT.- P. A.Giraud,Joba E. Currin, A. David, J. Calder, *. A. um, Robert Henderton, 8. L. Fowler, Dennis Ful- vey, W. K. Day^ B. E. Moore, Amilcar Rooz, A. Dunnd. FerdM ami JadfiMnl, SUI May, 1893. I ' Jacob MaaswA ) .„ . «. W,796. WiLUAM Alliho e< oi. ) This cause, continued flrom yesterday, came on again to- Roseliusand Wolfe h. Singleton, Esqs., for plaintiff, Bon- ford It Finney and H. D. Ogden, Esqs., for defendants. When the jury awom in, having come into court, were called, and after receiving a written charge from the court, the jury reUred to deliberate on the verdict; and after de- liberation they returned intocourtand delivered the follow- ing verdict, to wit : " We, the Jury, And that the defendants shall convey unto Jacob Mussina, tbe plainUff, by good and sufficient title, all the riahtt of property acquired by Basse and Hord, under the tmnsfor of conveyance of the 14th December, 1849, and 3Ut January, 1850, within ninety days fhim tbe date hereof, and that Elisba Basse, R. H. Hord, B. A. Belden, and W. Allinc pay to the plainUff the sum of #95,000 damages. . " we, the Jury. Airther find, that S. A. Belden and W. Ailing convey to J. Mussina the property purchaaed by them iron) Basse and Hord, on the Sth January 1851 ; and on the said defondants complying with the above, the caid plain- tiff shall refund the said amounts advanced by the defend- ants for the purchase of the property ; and in defhult of the defendants making the above conveyances witliin ninety days, we, the Jury, And a verdict in favor of the plaintiff, J. Mussina, for the sum of ^14,000, in lieu of the title to the property. 8. L. FOWLER, Foreman. " New OSLIANS, Men/ 31 , 1853. " Judgment was afterwards rendered upon this verdict in accordance with iu terms. The defendants appealed to the supreme court. The judgment was set aside by the supreme court for want of jurisdiction in the court below. The proofs that Judge Watrous had knowledge of the con- spiracy between the solicitors for tlie complainants, and part of the solicitors for defendants, also part of the derend- ants, to defraud Jocob Mussina, are as follows : Jacob Muuina commenced suit against the conspirators, Hord and others, in tlie United Stotes court, at Oalveston, March, 1850, (p. 475;) the admission of Hale, solicitor for the com- plainants, of his interest in Uie subject-matter of the suit, (p. 133 ;) the question tr Hord as to his complication in the conspiracy, and bis refusal to auswer sustained by Judge WatroM, Mareb, Itel, (p. ISB;) the reception of the teati- ■ony of Hale and Hord, and his deelaraiioa ibMhe ba« seen 8m pnitiaa, and ibMlbay w«n antiilad, (pp. 183, 186, lOS.) Motion for a rule on Jacob Moaeina to answer for a con- tempt ofeourt, January 4, 1854, (p. 936 ;) served upon Jacob Mnasina, at New Orteana, January 18, toappear February 1. Tka earriee waa leas than twenty days before the next rale dty— IsiFabsmaiy— audontoriheSiaMorTexaa. Jacob Mnasina. by oonnaal, January 31, patltioned the court for ninher tune to answer, under the rule allowing time until the next rale day. Mateli I, In casea where tbe service waa leaa than twenty days, (p. — .) This petition vru overraled ; but tbe rale to show eanaa, M., ««a aatended until Feb- ruary 18, (p. 958.) On tka ISih Fabraary, be filed exeep- Uono to tbe Juriadietion of the aouit, as follows, (p. 959 :) " DisntOT CoDBT or Tan 0)nvn> SrAna, f " iNrtrM ^ SVOMS, al CWMrfo*. \ « Batwawi JUMAai. Oamia CUvabo* <« ai., oonplain- mMi nnaVKAUka BniUiAr e( ti.t defondanu. In chan- cery. No. 41. "And now comes Jacob Mussina by his solicitor, and ap- pearing for the purposes herein set forth, respectfully sub- mits to this honorable court whether be ought, or is bound to appear and answer the rule to show cause why a per- emptory attachment should not issue against him, he— 1. Because no copy of the motion and exhibits, upon which said rale was granted, was ever served on him. 3. Because the said Jacob Mussina was, at tbe time of the filing of the original bill of complainanu, and is now, a citizen of tlie State of Louishina. and not within the Jurisdiction of this honorable court. 3. That this coun has no power to issue process, to be served upon patties who are. and always have been, beyond its Jurisdiction ; and for other causes, he. ; and he refoia to the farlous papers in the cause in support hereof, fcc. JACOB MUSSINA. << By Air Solicitor, DANL. D. ATCHINSON." Jacob Mussina, to protect his property iu Texas, filed his answer, and puiaed himself of the allef^ contempt. The following is the first part of htai answer, (p. 350 :) " This respondent, Jacob Mussina proteeting that be ought not to be called upon to answer said rule, Iioccuse he ^as not been served with tiie — motion, with tbe exhibits re- ferred to therein, upon which the same was granted, and that the said motion, exhibits, and rale are wholly insuffi- cient in law, without waivingany benefit timt may or might be taken by exception to tbe manifest error and imperfec- tions thereof, for answer unto said rule, says, that lie Ims never, knowmgly or intentionally, treated with disrespect the laws, or any of the tribunals or the United Suites ; and that it has always been his wish and purpose to show a be- coming respect to the laws, and to all the tribunals of the United States ; and that he has never intended to violate, or attempted to violate, the li^unction of this honorable court. "And being satisfied tbat there can be no contempt when none was intended, and not being awure that there has been any disobedience to the iqjunction, he denies that he has in any way been guilty of any contempt to, or disobedience of, said injunction since tbe same was served on hUn, about May, 1859." He also insists that he was not prosecuting tbe suit at New Orleans when the rule was served upon him, but was defendUig, as appellee, in the supreme court. He insists that , having been made the victim of a conspiracy in the suit at Gaiveslon, as is evidenced by the verdict of n jury, and tlic judgment of a coun thereupon, which verdict and Judgment he made a part of bis answer, it was not competent for tbe United States court in Texas to prohibit him from prosecu- ting tbe conspirators in the courts of the State of his resi- dence. Particular attention to the whole of the answer and exhibits is requested by the committee. Febraary 34, 1854.— Court decided that Jacob Mussina was guilty of a contempt, as charged, (p. 337.) February 35, 1854 — Attachment issued, (p. 338.) Mankal't Return. Received February 35, 1854; and having made diligent inquiry, I find that Jacob Mussina is, and has been, for many years past, a resident of the city of New Orleans, State of Louisiana, and is not at present, nor has been. " '-^'ff^ II ndjudgii etent for wiilria ■% dhiTiei. I MMRfor* nnmlMi writ not tne«- ted, be being not (bund In By diitrlet. BBNJAMUI MeCULLOCH. OMImI StatM MmrAal. Bjr B. T. AUSTIN. I>irirfy. aLtyuwrnn, FVmury 91, I8M, (p. 900.) MoUonfor timntralion againa .hcot IhiMdM, JIM fW- TWOTy S8| 18ft4a And afterwardi, to wit, oa the 16tk diy of Mareb, of the ■une year, Um eowt here nade an order, whieh la In the words and of the tenor followinf, to wit i "Order. " M ABIA Jof iFA Cavasoi and another ) M. } " CiABLif Stiilm AN and othen. ) " The mtition of the complalaania in the abore-entltlad cauie for a writ of lequestration aninat Jacob Miuaina, one of the defendant*, filed on the 96lh day of Febniaiy. ISM, having been heard at a former day of thU terra, ana the oonrt having then taken linie to eoiuider tba laaia, and being now fully adviied, and ii appearini to the court that the writ of attachment heretofore uauedma boon retwawl not fband, it ii now ordered by the court that a coramto- sion or writ of aequeftration, in dae fbrm, at once iwne to Israel B. Biielowand E. D. Kofnnan,ofthe county of Cam- eron, and William O. Webb, of the county of Fayette, in this atate and district, as commissioners, empowering and di- recting them, or any of them, to enter upon the messuage*, lands, tenement*, and real estate of tlie said Jacob Musslaa. and collect, receive, and sequester, not only the rent* and proflts of his real estate, but also his goods, chatuls, and personal estate, and to retain and lieep the same under se- questration In tncirhands until the saia Jacob Mussina shall clear hi* contempt, and this court malte other order to the contrary." And afterwards, to wit, on the 33d day of March, of the same year, a writ if sequestration was issued fVois the clerk'* office of our afii court. It appears that bp:.Acer settled upon what he supposed to be public domain of Texas, Novcmber35, 1847, (p. 350.) Suit was commenced ajrainst him at Galveston by Lap*- ley, January, 1851, (p. 347;) afterwards it seems to have been removed to Austin, (p. 353,} and remained pending in Uie district court of Texas until November, 1854, (p. 3Sa.) Transferred by order of the court to the United States circuit court, eastern district of Louisiana, on account of the interest of the Judge In the land In controversy, (p. %9.) Spencer wuuld have pleaded the interest of the Judge a* matter in abatement, but did not know of such interest when he filed his answer, (pp. 3SS, 356.) Numerous other land suits were translbrred to the United States circuit court in Louisiana for the same cause, (p. 380.) The deed of Williams and Menard, trustees of Sophia St. John, for tlic land in controversy, to Tliomas M. League, bears date July 1, 1850, (p. 393.) League to Lnpslcy, same day, (p. 398;) see the answer and nnidnvit of Spencer, (p. 355.) By tracing the title set up to the land in question by Laps ley, (»8 shown upon pp. 393, 394, 395, 396, 397, 398, 399,) we conclude that the interest of Judge Watrous, referred to in tlie order, was acquired in 1850. The title claimed by Lapsley in the land in controversy originated in three eleven-league granu,made by the Mexi- can States of Cnahuilu and Texas, to three persons in seve- ralty. (See p. 388 et uq., and p. 401 et iff.) Dy the record of the verdict and judgment in the case of Uflbrd vs. Dykes et al, (p. 406;) and the bill of exceptions, (p. 410;) and the testimony of Williams, (pp. 407,408, 409, 410,411,413,413;) and the opinion of the court, (p. 114,) it appeared that Judge VVatruu.s tried certain cases, and pro- nounced judgment therein, involving a claim to land de- pending upon the same title as the land included in the suits transferred to tlie United States court, in Lousiana, on ac- count uf Ills iutcrcGt, adcr tlie change of venue in the Spencer case. ''■'■'' APPENDIX No. 3. ' -^ '""i* The following passages of testimony of Judge Watreuili witiMMwa are token aa example*, to ■how the effect of their haring their re<»>Uectiona refreahed by the judge on their examination by tlM eoaimitiee: TMimonye/J. IT. LapiUf. " QmiHm, (by Mr. Evar*.) Since you gave your testl- moBv oa tho Irst day of year exawJaatlna, have yon not iiad mqacat eoa venation*, on the Mil^oet ofyoar leMiBioay, with Judge Watrou* and bis counsel. Judge Hughes .' " Jhmnr. I have bad repealed eonvemtlons with thcM geallMMn in relaUoB w tba s aHja c i* aboat whiek I b«v* (tea tsitlfting <■ t^iiStm. Ware not •oate of tba esplaaaiion*, qaalifi- catiOM, and alteration* in your testimony made at lh« sug- gestion of Judee Walreai or Jndga Rngbe*, or soggesied oj one or both ofibem? " .tnsiMr. I will state tbi* : that in mr teuimony tbe flnt day I wa* esaadnad about a nnniber or manei* which ap- pear*4 to me to be immaierinl, and I spoke without very much reflection, when the testimony cam* to be read over, I hand I had not been as definite a* I desired to be when I laeanalnMI thai ■ame ponioB* of my leattmoav a^eht be regnrdad aa BMtarial. On eoaversint with Judge Hogtae* and Judge Wanoaa, after aiy taatinony wa* uken down, and on my attention being calM to eae or two matwn as to which it waa desired that I should be more definite, I reflected on the aal^act, aad I caaM to Nia eoaelaaiaa that it wa* proper ibat I ibonld apeak Moie daflaitely. It wa* desired that I shoaM be a* deflnite a* my reeoUeetion wonM enable me to be. Tbe matter I now rafar to, partienleriy, is in regard to what transpired « Selnia at the time of tbe eeatfuel; bat Ibelargerponionoflheoofrections were made by me without any auggestlon firom either of lliese gentle- men, merely (br tbe pnrpoae of tendering ay testimony as accurate aa praetieable. << ^miH ai i , (by Judge Watroaa.) Have yea made any part of your depo*ition or statement* on suggration* made by me or Judge Hngbes, or in eoMeqnence onuijrtbinf *i ther of us ha* said to yoa ? « .dnnrar. No, sir ; exeenl so " Qvetttan. How late that day? ^ <' Atuwer. Till about twelve o'clock that night. " OueiKon. And the next day ? " Jntwer. I went (Irom the market-houae, about day- light, to the court-house, and remained there that day until about twelve o'clock that night. " Question. That was the 16tb? << Antwer. Yes, sir. " Queation. Well, Uie 17th? "Answer. About twelve o'clock, on the 17tb, Judge Watrous left for Brownsville, on the boat. " Ofi e t U am. When waa Jadge Watrmu's eoart ai4row*B- vMelield? '< .dn«Mr. It waa ktliia Um aaath of January. " QfteeUmt. Tkea thla keeping tbe court open after tbe faaainest waa done waa all anoaual. M Amiwer. Yea ; bat the Judge told me be wanted to alRird Mr. Atebiaon an opporlanity to uke an appeal. << QmiKms. dm Atebiaon know that this wna going oa ? liuwer. I do not know ; I think be did. Qf u i H t n . Whu makea yoe ibink be did? Aneam. I f ' ' " * . aakad Mr. Joaea to tall bim, and to say that I waa tired remaining there. " QiMtMofl. Do you know, of your own knowledge, that Atebbon knew it ; had the Judge informed Atebiaon, boibre be loft the court la a pet, that lie should keep the court open flir the purpoee of fhcilicating an appeal, or was this order made after Atebiaon had left; I want to see If Atchison knew it i did Atchison eome in there at all ? "^Mwer. Itoisirt be never came. " Qfftton. was there a jsretty fUll attendance of the liar, at the yme j|iat Judge Watwaa t«l4 you to keep the easiRv|Mar '< Aneteer. I do not ihink there were a great many law- yers in the room ; I am certain, though, there were some. " OufsMon. Do you know of any fbct that would tend to aatisly ns on the point, whether Atebiaon knew of Judge Watroua'a keening the court open ? " ^nniwr. Nothing more, than that I myself sent Atchi- son word by Jones, the deputy clerk. « QueiMon. But no step waa Uken flirther? " .^nnrer. I did not feel bound to follow Mr. Atchison. " QueiMon. Yon sent Jones after him? " Anneer. I did that us a matter of accommodation. I wanted to get rid of sitting tbere day and night. " QuetMon. Where was Judge Watrous these two days ? " Antaer. f n the office, adjoining the court. He directed me to come to bim, if Atchison came in. " QuetHon. Beftiro Atchison left tbe court was anything said'by Atchison or by the Judge about an appeal at all ? "•tnticer. I do not recollect. "-rPa^s 181, 183, 183, 184, iBOa On examination. May 1. — J. A. H. Cleveland examined by Mr. Gushing, counsel for Judge Watroua. << 0«nHon. You have stated that, after the complaints by Mr. Alchison in court, on the rendition of Judge Wat- roua'a decision in Cavaaos m. Shannon, the Judge ordered the court to be kept open to receive an appeal. Was that order given befbre or after Mr. Atchison left court ? "^ntiMr. I waa mistaken, tlie other dny, about that. On reflection, and on thinking a good deal about it, I recol- lect pretty much wbat occurred in court The order was mode in Mr. Atchison's hearing. Just as he was in the act of leaving court. " Quftiion. Do you recollect the words that Judge Wat- ions employed in making that order ? " Antwer. I do, air. " QuMtion. Please state them. " Antwer. At the close of tbe discussion between Mr. Atchison and the Judge, Mr. Atchison was evidently angry, and replied in pretty harsh terms, as I stated, to thu Judge. The Judge replied to him, ' I do not intend to be put in the wrong in this matter ;' and he turned to roe and said, ' Mr. Marshal, do you keep this court open as long as I can pnssi- bl V remain here, Ibr the purpoHe oCletting Mr. Atchison take whatever course he pleases.' He turned away, with his hat in his hand, and left the court-room."— Page 158. Cross-examined by Mr. EviLNa. " QuetMon. You recollect 1 was quite particular in my Inquiries as to the notice given in court as to keeping tlic court open for an appeal ; whether Atchison had or lioQ not left the court when that notici; was given ; have you hail I any conversation with any party on Uiat point since ? I <■ Aniwer. I have, sir ; but it was in order to see whether I I was right or not. ; " Ouuiion. With whom ? I " .;initi!er. With Colonel Love, and with Judge Watrous, and with Mr. Shearer. '■ Qu«>«on. Did you travel to this city with Colonel liove.' " Antwer. No ; I came here alone. 1 ouine a ililTerent { route ftom the other witnesses. " QuMlion. Did you have any conversation with Culnnel ! Love, since you got here, ai to the points you expected to prove? *..K^iAI;^ : .? I • -'f/risro;' ;-.IW W*'V-^E '' ' .»■ M^^ia^m p . wup ^i■ QmoHoii, (by Jndfe Watmn.) YM ipaiMar lia*te| alked wlih ne on thU inject iIb«« tli* ckwt of jrouf uali- monjr ; did I approaeh jron on iha raUeci, or 7o« aa f " JItuwtr. I aiked too ; and I think I taid— (Uueiilon eicladed.}— Page 680. Tatitnony of J. Jl. H. CfeMtoml, l» rclaM«« I* M« natare of Ikt inUmt Hielofd »y Jiidf ITatroiM ta tko Ja frfr y milt. On eaamiaation, April 99. "OtuMon. WliatwaiialdlnopeBcoanbrtbaJiidMr " ^luicvr. The Judge reAned to make any order, aa f tell yoo. He told him he wouM not. I reeolleet hia expraa- (ion very diitincily. It waa rather a hootely one. It waa, that he would not touch It with a tbrty-lbot pole. " OiiaMoii. He uied that exprenionf " Atuwtr. Yei, lir, he did. " Qiiettfon. Did he lay why he would not touch it with a fiwty-foot pole I " Antwer. He had diteloeed hii intereit. " Oueition. Did be aay at that time what Intereit ha had F "Jtnnctr. I cannot dUtincUy iUle that. The record will ihow. " (luatton. Do yon recollect what the Judge laid la rela- tion to bit intereit, if he had any; m bii connection with the partlM? " Jlnstfier. I Judged lo flrom the entry on the record. <■ Quctlion. I did not aik your Judgment fVom the record. I aik you to ipeak from what Judge Watroui laid in open court? " JituwiT. I have told you ai neariy aa I can recollect." (See p. 181 : alio, pp. 174, 177, 180.) In cross-examination, May 1. " WiTifEii I deiire to make lome explanation of my teitiinony on Thunday. In regard to the Judge diieloiing Ilia interest at the April term nf 1851, 1 recollect that he itated that he wai part owner of the landi. •< Qwii W in, (by Ml. Ci.au.) U that alt tka eorreeUon yoawWitamake? « ^tannr. That ia all, except aa lo !ka le«gtk of April aad May tarn. I laid OAy-iix dayi ; it waa probably nTeaty •' ^Mifiea. When did thii new recoUeetion come to yon? *< .IniiMr. On ittumiog to ny room and thiaking over U» Wheal wai called here, I did not RMW on what point I wai golag to be exaaUned. '* QaMNan. Do yoa not raeolleet how 1 qaaitloned you venr pantevUily on that petatf "Jkntmtr. Taai bat yoa q a ea U oaed me very hut. " QmmMm. Wham did thia thtag reiam to your reeoUoe- " JhuwoT' On the veiv day I waa examined here. 1 went to my room, and I began to think and itudy it over. " ^HMMm. Yo« recollect that I put the queiiion half a dosen timea, with a view to reftndi your meaMry I "JlrnMn. I reeolleet yow did. " QimtiMt. Did yon have any convenatioa with Judge Watroui oa that point i •' .rdnnMr. I did have a eonvenaiinn with Judge Wat- raw, far the parpoie of refkeibing my menM>ry. " Qu*Mt». And he did reflreeh it ? •' Jk m mtt. He did, lir ; but Judge Watroui eouM not get me 10 Male a Ibliehnnd <• Jj/tmUtm. Bm your reeoUectloa of that Incident ie aid- ed by yowr eoMverwthm with Judge Wairooi i « .ftiwir. I talked with Judge Watrooa aad Colonel liOveaboMil. " ^MeMen. When did yoa have that eonvenatlon aboat lif •• JhuMT. The evening of the day I wai examined. " QueMeii. Caa yen ^ve the language the Judge need when he aiated hia peeuniary iaterait in the mitt i " .MMMr. He Mated that they need not ptoeeed any flirther ; that he could noi.try aay of the Lapaley cam; that he had an lateraM in them— an Intereit by marriage i and that he wis part owner of the laadi. That wai about the language he uaed, aa well aa I recollect. ''QmoHoii. Tbenheialdliewaipartownerofihelaada? " .JMiMr. Tea ; ha bad a penonal InlereM hi tiie laada, or hi the luit. " OutMon. Or in the ral4ect-matter I " Jhuwr. Tea t that waa hia expreeilon, I think. *' Qunllon. And are you certain, now, that the diiqnali- lying relationi that he ipoke of waa not one of blood or marriage? » .danMr. I think be itated both— that be had an intenn both wayi? " QmaMon. Wai it true that be bad aa intereit, by blood or marriage, dixquaiuying him I " .ANtwer. I do not know whetiier It waa true or not."— Page 190.] M>^ !flt*'^ •r V,*> -J ; '•■rV* /'■^ :^7^im^^ ■ :■ iHitMaAiiiiiii-