All Governments, including the Southern Confederacy, have written in
their statute books that whoever engages in rebellion or takes up arms
against their authority shall forfeit not only his property but his
life.
I am glad now that my Government did not enforce these harsh penalties
against any of the Confederates.
In 1864 the United States District Judge for New Mexico, himself a
Southern man, held that his Court had the power to libel and confiscate
the real estate of such citizens of El Paso County, Texas, as were then
in arms against the United States. He based this claim upon an Act of
Congress approved March 3d, 1863, which provided that “The jurisdiction
of the United States Court for New Mexico is hereby extended over the
citizens of El Paso County only in cases not instituted by indictment.”
I, being Collector of Customs, had caused this act to be passed to
enable me to condemn and sell goods smuggled into El Paso County (there
being then no United States Courts in Texas). I am frank to say that I
did not then even dream of the confiscation of any one’s real estate.
The United States Attorney and Marshal for New Mexico came to El Paso
and libeled the property of certain leading Confederates and proceeded
against it in the United States Court at Mesilla, New Mexico, and
certain of these lands and lots were declared forfeited and were sold at
El Paso by the United States Marshal, and I purchased a portion of this
property, as did others. I paid the Marshal eighteen hundred dollars
good and lawful money therefor, and received and recorded his deeds.
I protected the property of some of my Confederate neighbors, Dowell’s
and Stephenson’s and others.
Along with what I purchased was a six-eighths’ interest in the El Paso
town tract belonging to the Gillett brothers, who were then absent with
the Confederate army; but some years later, when they returned to El
Paso and we patched up a peace, I proposed to them that if they would
join their title with mine I would pay their debts, amounting to a few
thousand dollars, which debts were a lien on the property, and we would
hold it share and share alike.
This they declined to do, and in the end they lost it all. So did I, for
years later the Supreme Court of the United States decided, _not_ that
the property was not subject to forfeiture, as all such property
certainly was, but simply that the Act of Congress referred to did not
confer the jurisdiction claimed by the Court at Mesilla.
Without a murmur I reconveyed all the property to the original owners
and lost the eighteen hundred I had paid the Marshal.
Then the Gillett’s creditors sold them out. I had held possession of the
town tract and paid taxes on it for five years.
It has been said that I purchased the property of Simon Hart at the
confiscation sale. That is not true. I purchased that property at
Sheriff’s sale on a judgment for false imprisonment, which I obtained
against Hart in a Texas court, which judgment was twice affirmed by the
Supreme Court of Texas.
In 1871 I was the owner of a portion of Franklin Heights, of the city of
El Paso, then known as Hart Survey, No. 9.
Being in Washington City I met my friend, Gen. Robert B. Mitchell, and
gave him a power of attorney to sell the property. He sold to different
purchasers, to the amount of $14,000, and we divided the proceeds share
and share alike.
The property was then considered valueless by those who knew less than
we did, but it is now worth forty-fold what we received for it. Among
the purchasers were George W. Gray of Washington City and one Peck of
Kansas, and others.
The recording of the deeds in El Paso County aroused the jealousy and
hatred of my El Paso enemies, and, heedless of what harm they might do
to others so long as there was a prospect of injuring me, they wrote the
purchasers that I had no title to Survey No. 9, that the property was
worthless, and that I was a swindler.
It is strange that the purchasers took these statements at par, and
instead of investigating or communicating with me they sued me in
Washington City for the purchase money, charging fraud, and got service
on me there. I demurred them out of court, and came home, and being
angry with the purchasers I paid no further attention to them or their
troubles.
None of them, ever asserted their rights to the property, WHICH THEY
COULD HAVE DONE SUCCESSFULLY IF IN TIME.
These strange facts being of record in El Paso County have caused a lot
of talk, and many a lawyer has believed he had made an important
discovery and has had visions of profitable litigation. I have been
interviewed about this transaction one hundred times, more or less.
[Illustration]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
“STAR” MAIL CONTRACTS—THE FIRST TRUST—1869-70.
After the war I and my El Paso friends became involved in a bitter
contest with the San Antonio and El Paso Mail Company, which continued
for several years.
At that time the great lines of railroads were reaching out toward the
west and southwest, and many mail routes, hundreds of miles in length,
were preceding them. These mails were carried in stage coaches,
buckboards and on horseback. Millions were expended annually by the
Government for this service, and it was harvest time for the two wealthy
companies who monopolized the larger routes, the above named company in
Texas and another company in the northwest.
This Texas company failed year after year to deliver the mails at El
Paso according to their contract, and our people were practically
without mail facilities, which was a great privation, and the people
complained to the Post Office Department but without avail, because the
wealthy company had powerful influence with some of its high officials
and a strong lobby in Washington City. Then the El Paso merchants and
people held an indignation meeting, denounced the company and appointed
Col. Jas. A. Zabriskie and myself to represent them at Washington, and
after taking much testimony all along the line we went on our mission at
our own expense.
After a careful investigation in Washington City, during which we found
more rottenness than we had dreamed of, and in higher places than we had
suspected, we secured a hearing before the joint committee of Congress
on Retrenchment, composed of seven Senators and fourteen Representatives
and the contest began.
Zabriskie and Mills for the complainants, “the prosecution,” and the
distinguished Judge Pascal of Texas, and the still more distinguished
Jere Black of Maryland for the Mail Company, “the defense.” It was a “go
as you please” contest. Three days were consumed in reading testimony,
in quarreling and in arguments before that distinguished court or jury,
and I flatter myself that we youths from the frontier held our own with
these veterans of the Washington bar. (At least I am as proud of what I
did there as the average young El Paso lawyer is when he wins a cow case
against a railroad or makes a free silver speech.) I had recently been
“suspended” as Collector at El Paso, and I charged that the Mail Company
had employed Pearson & Williams at El Paso as scavengers to hunt for
charges against me.
F. P. Sawyer, the principal man of the Mail Company, was present and
took the stand and denied this charge, and stated that “out of
consideration for others” he had tried to have me retained in office. On
cross examination I led him to repeat these statements _most solemnly_,
and then handed to Senator Patterson, the Chairman, the original of the
following letter, which he read aloud to the committee:
“Washington, June 2d, 1869.
“W. M. Pearson, Esq., El Paso, Texas.
“Dear Sir: Yours of the 10th instant was this A. M. received and already
placiet in Secretary Boutwell’s hands to strengthen those already on
file in his office which has as I suppose you have hird removed the
greatest man in the U. S. as per his own opinion. I think this last
affidavit of Mr. Wardwell’s is a clincher. You have done your duty
manfilly & have no doubt have done that People of that western county a
great and lasting good. I have written you several letters to El Paso
suppose you have them all. Yours very truly,
“(Signed) F. P. Sawyer.”
The scene was somewhat dramatic. There was no attempt to deny the
authenticity of the letter. I was not in a merciful mood. Never mind
what I said. That millionaire perjurer left that committee room weeping
like a child.
Colonel Zabriskie’s speech before those potent, grave and reverend
Señors was as fine a piece of oratory as one would wish to listen to.
Our victory was complete. The unanimous report of the joint committee,
dated April, 1870, is before me, but it is too long for publication here
and I will condense it conscientiously. They say: “The committee find
that in July, 1867, a contract was awarded to E. Bates for carrying a
weekly mail between San Antonio and El Paso, Texas, seven hundred miles,
for thirty-three thousand dollars a year; and they find that without
warrant of law and without giving other bidders any opportunity to
compete, this compensation was in eighteen months increased from $33,000
to $333,617! This was done by adding new routes, some of them longer
than the original one and running at right angles to it and increasing
the number of trips and ‘expediting’ the ‘speed.’ They say: “Charges
were made that the service was not perfectly performed and that the
contractor had wholly failed to perform his contract, and there is no
doubt in the minds of the committee that these charges were
substantially true up to the latter part of 1868. It is also charged
that the Mail Company had sufficient influence with some of the
postmasters to procure from them false certificates of the arrivals of
the mails. The committee find that —— ——, postmaster at El Paso, Texas,
certified that out of thirty-seven mails due at El Paso for a certain
period, only ten ever arrived, and subsequently sent to the Department a
certificate stating that all of the thirty-seven mails had arrived on
time. For this and other reasons the committee recommend his dismissal.
All the evidence concurs that the mails in Texas are so unsafe that no
one dare trust money to them.” The report says: “In making these
increases of service and compensation the Postoffice Department seems to
have given great weight to the representations of Judge Paschel, State
Agent of Texas, probably not knowing that he was also the attorney of
the Mail Company and himself interested in the contract.” The report
says: “It is evident that much feeling exists and powerful influences
are interested both for and against the Mail Company.” I know of no
“powerful influence” _against_ the Mail Company unless the committee
refer to Zabriskie and myself, for we were alone in that contest.
Well, the result was a curtailment of the Mail Company’s compensation by
several hundred thousand dollars during the years for which they claimed
the contracts, and a saving to the Government of an equal sum, and
finally a return to something like fair and honest dealing in letting of
such contracts.
While we were making our fight on the Mail Company of the Southwest, as
above related, Col. Joe McCibbin was attacking a company who had by the
same means monopolized the main routes in the Northwest, and he was
trying to expose their frauds. Though acting independently, we
sympathized and sometimes consulted with each other, and became fast
friends. McCibbin was a man of fine ability, had been a member of
Congress from California and in 1856 had been the second to Senator
David C. Broderick of that State in the duel with Judge David S. Terry,
in which the brilliant Senator was killed. McCibbin bore a striking
resemblance to and in his manner was much like my friend, the elder Dr.
Samaniego of Juarez. His fight was not concluded when we left
Washington, and on my return a year or two later I asked him how it had
terminated. He replied: “Oh, I am on the inside. I am the attorney for
the Mail Company and am well paid for my services. You and Zabriskie had
better get in. You can easily do so, and it don’t pay to fight other
people’s battles. You get neither money nor thanks.”
McCibbin then told me that the Mail Company had paid him $20,000 in cash
to stop the fight, and were then paying him $10,000 per year as their
Washington attorney. I would not state what McCibbin told me had he not
later on made the same statement under oath to a committee of Congress
and boldly defended his conduct. Did he do wrong? I don’t know. His was
a free lance. I sometimes envy the happy ignorance of those who tell me
that they always know exactly what is right and wrong.
Yes, Zabriskie and I could have “got in,” but we did not.
------------------------------------------------------------------------