Page:Life and Select Literary Remains of Sam Houston of Texas (1884).djvu/567

Rh ", of Louisiana,

vs.

, and, of Texas. No. 1982.

"Petition in this cause filed in district court of the United States, district of Texas, on the 12th day May, A.D. 1849."

And afterward, on Monday, the 7th day of June, A.D. 1850, the following order was made, to wit:

"This day came the parties by their attorneys, and upon motion of the said plaintiff, and because the judge of this court is so connected, in interest and otherwise, with one of the parties in this suit as to render it improper, in his opinion, to sit upon the trial of that cause, it is now hereby ordered by the court, that this fact be entered upon the record of this court, and that a certified copy of such entry, with all the proceedings in this suit, be forthwith certified in the circuit court of the United States for the eastern district of Louisiana, that being the most convenient court of the United States in the next adjacent State."

Well might Reynolds move for a transfer to New Orleans. Did he not think (as his correspondence has already disclosed) that he had the clerk of the court to work there in his behalf? Did he not think that he had an approach to the ear of the court there? Did he not have there the influence, the official presence of Judge Watrous, a brother of the bench? In fine, did he not have the case transferred from the juries of Texas, but to have it removed to a court, where there was every augury of success, it mattered not whether by fair or by foul means?

I have already directed attention to the participation of Thomas M. League in the management of the affairs of the land company, and in the advancement of its interests. It has been shown that at the time the curtain dropped at New Orleans on the Phalen case, a suit was on the instant instituted by League, on the identical test land certificate that had just been the subject of the suit in New Orleans; thus revealing his partnership in the common iniquity of Judge Watrous and his "compeers," and indicating his position as a prominent actor in the infamous certificate business, that was the chief, but not the only, subject of the company's operations.

It may also be remarked, that Johnson and Hale, the attorneys for the company in the Phalen case at New Orleans, appear also as counsel for League, in the consequent suit at Galveston.

It is to be seen how he sustains other characters, and undertakes other parts in the wide field of the company's speculations. It appears from the testimony in the Watrous investigation that, in company with Robert Hughes, the confidential adviser and favored counsel of Judge Watrous, he assumed or simulated an interest in what was called the Powers and Hewitson's colony grant, and undertook to bring suits in relation to it in Judge Watrous' court, by feigned change of residence.