Supreme court of the United States. No. 135. The United States, appellants, vs. John A. Sutter. Appeal from the District court U.S. for the Northern district of California.

662 The United States vs. -Stter.
settlement of Texas convinced me that the two leagues surveyed
here could not be confirmed in connection with any other grant. But
I supposed if they fixed the corner at Candell's they would have no
trouble in fixing it here.
[Mr. Crittenden objected to answer as not responsive to question.]
34th. In your last answer you speak of jeopardizing an indefinite
section of country to an indefinite distance from that point: to what
point do you allude?
738 Ans. The point originally spoken of by Vioget as Sutterville.
Iwill state,in connection with that, however, that that was only
one of my reasons. My great effort always is, in such cases, to expose anything that I conceive to be a fraud, so far as my efforts can
tend to the public good.
[The last part of the answer objected to - by Mr. Crittenden as not
responsive to the question.]
35th. Look at the plat of the final survey made by A. W. Von
Schmidt, and filed in this court on the 27 Feb'ry, 1860, and which
is now shown to you, and state where that point to which you allude,
and which you say was spoken of by Vioget, would fall?
[Question objected to by A. Pratt, on the ground that there is no
final survey filed in this case, and that map shown witness does not
answer the description of anything given in the question; and
739 that there is no paper filed in the case that purports to be of
the character that the question implies, or which can be
legally so designated; and that it is impossible to answer the question correctly.]
Ans. It is at the point on the map before me, (map referred to in
question,) marked Suttertown.
Examination adjourned until to-morrow, Dec'r 22d, 1860, at 10
o'clock a. m.
SATURDAY, Dec. 22d, 1860-10 o'clock a. m.
Examination resumed by A. P. Crittenden, esq., for claimants.
36th. At what point did Vioget testify that his line commenced
on the Sacramento river, below the American? I refer to the testimony of Vioget, to which you have yourself alluded in your answer
to a previous question.
Ans. On the bank of the Sacramento river where Sutterville then
stood-I mean in that deposition taken before the land commission.
740 37th. In the first part of your answer to question No. 33,
you speak of a fraud which would jeopardize an indefinite section of country to an indefinite- distance from that point. What
fraud do you mean?
Ans. The attempting to fix, by Sutter's agent, a corner not before known to the Sutter grant. Mr. Fowler stated to me, in the
presence of Von Schmidt, that when he was Sutter's agent he went
with Vioget to Candell's, and that Vioget there pointed out an oak
tree as the corner of Sutter's grant, and he was willing to make oath
to that effect. At another time he fixed upon a point directly above