Edwardsville spectator. [volume] (Edwardsville, Ill.) 1819-1826, 1822-07-27

give it per6atim. Ii however, comedies
the strongest argument in favor of the
bill, because it is predicated upon the
supposition that suificiency of land to
be brought into market had not been
surveyed within the new district--which
assumption is directly contrary to the
fact, and had been shown to be so, by
Mr.. Thomas colleague. Why then, Of
fer the amendment The case supposed
not being true, the amendment was
wholly useless for any honest, and can
did purpose. A Senate that would pass
such bill with proviso "that the off
GERS should not be appointed till sui
ficency of land should be surveyed
would not have hesitated to pass the bill
without the proviso, on being satisfied
that, sufficiency Of land, had actualH
been surpeyed-wbich was the TACT IN
this case-and Mr. l homas was apprlz-
ed of it.
He will not deny that the senate, as
well as the house OF Representatives, was
in general, very much opposed to the
multiplication of land Offices. Could ne
then, have adopted any course, more ha-
zardous to the success Of the bill in ques-
ton, than to admit, that the lands within
the proposed district had not been sur
veyed, and Of course that, the Office z0dS
not necessary
Why did he thus act This, he alone,
can answer with positive certainty. But
it is not improbable, that he might have
wished the appointments deferred till
after his election. A multitude of can
didates are looking to him for success,
and may be inclined to support him.
Some of them must be disappointed.
Postpopcment guards against all the con-
sequences that might arise theretrom.
He may have some particular favorlte,
or eQg. connections, whom be might think
it dangerous to prefer, before he himself
is secure. lhe should not be reelected,
he might be willing to accept the office
himself, as it would be worth all the rest
in the state. Or he may have been guilty
of the old trick, Of promising the same
thing to two, or more different persons.
The use he has made of the report of
the comnittee, TO which was referred
the resolution OF the house Of representa-
tives, in relation to the appointment OF
| persons to examine the land Offices
made by a ma ority OF one only, out OF
seven, evinces his extreme want oil can
dor, and his disposition to practise de-
ception upon the people. Not only, has
he in every possible way, endeavored to
turn that report to my disadvantage, but
he has conirived to have it considered, as
a final and triumhh0nt dishosition Of The
case, although he knows, 1t was neither
discussed, nor acted on; that it contains
very important statements particularly,
in relation to Mr.. Baldwin, and Mr.. Rod
ney, which have been subsequently, dis
proved and that it stands postponed 10
the next session--when | have 10 doubt
it will be rejected by as large ma jorily,
as ever has been found against the re-
port of any committee OF that house.
Ii the bare report OF a committee is to
be considered proof Of the sentiments Of
the house, how, | ask, will he excuse
himself, for never having called up the
bill for granting the right Of presumption,
which he himself as chairman OF a COM
mittee reported TO the Senate?
He complains loudly, oil my having Of
fcred The resolution alluded to, and
though, it was general, and intended to
embrace other cases, applies Ii exclusive
ly to his own, and inlers a disposition on
my part TO do him injustice. But how
does this appear? The principal object
of the resolution was to ascertain who had
been appointed to examine the land of
fees, and what compensation they re-
ceived. If there was nothing wrong IL
his case, it may be emihhaticaily askea,
HOW COULD THIS INFORMATION INyURE
HIM II, on the other hand, there was
something inlriasicaIIy improper in the
case---if ii involved a violation, either OF
the letter or spirit of the constitution, or
any law Of Congress, and might lead to
the establishment of a precedent, that
could readily be perverted TO election
eering purposes, at The erfenae OF the
people, and to the hazard of their most
important and essential rights--can it be
fairly objected TO representative OF the
people that, he entleavored to guard
against such consequences /? That the
case was universally viewed la this light,
need only refer, Tor proof, to the most
respectable public journals, OF all poiti-
cal distinctions, throughout every part oil
the Union. Hereafter, l intend to pre-
sent my views at large OH the subject
AT present, will only add that, it was
Mr.. Crawford's conduct, was solicitous
to investigate, and this attempted with