The Rhode-Island Republican. [volume] (Newport, R.I.) 1809-1841, 1837-12-20


ments reported to have been made in Fam
Gull Hall, by Mr.. Fletcher, Of Mass, in re-
lalion to the manner Of doing business in
that Committee, Mr.. Fletcher on Wednes-
day morning attempted to make some ex-
plantations. We copy the following report
Of his remarks, and the answers made TO
him by Messrs. Cambreleng, Atherton and
Jones.
Mr. Fletcher made statement in rela-
ton to a publication in the Globe uewspa-
per, signed Ivy several members Of the Com
mItlee of Ways and Means, adverting to a
speech which purported to be made by him
a. Faneuil Hall. The speech which ap-
peared in the Boston papers was not pre-
pared, revised, or even seen by him before
its appearance. The publication was in 10
sense his, nor was he responsible for IT.
The remarks imputed TO him were made
early in November; yet, though one of the
members Of the Committee of Ways and
Means lived in New Hampshire, at no
he had never heard word on the subject
until that morning. He observed that had
he known earlier Of the charge against him
lie should have procured the attendance of
Mr.. Sergeant, of Philadelphia, one Of the
members of the committee, that he might
have the advantage of bis testimony.
Mr. Fletcher said that at the late session
he was stranger and an inexperienced
member Of the Committee. When the
bills were introduced by the Chairman of
that Committee he thought it was distinct
ly understood that they came from. aud
were drafted by the Secretary of the Treas
ury. The statement in the Globe adnits
that most of them were drafted by that Off
Ger, and that the Chairman consulted with
him. Tie had thought, perhaps ignorantly,
that such n course was improper, aud a
dangerous interference of the Executive
with the Legislative department. He had
considered the affair as no secret, and sup
posed that he did not violate courtesy in
speaking Of it. During The last session It
was avcrred in debate " tn al the bills did
not originate in the Committee of Ways
and Means" and that nvorment was not
denied When he went home, he thought
it his duty to inform his constituents of the
manner in which business was done in the
Committees Of Ways and Means. stated,
said Mr.. Fletcher, that the bills were pre-
pared by the Secretary Of Treasury; that
they originated with the Executive and
that they were Executive measures. But
when | used the word Executive, i did
not refer to the President only, but to the
heads Of Departments; and | expressed
my opinion that such u course was an I'M
proper and dangerous interference on the
part Of the Executive with Legislative ac-
ton. The substence Of my remarks was,
simply, the unjus,iiable conduct of the
Executive, and the abuse of Executive
power.
Mr.. Fletcher proceeded to say that he
had intended no attack OF the members of
the committee his remarks related solely
to the subject of Legislative interference.
The details of the publication in the Globe
were founded on particular expressions,
which were not his, and for which he was
not responsible. The gent!eman who pre-
pared the report of his speech must have
had a low estimate of his understanding if
he supposed he could have said of the bills
discussed so long in Congress, "that the
majority of the House passed such bills
forthwith without alteration"
As to the resolution touching the mex
pedency of chnrtering National Bank,
he said that he had suggested to the com
mltee that it would he better to refrain
from action until all the petitions came in.
He had no recollection that the subject had
L.. al
in the Globe, nor that the resolution was
drawn in his presence. To the best of his
recollectisn he had no knowledge of the
resolution till it was read by the chairman
and called up to be reported. He thought
himself entitled to declare that he had said
nothing but what was substantially true,
and that in the course he had taken he had
only done his duty to his constituents. But
from the manner in which the members of
the committee had thought proper to deal
with himself personally, he thought il prop
er that he should be discharged from duty
on that committee, which he according re-
ques,ed might be done.
MIR. Cambreleng said he had very brief
reply to make to the member from Mas
sschusetts; for after what had passed, he
could not make an issue with him on this
or any other occasion. TIE member $
speech of two columes and half was pub
lished by itself in many papers in his own
city, aud was circulated throughout the
Union. The opposition press had been
every where filled with denunciations OF
MIR. c. and his colleagues on the committee,
founded on charges published under the
name of the member from Massachusetts,
which had remained for four weeks uncon-
tradicted by him; he repeated, therefor,
that he could not either then or thereafter
make an issue with tha, member. If he
were disposed o'do so, he could appeal to
his colleagues on the committee to disprove
the statements now made by that member.
Mheiher the gentleman had seon hat