The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-04-24

order an amendment to the resolution Of the gentle
Mr. BAYLY next spoke. saying thai the House were
acting e grand ,naass IA member hsd formally
House itself, TO the member 70 the persons charged
and 70 the country that the investigation should Be had
Saca naa been ordered before During the
ORDERED, sna ne objections urged then were all against
me ndrccmess o. the accusations. The wings at that
nme Eued snat inc allegations could not be specific.
because the accusers could command the records then
n the hands OF the accused. The wings had justified
their course IN that case this ground to the satsfac
ton OF the country The gentleman from illinois declined
very properly 10 amrm the truth OF the charges Mr. B.
held .Fa sz .sTs'.- s--.-s'
MI. BAKER asked whether the gentleman would try
cARfER WHICH SRiEss : the proper rbup. q, ri,
person charged, committee Of the
MI, BAKER would answer BY remarking, that mem
Der who would condemn without formal charges would
be 2 worse tribunal than the accused n
MT BAYLY fesumiDg the fooD went on to show
lna me proposition was only to raise committee TO in
seSugate Wnether u was proper TO institute charges
against the Secretary not to be tried before another
tribunal he had disposition 10 do injustice 10 the
Secretary and thought i very probable that the result Of
In one OF the cases alleged in the resolution he (r b.
thought ihs l, Secretary had but done his duty
q a raa that he
Since the formation Of the government such payments
as those Of the Ewing had often been made without
making them He desired rather that he inquiry should
be made BY the Committee on Public Expenditures
Mr.. RICHARDSON would consent to send the reso-
luton % the Committee Public Expenditures, pro-
vded that committee be clothed with power 10 Send for
Mr. G i'd moved the reference 81 the rssou
tons 70 the Committee on Public Expenditures.
Mr.. McCLERNAND was DESTROYS Of probing the sub
ec to the bottom and Of doing justice to all parties. He
was willing that the investigation should be in the hands
OF the Committee on Public Expenditures. Mr.. McC.
rehearsed the history Of the opposition the inquiry as
to the resolution, from its first introduction So far all
the objections made technical and seemed to imply
disposition 70 avoid investigation. The Secretary
Of the Interior should have followed the example OF the
Republic. in boldly demanding an investigation No
gentleman on the wing side OF the House had denied the
MIR BAKER No gentleman on the democratic side
formally charges the Secretary with guilt.
Mr. MccLERNAND lcontinuing) urged that there
were sufficient grounds tor inquiry Had not the Secre
elsrksfor the Land Office bureau without authority Il
Mr. BAKER II he has done so, he will so answer
simple resolution OF inquiry.
/ Mr. McCLERNAND contended that the reply OF his
colleague admission of the truth OF the charge.
Quoting from the law establishing the General Land Office
Mr. Nice went on to show that in this case the SecIe
tary had palpably violated that law and that it could
patton the part of the Secretary, and dangerous rem
derng up OF the legal powers of his Office another
the part Of the Commissioner Of the General Land Office
that in other Of the allegations (f such payments
were alleged had been made there was sufficient to make
1.-THE duty Of the House, the purse keepers oil the nation
to investigate their truth thoroughly and gravely
Mr.. EVANS. Of Maryland, asked the House las Mr..
RIcHARDsoS had introduced his resolution by msunder
standing g ne h sHs, !, o. ne part o. as whs TO
Mr.. BAYLY suggested that. if the gentlemen on the
other side would permit the adoption OF the resolution of
the gentleman from Illinois, Mr. RcHARDsoNs] the dem
ocrafs would with pleasure, vote raise another
tee to take IN hand the investigations proposed in his
MT. RICHARDSON made remark, not heard dis
Mr.. EVANS, of Maryland, argued to show the pro-
prey Of uniting the inquiries and to prove that the ale
hcenty specific to Justify the OF proceeding pro-
posed BY the gentleman from Illinois, mr. RICHARD
Mr.. THOMPSON, Of Mississippi, suggested that the
style of opposition to the proposition proved that the
wings were for staving OF investigation.
Mr. 7. reviewed the history of the Ewing claim to show
that In paying the Secretary could not have failed to
know that he was reversing the action OF his pre-
decessors, which strict keeping with the decisions
Of Congress the claim, Mr. quoted from the record
Mr. Collamer (said Mr. IT, had made it rule to
pay claims against his department rejected by his pre-
Mr. HALL read from precedent in the legislation Of
the House, to show that i was customary to authorize
committees to make such investigations as were now
proposed ODE made before charges were brought against
Mr.. SWEETSER having knowledge Of the Ewing
claim, explained s history, 70 show its validity.
Mr. THOMPSON, of Mississippi, made charge
against the claim but argued TO show that the head Of
executive department could not properly open set
tied by predecessor fs8 "a, ~ oa5+t ssst
Mr.. CROW ELL asked the gentleman from Mississippi
Mr. THoMPsoK] what the difference between action
on the part OF an executive officer IN paying a claim
jected by his predecessor, and that OF this House,
making an appropriation to hquidate claim heretofore
Mt THOMPSON, Of Mississippi, (continuing.) went
to prove that the House held the whole control of
the public funds; whereas the Secretary limited by
laws and rules BY no means applicable to govern the
House. 1919 ,eg So Nlfs.s # n rc
Mr. GENTRY again urged the proprieiy OF making the
resolution of inquiry only instead OF raising
mitiee 10 investigate grave charges for the truth OF
which one willing TO hold himself responsible.
| Mr.. THOMPSON, of Mississippi, quoted from the
precedent cited previously BY Mr. Hall, 10 show tina, the
in such TO be right and proper which he M
To urged in this This with reference to nvesti
CATION concerning the relation which the last Secretary of
the Treasury had borne to the issuing Of treasury notes.
| &c. ~ NJ fss 1890 ~ 1a NJ NJ ~
| Here followed conversation between Mr. GENTRY
and MIR, THOMPSON, OF Mississippi, TO the identity
OF the principles involved in the two caseshe first hold
ing that there was similarity between them, and the
latter endeayorng to show that they were well nigh
| Identical. 1900
Mr. T. next argued for some time to prove the gravity
designed by the resolution. Such had been the plan
lected by the Secretary OF War in his own case He
(Mr, To would be content TO place the subject matter
wholly in the hands OF the Committee on Public Ex-
pendtures provided that power send for persons and
papers was accorded TO them. ff