The Minnesota pioneer. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn. Territory) 1849-1855, 1850-09-05
More of the StupendOus DisunionP Plot.
ICo1esponueHccv Q1e FHIlaueli'HIa iHquHerI
WASHINGTON. Augnst Is. 1880.


WASHINGTON, August is, 1850.
Iui my letter to the oH,qa;rer, of the
llthinst, it is stated that in sJaHuary
last,la paper developing "a plot for the
formation of Southern. eontederacy
had been placed in General Sam. Hous-
tons hands-thatrit detailed with some
minuteness the measures which were to
be adopted-that overtures were,to be
made to Mexico to join tho confederacy
that General Hooston'wa is to be Pres
idcnt, &c. My information was from a
reliable source, and l feNIit dhty to
the country to make it public.
To-day, in the Senate, Mr.. Butler, of
South Carolina, read th Is letter, and
called upon General Houston to state
whether il, was true. or not, q General
Houston was hot present while the let
ter was being read, but ss-ame into che
chamber immediately aitSwards; , and,
on being informed of what had trapspir-
ed in his absence, at once respp.de d
to Mr.. Buffers call, by declaring that
the statement was a solemn hulnbug, or
falsehood. That he knew nothing Of
such scheme In the :course of his
remarks, however, he slated that he
hooted at the idea Of Mexico Joining the
Southern, ,conledesacy, This statement
seemed somewhat at variance with his
denial of the truth of the ae,tcr, for the
most prominent part oftt'e scheme, as
there stated, was this very proposition
with regard to Mexico, which General
Houston said he hooted at. ...o,
Believing from this that iherc must he
some misapprehension or the part of
General Houston, and feeling deeply
sensible of the Importance Of the truth
being arrived at, called upon that gen
tleman this afternoon, a.ld found that
my surmise Of his having made the
denial under a misappreidnsion of what
was stated in the letter, vas correct.
He said to me that doc@ ment such as
| had described in my letter, had been
handed to him last january; but that it
was mistake that Gene Hal Lopez had
anything to do with it, as i was present
ed to him by another. rgntlemap who
had brought a letter ofint! !oductioh from
a friend; that what he h!d intended 70
deny. IN bis remarks in thi Senate was,
that the document or mciSorandum ha d
the signature of Mr.. Better, or any
leading Southern men, attached to it, as
h'had no signature. wbateyer imme-
ldiately called General H:uston;s stlea-
ton to the fact. that | HAD made no as
sertlpn that any signatures were attach
ed that had implicated :nO person by
name, for did not hear that the docu-
ment was signed, and i struck me as
highly improbable that b treasonable
paper would be handed about with tell
tale signatures attached, General Hous-
ton said fultherto me, tina: he indignant
ly refusedto have anything: to do with
the plot, and handed the paper to Gener-
sal Risk He did not know " here it
was now, but he believed it was in his
possession, either at Wa alhinston, or at
his home, in Texas; that fthe paper
had been signed, he would have felt it
his du,y to have exposed he guilty par
ties; but being merely aniunsigned doc
umcnt, he did not fee! Warranted, upon
mere surmise. 10 taking any action, and
SO dropped it, He also Gisavowed any
intention of being persohal IN his7re
marks in the Senate. ''s1'"fJ
. .i. The matter is one Of great moment TO
the country. A plot has been, and
is now, in all probability going on, for
the dismelnberment of lle Union, and
ii becomes the duty. of al! good citizens
TO use every effort to unnask the .trea-
son. q It, will not do to utter hackneyed
sneers at 50 letter write er&, or "news-
paper paragraphs. The matter is one
Qfstoo much Importance. to be either
| Sdered Or laughed into silence. The
SeGate, through some oftheir members.
ehafe Seen fit to notice the matter, and
the caaptry will expect that it will not
end hera. General Houyton has stated
th#t paPer,such as has been described
is In existence; and in Smauer " hich,
perhaps, involvcs%he e!,panencya aofthe
Union, the authors Of that treas Qua bic
PAPER should be dragged into daylight.
I.-,T ----------- - --,-t----- - r.,
( !, DIVORCE the House of LORDS
/ LORD 'brouShan presenter petitiDn on
this subject. The petitioner was a Mrs
Georgiana Hall, who had contracted a
cIandestine murriage with her presen,
/ husband in September last Her maid
en- name was Foley, and her marriage
lunknownto her parents. II took place
atthe parish church; and at the church
doors the parties separated. No consu.
nation Of the marriage had taken place
Since, and nothing criminal had taken
lplace between the parties before. The
lady was therefore in THE unfortunate
position q Of a '.maiden wife. "de Afte,
two months had passedin she hope ofob-
tanning the consent other parents I'd mar.
riage-for with that objeca she had post
poned its consfmation-,.her9 husband
welt and cohabited with her = A milli-
tner took her to France, and there, inter
married with her at thdi house Of the
British Ambassador 80 The first MAJ r
tfiage was in evefy'respees "a valid mar
riage, thoug gh consumatiSin had not fol-
lowed Mrs, Georgianas Hall shsd al.
lready sobt aimed divorce IL IN easa at tho.