The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1851-01-14

and you are again in remember 10 retain the abhor
renee which you now feel for 'prosr.psH = forget your
the spoIs OF victory and JOIN With tbs senator from North
Carolina; and in that state OF things the whole wing
w h sS in s sSio I'd s one
win deest the belfer and slsndefe. and the members 81
which shall spurn Offices, hold them only because
the people have need OF their ssrviessa party which
shall consider men as nothing, the Union everything
When the democracy shall bring into power temper and
purpose such this then, and not tif then, will
the evil which they have brought upon the nation bsre
moved. -
R.toiaders ny C.ss and mr Downs
When Mr. EWING had concluded
Mr. BRADBURY obtained the floor, but gave was to
Mr.. CASS who said Will the senator from Maine
permit to say few words in reply 10 some remarks
OF the senator from Ohio more particularly directed TO
Mr. BRADBURY yielded the floor
Mr. CASS design TO trouble the Senate but for a
few minutes. and merely because the senator from Ohio
has assigned TO much more important part in this
discussion than belongs to me-
The senator has conducted this defence under good
deal OF excitement do not mention this by way of re-
Mr. EWING. | beg the senator's pardon. was not
the least excited in the world. | never was calmer in
Mr. CASS The honorable gentleman. il appeared to
me- good deal excited during the whole Of his re-
marks though he began to grow more cool he ap-
preached the termination. repeat, sir. do not mention
this by way OF reproach. The feeling was very natural
under the circumstances Of the senator's position, and
excitement should have led him TO point out OF
the prominent mem bers in conducting this inquiry How
ever just consider it. have taken no parin il. There
peculiar OF proprety, which am sure every
senator will appreciate. that prevented the slightest il.
reference my part From the beginning TO this time
mot M s wsoa ne
prety in the position in which had been placed The
senator seems to put his attack upon Col Weller upon
something | had said or done. Had never opened my
mouth the senator would have brought forward these
charges after he found that he had placed the removal
of Col Weller upon the utterly indeensibe ground as
50 far as e respects e any participation Of mine heard
Col Weller for whom have much regard, CHANGED
with having been removed from very responsible office
because he had drawn drafts upon the treasury and had
forwarded his accounts for settlement As this i'm
piled he defauer, and never having heard such
complaint before inquired i they had been settled at
settled and closed, and that he owed the United States
nothing and think il was added that the balance was
the other way WE'LL sir here was most extraordinary
fact an officer removed from Office because he had not
sent his accounts, implying pecuniary delinquency,
when in truth his accounts were received at the treasury
had been settled, leaving him creditor then took the
ground-from whence, the senator from Ohio says and
says truly could no! be drivsnc,hat the law having
given to Col Weller till the end OF the second quarter to
send his accounts and the second quarter not having
expired when he removed, if the time between
the I'd and the 3lst of March be counted full quarter
(Which, BY by, would be most harsh consructionD
the removal was not ustiable by the law VI this no
one doubt That may do no injustice TO the sena-
tor will read from his printed speech what be said upon
this subject
"He lCo Welcr) had expended large amount of
money. for which he mad accounted according law
and usage and he continued to draw heavily"
Now, sir nothing is clearer than that this position is
utterly ndeiensbe; and the honorable senator found it
So or should have heard nothing OF these second
law gave Col Weller until the expiration Of The quarter
succeeding payment TO have his accounts at the treasury
The provisions are, that every officer receiving public
money except for his compensation shall render
his accounts therefor within three months at least after
the expiration of each successive quarter and, not,
that he shall be removed The reason of this provision
is obvious. Payments cannot be made till the quarter
has expired and often the persons 10 be psd, officers
and soldiers, persons in the Indian Department light
houses keepers, and many others, may De remote and
scattered and reasonable time should be allowed 10
pay them, and consideration should be had for the
accidents and delays of the mail, and especially for an
officer like Col Weller who the other side OF the
continent The time for all this has been therefore fixed
three months Col Weller left the United States
the 81 OF March, and he removed on about the
25h OF June. One quarter and few days had then
pred. instead Of the six months fixed by the law. Now,
sir what right had the senator from Ohio TO say that Col
Weller :" had not accounted according TO law and
usage" when he was removed ! There was no law nor
usage which required his accounts TO be rendered I'LL the
expiration of the second quarter. Why. is obvious
tina, his accounts for the quarter in which he was re-
moved could not have been rendered when the removal
took place, If he had then been in Washington instead Of
being three or four thousand miles off, because the end of
the quarter, when alone the payments could be leg and
complete, did not occur I'LL some days after he had been
dismissed ....
have already remarked that the senator said would
not be driven from my position and be then added that
the removal did not take place under ihs law. Mr. Pres
dent this is extraordinary indeed The senator IS asked
why Col Weller removed. He answers that he
had drawn drafts and rendered his accounts accord
ing to law and usage" lie ia then told there no
law requiring the transmission OF his accounts before
his renewal but that the law expressly gave him till the
end OF the second quarter for that purpose. And what
does he then say justification OF the ACT Why, that
he not removed under this law. Why, this is
stranger yet II the act OF removal were mere act OF
executive power whether arbitrary discretionary,
founded the executive will, It's open avowa would
have rendered unnecessary much OF this investigation
But the senator makes such avowa He disavows II
in fact He give the reason for the removal that the 9th
had not rendered his accounts He gives It, man
doubt IT, neglect OF duty, and justification Tor
the Executive II the law gave the officer months
for the rendition Of his accounts. what right had the Elk
ecutye to make new law. and strike three months from
this time He is indeed authorized order the rendition
he thinks the public interest requires but this must be
done by proper treasury order TO the officer, have
before SNOWMAN order which pretends was
given to Col. Weller, If, indeed, such a one ever
given in any Here tie punishment came before the
offence.
A few words more, Mr. President The senator says
he gave notice that he had charges in reserve, and
Inmates that brought this part OF the discussion Had
distinctly understood what the senator now openly
charges, IT would not have altered my all for
have fear Of any injurious results to Col Weller from
this discussion. But had not the most remote idea OF
what he says he alluded to- After stating The neglect OF
Col Weller, and his overdrsis, the ground OF removal
he added, In answer 10 my question whether a wing
would have been removed under the
that the information IN hs possession fully justified the
removal supposed. OF course, he referred to nforma
a. L. L., L.Iu