The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1853-02-22

mony or without full investigations We ought 10 wsn
until we can s all these charges andsee howshey staad
1 had condemned this architect mysef-condemned him
seriousy-for putting these granite blocks into the wall
when saw, from my own Inspection and judgment, that
gness rock would have answered just we'll But
engineers upon the possibility that few courses OF solid
granite might protect the building in the foundation
should prove al all defective r
he motion Is 10 reconsider the question OF concursing
IN the amendments made In committee and 10 take the
question separately upon the amendment of the senator
from Arkansas, Mr. BoRLASD,l providing that the dis
ou,senshi Oh Inc money shall be taken from The arch
ect and gwen 10 the superintendent until this investga
uon Is completed ii you transfer the disbursement, il
VIII DC equivalent to saying 10 the architect From the
Investigations we have already made, think you
NOT lrusiworhyj We have discovered enough lead
suspect that you have acted raudulen and therefore
cannot be trusted; and fear, ii the money retained
~ your hands, II Will be used Tor fraudulent purposes
paying persons who are acting fraudulenly against the
government" do not myself feel willing TO make this
charge Until &c, through the investigations and hnd that
TINS man ought TO be condemned and although have
Already slated that have entertained high opinion OF
MN, II hnd the facts TO be proved, upon which ne
be condemned, trust shall be the last man who will
attempt TO save him from the just censure which awaits
his conduct But am not willing beforehand 10 say to
The public and TO him. that he has acted in such way
that he must be allowed 10 disburse the money longer
Mr. BORLAND. did hope that, after the long dis
cussion which we have had upon this subject,
done with it, But il there is TO be end to it,
What sMhe proposition now 1t is TO insist. in the very
face OF all that has passed. when the Senate has BY
vote concluded to suspend this operaon--t is to insist
that the architect shall have possession OF this money
Why does the architect still insist that he shall have
session OF the money
tor upon that point have not the architect for
month or more. AS far | recoect. the last time |
saw him was In The committee room al the time an I'M
pleasant occurrence took place there between the arch
tect and some OF the hands employed upon the Capitol
lie Departed and have not him since. have not
had one word OF correspondence with him by letter
Otherwise. This movement is 10 be charged altogether
TO my account, TO my sense OF justice, and one with
which the architect has had nothing TO do.
Mr. BORLAND. If the senator from Kentacky [Nr
UNDERwooDl had not said when he got up that he was
acting upon information communicated to him from with
out and being communicated TO him almost at the very
moment he spoke, should not have minated what
Mr.. UNDERWOOD Igave my au,hori,y-a gentle
man OF the other House.
Mr.. BORLAND. But why should We have il insisted
upon from other quarters that this individual shall be IN
trusted with this money? Now, the only effect oil my
amendment upon this appropriation OF money for the
tension OF The Capitol is to put il upon the footing
that the expenditure OF the public money for the public
grounds has always been placed upon heretofore, and pro-
ydlng that the accounts shall be audited and settled in
the same way nothing else at ALL Ii is return to the
old system As far as have heard, no charges
were ever made or suspicious entertained that the money
under the old system improperly used. But change
was made IN this case Under that change, however, it
made, and an attempt made at the time to guard
against any such danger BY The Introduction of pro-
vision in the bill 10 that effect That was not DONE and
we find now, as suppose the honorable senator from
kentucky will hardly attempt 10 conlroyer that improper
uses have been made OF The money-by what ndiv dual
or whether by more than one, do undertake say
The amendment have offered, and which has been
agreed 10, IS proposition TO return 10 the old system
and let the money be expended the same way as be-
fore II the architect chooses TO consider that as an i'm
pulaon upon him, cannot help il Ii would be strange
argument, indeed TO say that should make no pIopo
sion here 10 expend the public money according 10 The
goou Old an IN order TO avoid mproprietes, simply be-
cause any man IN the public employment chooses
That IL is blow aimed al him. Ii he has discharged
his duties properly and faithfully, do not see how this
proposition affect his character, because that will be
made 10 appear when the facts become known. And
why the fenas oil this individual should that the
money should be continued in his hands, cannot see
However, il the Senate after all tina, has been said
chooses TO do so, let them do IT. and give il TO him.
II seems that objection was made to my auson to
what took place IN the committee room; yet we iad
other members OF the committee doing the same thing,
although they seemed 10 think that II would have been
better Tor me TO have avoided it. The honorable sena-
tor from Kentucky has alluded TO unpleasant occur
renee which took place IN the committee That
unpleasant occurrence took place when was not pres
ent What was that unpleasant occurrence | will
give the facts AS | heard them 1t was this: When
witness was teshiyng before the committee IN regard TO
matters which were not favorable 10 Mr.. Walter, be
became enraged and interrupted the Witness and under
took 10 prevent him from going with bis testimony,
and II was with difficulty that he could be controlled in
the matter Now, suppose that an individual was sitting
10 court and impuiaiions upon his character being
made by witness under oath, and he was 10 rise and at
tempt 10 interfere with that waess attempt 10 browbeal
him, eDdeavor TO prevent hun from wing his testimony,
what would be thought of him Ilis that the ind
vlduai as understand, apoogzed afterwards for the
lmpIoprleiy OF his conduct, But should not have al
luded 10 this matter had not the honorable senator from
Kentucky made the hrst ailuslon TO IT, Yet when that
auson was made, think II is but right that the Senate
should understand the whole facts OF the should
understand when witness, one OF the humble laborers
upon the Capitol here, iesyDg 10 matters upon the
responsibility oil his oath, which did reflect upon Mr..
Alter he arose, and rather violeny-so volen that
he was with difficulty resiraned-attemped 10 brow beat
the witness, and endesyor prevent him from gong
with has testimony. That does not prove that the charges
against him lfue do not rest the charges against
him upon ha, ground But since the transaction was al
loded 10, wanted TO have placed fully before the Sen
ate for sha, IT may be worth.
II is sl insisted that this individual shall disburse this
money. II the Senate chooses 10 put II in his hands
with the information that they possess let them do
So have nothing more TO say upon the matter, way
or the other.
MIR. UNDERWOOD. wish TO say word or two
further upon this subject alluded to the unpleasant
occurrence which took place in the committee room not
by any means Tor the purpose oil going into the facts of
absenrd himse and 10 show that | bad bad no com
munfcaton or correspondence with him from thai time
That is The why alluded iimerely 10 explain
the position occupied IN relation to Mr. Walter. and 10
show the senator IRON Arkansas Mr.. BoRLANp1 that
was not acting here al the instance OF this architect or
ing here solely from of justice and duty towards
MIR. Walter, regarding bim yet the altitude OF gen
ueman. That was my reason for my abiding to the
Transaction IN any way. But the senator from Arkan
has gone into the particulars OF the case, although
be was not present and was--
Mr., BoRLAND. | made my statement upon the au-
thorlly oil the honorable senator himself.
M Var wall. \