The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1853-01-13

The previous question: when
MIR STEPHENS, OF Georgia, verbally amended his
proposed instructions, and his motion 10 Ieeommt ad
ding also, instructions TO the Printing Com@iliee TO IN
qure and report on the whole subject oil printing the
After further conversation, in which many members
participated, Mr.. STEPHENS withdrew The portion OF
the amendment 10 The resolution reported from The Print
ing Committee by Mr. STANTON OF Kentucky, proposing
its recommimen with instructions aud leaving il SO as
that 4 merely provided Tor the repnnng and binding OF
the abstract OF the tables originally published in
The Congressional Globe with the 100 900 copies OF The
report OF the superintendent OF the census
The last annual message Of the President OF the United
States
AS modified, this amendment was agreed to, and then,
as amended, the said resolution adopted
The regular order OF business being called for,
The SPEAKER announced the rex ular order OF bust
ness 10 be The further consideration OF the bill for the pre-
vennon OF frauds on the treasury; whereupon
Mr.. JOHNSON, OF Tenne ssee, who was entitled 10 the
oor went ON 10 address the House in favor OF the said
bill, arguing 10 show the importance of the of
some elective law OF the kind, and urging that the bill
Mr. reviewed the bill. section by section. explaining
its provisions He held that members OF Congress should
not be interested in the payment OF any claims on The
treasury They were sent here guardians OF the treas
uy and could not ghuy change the character OF Their
cang more especially az, directly or remotely they were
10 be called the money make such pay
ments Thus. Congress had TO make all appropriations
from which claims were TO be paid. How could mem
bsrs he commended vote on such appropriations out OF
which they anticipated receive the payment OF claims,
and still do justice to their trusts
Mr illustrated this position by relating The history
OF an Indian treaty BY which the Senate bound the gov
senators who had voted for the ratification of the treaty
had risen up before the board Of commissioners the
adjudication OF these claims where they appeared as the
main attorneys for particular claimants These practices
Mr; held to be very improper, and explained their
evils at length
under the treaty with Mexico Of 1881, under which
| a large number OF claims had also originated. The
Of sa 81 had provided for the adjudication
ure the Mexicans and Americans upon il not agree
ing. subsequent board had been provided for in
ls43, which did ttle failing discharge It's duties
These repeated failures had created much bad blood,
threatening TO involve the country in In 1910
Gardiner went 10 Mexico travelling puler and
two Years before the broke out He claimed that at
that time he had gone into mining operations The cyl
dence showed that he had capital then. though he
further claimed that when IN the course q the two
| years. he was turned out of Mexico he had made
100000 by mining having been involved in total loss
OF $3ooooo worth OF property actually IN his posses
sion.
Mr.. J. (conlinung) detailed the history of the pre-
senalion OF GARDENERS claim before the last board for full
though Mr. would not say that he absolutely cog
infant OF the fraud in the claim, had superintendent the
preparation OF all the testimony brought forward BY Gar
diner, showing him what testimony was necessary, &c
Mr.. STEPHENS, Of Georgia, asked whether Mr.
Thompson had acted in this any different
Mr. JOHNSON tconnuingJ srged tina, he had been
merely stating facts: i might be that such was the
custom with counsel: But in this case Mr.. Thompson
had given Gardiner in the first place instructions how TO
make out his and then Gardiner had manufactured
The testimony TO suit the instructions
first presented 10 MIR. Thompson the athdavts of many
persons conceived TO be respectable in Mexico fully sub
Stimulating the truth OF his representation
Mr.. JOHNSON, admitting that fact. went on 10 show
that the claim marked fraud, made up OF fraud
| and perjury. Messrs. Corwin. Waddy Thompson, Ma.
or Lay and all who had been recipients of the proceeds
OF this fraud should return the money They now stood
III the position of receivers OF stolen goods If honest
men, they would do SO; if dishonest men, they would
themselves out of public odum by the plea that they
not parties TO the orgixaion o. the fraud, while
they refused TO disgorge the stolen property.
Mr.. j.. further continuing. explained that the able
defence by Mr. Chaplain. delivered on the day before,
sought to excupae Mr. Corwn not on the merits Of his
the enemy Of Corwin. and tina, the committees proceed
ings had been parte Now, he conceived both these
pleas to be but subterfuges.
Mr.. CHAPMAN. inlerrus,ing Mr. JOHNSON, contend.
ell that he bad merely urged that the investigation
e1 parts so far as Gardiner, not Corwin, was con-
cerned
Mr.. JOHNSON, of Tennessee, resumipg, held that
the committee only set out to try Mr. Corwins connexion
with the claim, not Dr. Gardiner; that Mr. Corwin had
been confronted with the witnesses &c. and that offer
had been made to Gardiner to hear any argument est
mony, or defence he might choose to make But he had
avoided such trial The report of the COMMITTEES Mr.
further argued, had settled the fact that Mr. Corwn had
done wrong IN having any connexion with the claim,
well as in the circumstances involved in his connexion
which the money bad been paid He had also voted for
the creation of the board to adiudcate on this claim as
well as Tor The continuation OF the individual members
OF the board.
Mr.. STANTON, OF Ohio, asked whether the special
committee had not been nstrnced in effect only to in
quire what connexion with the claim MIR. Corwin had
further than such connexoD senators and mem bers
are constantly having with clams'
Resuming the thread Of his remarks Mr.. JOHNSON
commended that, look at the the House would il
would be plain that Mr.. Corwins connection with i, was
an improper and further that the conclusions to
which Mr. BARRERE, OF Ohio, bad The day be-
fore his remarks-to for the b-be had endorsed
practically the result OF the labors OF the committee
far they reflected Mr.. Corwn. Mr. j., proceed
ing, commented various portions OF the testimony 10
show that Mr.. Corwln could not help knowing some
thing Of the Infamous character of the claim before the
aw ard was made.
Mr.. STEPHENS, OF Georgia, next obtaining the floor
On motion OF Mr. ORR, the rules were suspended and
the House went into Committee of the Whole on the
state OF the Union, (Mr BRowS, OF Mississippi, in the
chair.j
The committee proceeded with the further considera-
ton oil the bill 10 suppress the circulation Of mall notes
in the District of Columbia.
Whereupon Mr.. FREEMAN, after giving notice of
his intention at the proper time to propose substitute
for the BILL addressed the committee in favor OF legisla
on to prevent as far possible the circulation of paper
money in the District OF Columbia.
Mr. AvERETT made few remarks in favor Of the
bill
Mr.. FlCKLIN addressed the committee for few mo-
ments in favor OF the original bill
Mr.. VENABLE addressed the committee against the