Minnesota weekly times. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1854-1859, 1854-09-05
MINNESOTA LAND BILL FRAUD.

Representatives. of the United States under Res
Bill No. sas af.s9 its IT, ss"ass '''
July "a, 1854.
The Committee met. Present Messrs. WASH
burne, Breckenridge, Campbell, Barry, and Davis.
Testimony and Documentary Evidence taken be-
fore the Select Committee Of the House Of Repre-
sentatiUes, u'ader the tollOtoing resolution Of the
House:
RESOLVED, That special committee of FIVE be
appointed for the purpose of inquiring whether
the text of House bill 342 to aid the construction
tered, or in any way changed in its language subse-
quent to its engrOssment passage by this House;
without the authority of the House, and if so, by
whom, and under what circumstances, such change
was made; and also in regard to all other cases
of Interpolation of bills or joint resolutions Of
said committee be empowered to send for persons
and papers, and to examine witnesses on oath in
the premises.
DAVID BUCK, SWORN.
Question. Are you employed in the Clerks
Office of the House of Representatives if SO, in
what capacity?
Answer. l am employed in that Office, and have
charge of the files Of the office and of the House.
Question. In whose hands come the bills of the
House first?
Answer. Thomas D. K Harris.
Question. When did you first see this bill No.
$40?
Answer. can't recollect. When it first came
to the Office / numbered it.
Question. Look at the third section. Did you
make copy Of this bill for any one; if so, for
whom?
Answer. l made a copy for Mr.. Stevens at his
request, which went into the hands of Mr.. Rice.
l made but one copy, which was prior to the pas
sage of the bill, of the word 'future, in the third
section.
Question. Did you see the erasure at the time
of the making of the copy?
Answer. don't recollect that did.
Question. Do you recollect anything about the
change of the word ssand'' for the word ssor," in
the same section?
Answer. A few days after the bill passed the
House, and went to the Senate, General Patton,
clerk in the Senate came to me to change the
word 'or'' for the word ''and,' saying it was the
intention of Mr.. Stevens and Mr.. Jones to have
it ''and' instead of s'or'' On nv refusal to dc
it, he MIR. Patton, stated it Mr.. Stevens's in
tenton to have the word ''and ntead of s'Or'' in
serted; that it ought to be done; that it would
save time, and save Mr.. Jones having the bill
amended in the Senate. He then left me, and
went to Mr.. Forney, in company with MIR. Sproule
believe. General Patton, at that time, said il
was customary to make such changes, and that
the Secretary of the Senate would have allowed
such change or amendment to bave been made in
his office. | did not observe the change until
last Friday, when my attention was called to ii
by MIR. Rosser, who, stated that the bill was
passed in different form from what was under
stood in Minnesota.
Mr.. Buck discharged for the present.
Hon. GEORGE w. JONES, OF Iowa, Sworn.
Question. Have YOU ever seen this bill, (origin-
al bill p
Answer. No, never before.
Question. Did you ever see the engrossed bill?
Answer. q
committee.
Question. Has any alteration been made in it
since You first saw it
Answer. Yes the word SC and'' has been sub.
stituted for the word Sc or"
Question. Do you know by whom, and when
and where it was made?
Answer. do not.
Question. Do you know of the change being
made?
Answer. | don't know where, when, or by
whom it was made.
Question. Did you have conversation with any
one in regard to the change before it was made
and if so, by whom?
could not, as chairman of the Committee on En-
rolled Bills, change it from g or',' to ''and'' and
told him | could not.
| Question. What reason did Mr.. Billings assign
for asking the change to be made?
Answer Mono ox"nrt it was clerical error oil
the Clerk of the House, tho members of the
| House who belonged to the enrolling committee.
Question. Did you ever have any conversation
with Mr.. Billings as to the effect of such change
| of that or any other part of the bill?
Answer, Never.
Question. Do YOU know who brought the bill
to the House clerk to get the alteration made?
| Answer. do not.
| Question. Can you state what cOnnexiOn MIR
Billings has with the grant of land proposed by
this bill 4?
Answer. l know of none that he or any one
else has with it.
Question. Did you ever hear him state thai
any particular company expected to get the bene
fit of this grant.
Answer. never did. The conversation of Mr.
Billings was after the passage of the bill in the
House, and before it passed the Senate, and was
the printed bill.
Question. Do you know of any matter or thing
further connected with the change or alteration o.
the bill spoken of?
Answer. No.
ROBERT S. SPRoULE, SWORN.
Question. Are you employed in the capacity Of
clerk of the House of Representatives?
Answer. am as one of the engrossing clerks
Question. Have you ever seen the origna
House bill here presented, No. 342
Answer. have.
Question. State if any alterations have beer
made in the third section of this bill, since yor
first saw it, and in said bill after it engrossed
state all you know about it.
Answer. The original bill, (342) with the wore
''or'' in the third section, was handed to me fOl
cngrossment before it was presented to the House
in order that its passage through that body
should not be delayed for want Of engrossment
1t was engrossed by me, except portion of the
last section, which was engrossed by MIR. Galpin
my hand becoming so tired l could not finish it
1t was then compared, and found correct with the
original. Some time after it passed the House
to wit, on the Goth day of June, and was handed
by me to the Clerk to be presented to the Senate
The day after it passed the House, think, though
it might have been the day after that, but before
it passed the Senate, know, Git did not pass the
Senate until the 28th of June,) General Patton
the first engrossing clerk of the Senate, spoke to
me, think, in relation to the bill, and the word
'sor'' in it, and subsequently,, on the same day.
General Stevens, of Michigan, accompanied by
General Patton, came to me in relation to the
nattor- General Stevens at first insisted that the
word ''and" was in the original; but being convnc-
ed that he was wrong on that point, he said that
the word s'or'' was a verbal error; that he
thought that he had changed it, and that as
changed the committee had adopted it that he
certainly considered that it had passed in that
shape, with the word ssand'' in it,) and that he
had voted upon it under that impression that il
was his intention to have changed it., and he
thought he had done so that he could have
it altered in the Senate, but it put them to unne-
cessary delay. We conversed further on the mat
ter and it was agreed to submit it to Col. Forney
We adjourned tn Col FOrney's rOOm-Gcneral