Minnesota weekly times. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1854-1859, 1854-08-22
SATURDAY, AUG. 10, 1854.

SATURDAY, AUG. ~, 1884.
The WAR.-The only and principal feature of
news is the determination of the Gear to adhere
to his original demands. His verbal reply to Aus
tria is said to have been
"Tell your master that if he wishes war he shall
have it! but probably netherA ror will see the
England and France have come to the conclu-
sion that the Russian towns are too strongly forti
fed to attempt to take them. Notwithstanding
all the fuss which has been made about the war,
Russia appears to be perfectly secure, and deter
mined to fghtit to the last.
THAT FRAuD-WHAr They THINK OF r.-One
of the most extraordinary things done by the
House Of Representatives is the proceeding by
which the delinquency of its clerk, Mr.. Forney,
was visited upon Minnesota. A grant of lands
was made to the territory for building railways.
Mr. Forney, at the instigation of Mr.. Stevens, of
Michigan and Others altered the bill after it had
passed the House, as to vest the lands in GER
tain chartered company. When the forgery was
made known to the House, it passed vote re-
pealins the bill and taking away the lands from
Minnesota, and at the same time that it accepted
the report of an investigating committee, who re-
ports that the alteration was innocently made.
1t the alteration was innocently made, why take
| away the lands from Minnesota? We supposed
that when the House, in its virtuous Indignation,
voted for repeating the bill, it would also revoke
Mr.. Forney's commission of clerk. It was clear
case Of classification of the public records the act
as it stood was a forged act; the alteration made
was most essential; If Mr.. Forney knew it to be
| so, he should be dismissed with ignominy as a
rogue, and if he did not know it to be so, as he
pretends, he should be dismissed for incapacity !;
| yet he is allowed to keep his place-excused and
e.
falls on the territory of Minnesota.-N. Y. Eue.
Post.
| GwWe think the Post does not fully under
stand wly theH House repealed the bill by so large
a majority, as zee do. 1t was not so much be-
cause Mr.. Torney had done wrong in altering the
bill after il had passed the Senate, as it was that
our delegate, H. NJ. RICE, either by his indiHer-
ence Or his direct influence, aided in the consum-
nation of the fraud. Members of Congress we'll
knew that Mr.. FOmey was but the tool of others
and they looked to the Delegate of Minnesota to
come forward and defend Minnesota's interests.
Did he doso? No. Who discovered the alteration
Mr.. Wasiburne of Illinois. After that alteration
was made evident, did Mr.. Rice insist that Mr..
Forney should be expelled for direct violation
of his duty? No. Did he insist that Mr.. Ste
vens had done wrong? No. Did he inform the
House that the people of Minnesota would look
upon the alteration of the bill as an outrage upon
their rights? No. Did he do anything to con-
vince members of Congress that he was not ident-
flied with the fraud? No. Why then was the bill
repealed? Because the friends of Minnesota who
had cheerfully given Minnesota grant of land,
found that Minnesota's Delegate had given his
] roc 70 hat oI
had not raised his voice against the fraud-had
not even put forth the first effort to find out who
committed it, Disguised and irritated beyond
measure, the former friends and true friends OF
Minnesota ao,c, voted for the repeal of the bill
1t is true, in doing so, they took from us a
great boon, but they knew full we'll that the
whole thing was conceived in iniquity, and that
if they commended for supplementary bill, the
old company would put the matter in litigation
and in the end injure the interests of Minnesota.
Under the circumstances we cannot see how Con-
gress could have done otherwise than to repeal
the Bill. Now the lands are beyond the reach OF
Wall street spectators, and the probability is
that at no distant day we shall get another grant
so secured by legislative action as to rebound to
the prosperity of our Territory. While we believe
that MIR. Forney ought to be expelled for permit
ting the alteration to be made, at the same time
we believe the members of both Houses were
governed more by the Indifferent course pursued
by our Delegate, in the repeal Of the Bill, than
by any and all the acts of others, and therefore
we hold Mr.. Rice responsible for the loss Mime
sofa has sustained in the repeal of the Bill donat
ing her a large number of acres Of land. That
Minnesota should be punished for the acts Of one
man, is hard, very hard; but such is the case,
and such will continue to be the case, until the
people send only those to Congress in whom they
can trust.