The daily Minnesota pioneer. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1854-1855, 1854-10-28

to the people of Minnesota why he evaded
the questions relative to the organization Of
the Minnesota and Northwestern Railroad
Company Why, when asked plainly
" Who are the directors 2" did he give such
a shutting, irrelevant reply as Il have
heard that committee was appointed pr
Was he afraid to have it understood by
that Committee and Congress that his own
brother, EDMUND RICE, his new friend,
Ex-Governor ALEXANDER RAMSEY, and
his old friend, LYMAN DAYTON, were
among those directors ? and that the same
brother EDMUND Rice, was the Company's
Attorney? Would the knowledge Of these
things at that critical juncture, direct Con-
gressional attention upon him with disa-
greeable intensity or was the honorable
Delegate really ignorant of facts most init
mately concerning his relatives and friends ?
facts which were current in New York
and Minnesota weeks before his testimnny
was given Did the Honorable HENRY NJ.
RICE in this commit corrupt perjury, or was
his mind and memory really shrouded in the
darkness of this most impenetrable obfusca-
ton
Will the Honorable Congressional Dele
gate dispel from the minds of the people of
this Territory, the doubts and suspicious
which are entertained against his integrity,
in view Of the following facts In April of
the present year, when the Minnesota Land
Bill, which was altered in the Senate, was
presented to the consideration of the House
Committee On Public Lands, as a substitute
for the bill which had been tabled to its
certain death, the Honorable HENRY NJ.
RICE appeared before that Committee, with
others from Minnesota and New York, who
were interested, and took part in the discus
sions which were had thereupon. These
discussions covered the whole bill, section by
section. The third section, upon which the
forgery was subsequently committed, formed
the subject of particular comment--the
burden Of the talk hanging upon the words
"any future Legislature" and the words
constituted or organized" In this discus
sion HENRY NJ. RICE participated, and it
all TRANSFERRED in his presence and hearing.
He knew, then, that the words future :"
and cor" were in the bill, Subsequently,
and when the bill was before the House,
the Honorable HENRY M. RICE went to
COL ALBERT, Chief of the U, S. Corps of
Typographical Engineers, and asked his
advice relative to the effect of the very
same change which was afterwards made
by means of forgery. Aud, according to
the testimony of the Hon. JOHN WENT
WORTH, of Illinois, after the bill had passed,
and before the fraud was discovered, he
event to Mr.. RICE, the Delegate from
Minnesota, and asked for copy of the bill
as it had passed. He gave me printed
bill, and made one alteration, substituting
the word 'od' for 'or'" Yet, in the face
of these facts, which are notorious, and
which can be verified with any desirable
sanction, the Honorable HENRY NJ. RICE
in answer to the last question propomded, if
he suggested "that the word future in
the third section, should be erased, or that
the word and should he substituted for
the word 'or' 2" Replica did not, NOR
DID l KNOW THAT THE WORDS
WERE IN THE BILLY Will the
Honorable Delegate explain away, OF re-
duce to consistency, these conflicting eoneha-
sions between the oaths and statements Of
responsible men, and his own sworn decla-
rations Or must the people, through his
silence, rest in the belief that his testimony
before the Investigating Committee was
given with a predetermination to conceal
the truth; and that it ranged through the
whole gamut of mendacity from simple
evasion, up through comparative prevarica-
ton, and positive lying, to the very height
of audacious perjury, at its close.
We have thus gone through with the
testimony given by the Honorable HENRY
NJ. RICE, Delegate in Congress-, before
the Committee appointed by the House
of Representatives to investigate the
fraud perpetrated upon the Minnesota Land
Bill. We have accompanied the printing