Minnesota weekly times. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1854-1859, 1854-09-19

agreed 10 pay MN S),OUU III STOCK. lie says tnat
Mr.. Harrington requested him to remunerate him
in stock Mr.. Harrington says the amount was
to be in money. Mr.. Washburne's evidence we
give in full
+. b. WAsuBURNE, Sworn.
Question. Do you know anything in regard
to any alterations in House bill No. $40, which
passed Congress, to grant land to Minnesota Ter
ritory for railroad purposes, or anything touch
ing an agreement understanding in regard to
the form said bill should assume before it passed
the House ? And if so, state what you do know
about it.
Answer. In my answer will state the facts
so far as know them, as connected with the grant
of land to the Territory of Minnesota for railroad
purposes. The first bill Ga Senate billy was laid
on the table in the House on the 10th of March
last, think. While the bill was pending in the
House; stated my position in regard to it, and
the reasons l had why desired it should be in
particular shape. Those remarks | append.
(marked Az and make part of this statement.
After the bill was defeated had various CONVEX
sations in regard to another bill which was pro-
posed to be introduced into Congress. | stated
what kind of bill thought would be pro-
per, and would suit me and my constituents :;
and that all | wanted was, that the grant by
Congress should not be in such shape that one
road running through my district should have an
sst upon both roads being left on the same foot
ing that would not consent to give the Illinois
Central Railroad, which was built by a grant
from the government, any advantage over anOth-
cr road, which was to be built through my dis
trict by the farmers along the line of it; that
would suggest that we should take the old bill,
and, instead of the provision that the road should
be extended to the northern terminus of the Illi-
nois Central railroad, that it should be so changed
hat iva6 fhn nj hon
not be bound to take that direction, but might
take another direction if they pleased, and strike
the Mississippi river in jackson or Dubuque
county, Iowa, to meet the terminus of either of
the proposed roads running through my district.
| therefore, at the time, changed part Of the
first section of the old bill to meet my views,
leaving it so the terminus might be in either Du-
buque or jackson county, Iowa; which bill, and
the change made by me at the time, are made a
part OF this statement and marked B. After this
time, and before anything was done, however,
and should think about the middle of March, |
heard that certain parties in Wall street, connect
ed with the Illinois Central Railroad Company.
had sent out to Minnesota to get charter from
the Legislature, which charter was obtained, and
which | soon after received. During the pendency
of the bill in Congress, it was unknown to me,
and presume to nearly every man in Congress,
that any effort had been made to obtain such a
charter. As that charter gave to the company
all the lands that might thereafter be granted by
Congress to the Territory for railroads, and as
believed it to be controlled by a company that
would so locate their road as to deprive of the
roads of my district of any advantage of the
grant, said at once could not support any bill
which would give such an advantage, and which
would be legislating the property of the govern
ment, in the first instance, into the hands of O
corporation instead Of into the Territory, to be
disposed of after it had been required in manner
most conducive to the best interests of that Ter
ritory.
Such being my known position on that subject
some time, think, from the 5th to the 10th o1
last April, Hon. Robert Smith and George W
Billings came to my room to talk with me on the
subject of another bill. l expressed to them m,
views as above set forth, and gave them nv rea
sons for entertaining them. They wanted some
thing like the old bill, but told them that sucl
bill would not be likely to 60 through in tn,
face of the charter that had been granted by the
Minnesota Legislature, giving away all the land.
to company, but they thought bill like the olt
one would have more strength than any other. II
reply to nay objection that if the old bill shoult