Minnesota weekly times. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1854-1859, 1854-09-12

good faith, invested large amounts Of money
right and proper, and request and claim that they
be permitted by their counsel, Hiram Ketchum,
Esq., Of New York to examine the evidence al
Ieady taken, and to take such part in the further
proceedings before you as may be necessary to
protect the rights Of the company.
am, sir, your obedient servant,
ROBERT W. LOWBER,
Vice President Of M. and N. w. r. R. Co.
Hon. LEWIS D. CAxPBELL,
Chairman Of Committee Of Investigation.
The communication of Robert w. Lowber, ask
ing that the Minnesota and Northwestern Rail-
road Company may introduce Hiram Ketehuw,
ESQ.,, before the committee, Is counsel on behalf
ing been read. - .
On motion of Mr.. Barry,
Ordered, That, for the present, tho committee
decline to permit the introduction of counsel of any
of the parties interested to this investigation and
that the committee will examine such witnesses as
either of them may suggest, to have information
which is deemed pertinent to the matters embraced
in the resolution.
Copy of order delivered to Mr.. Lowber.
July 81, 1854.
GEORGE w. BILLINGS, RECALLED.
Question. In Mr.. Washburne's letter to you Of
May Goth, he says: "Our bill is on the Speakers
table," State what bill is alluded to.
sofa to construct q railroad therein.
Question. Had you any connexion with any
other bill than the one intended to be in the form
of what you have spoken of in your evidence9
Answer. had not.
Question. Have you had any conversation with
Mr.. Hugh Tyler and Mr.. Sibley in Mr.. Sibley's
room, or elsewhere, in regard to changing the
bill?
Answer. had q conversation with Mr.. Sibley,
and l think it was in Mr.. Tyler's room.
Question. Did you ever propose, in CONVERSE
ton with Mr.. Sibley or Mr.. Tyler, to make any
secret change in the BILL in any stage of its pas
sage9
Answer. did not. Mr.. Tyler intimated that
ne could make such a change as was necessary
| and from that time forward refused to have any
conversation with him, and have nothing to do
with him.
Question. Was anything, in the conversation
referred to, said in relation to interining or in
PRODUCING words in the text of the bill /?
Answer. do not recollect of making any pro-
position myself,
Question. When you discovered the want of
conformity in the original bill that you wanted
with the new bill after it passed the House, why
did you not 60 with it to Mr.. Washburne and
other opponents, and have them assent to having
the corrections made by the officers of the House?
| Answer. [ did not consider Mr.. Washburne an
opponent of the bill, and did not consider it
more than an error which had been made in the
original bill in the House, previous to its being
printed in the Senate.
| Question. Did you suppose Mr.. Washburne had
assented to all alterations made by Mr. Stevens
| Answer. could not suppose otherwise, as 1
saw him read the bill over twice at the Speakers
| desk.
Question. If you saw Mr.. Washburne read the
bill over twice at the Speakers desk, how could
you infer that he assented to the change of the
word ssor'' to ssand, !" afterwards?
| Answer. Because supposed the error was in
transcribing, and think Mr.. Stevens told me so
| at the time.
| Question. Was Mr.. Washburne about here
when you went to have the change made!
Answer. He was.
Question. Did you suppose Mr. Washburne had
voted for the bill.
| Answer. l did
| Question. Has any check or draft been drawn
upon you, or any other person, within your knowl-
edge, for the whole or any part Of the money to
be paid to Mr.. Hunt, mentioned in your former
examination; and if so, state the amount of such
check or draft, the person drawing it, and by
whom presented?
Answer. MIR. Satterlee called at my Office sub
sequent to the 25th June, and after the passage
of the bill, and inquired whether would pay a
| draft of five thousand dollars from Washington.
said no, would not. He wanted to know if 1
owed it said l did not. He did not present
the draft, but only told me the amount.
| Question. Did you know or have reason to be
satisfied, who was the drawer of the bill?
| Answer. did not
Question. Have you ever heard who it was
drawn by?
Answer. have not. When l stated that
saw Mr.. Washburne read the bill twice, wish
to be understood that supposed he read it, as
saw him read bill at the Speakers table.
| S. S. JONES, RECALLED.
Question. Did any member of Congress say to
you that MIR. Washburne, of Illinois, would be
cheated Tor words to that effect) in his efforts to
confine the grant of land to Minnesota Territory
to the action of future legislature?
Answer. Sometime after the passage of tho
last bill by the House of Representatives, and, it
is my impression, after its passage by the Senate,
had conversation with the Hon. John Went
worth on the subject of the Minnesota Land Bill,
in which Mr.. Wentworth stated that Mr.. WASH
burne was in fact, opposed to the first bill, which
had failed in the House; but that he (Washburne)
thought that the last bill was so framed to
prevent its inuring to the benefit of the railrrad
company to whom it was granted by the Mime
sofa legislature, but that he was mistaken, that
he was not so smart as he thought he was.