The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1854-05-03

#N8Ht& }<8 Ie A0 1N
Offices one person anywhere and that the government
service would be better without it. That Is his view and
IL should be pretty good authority
Then sir the senator tie senator from VirT
ginia and the senator Connecticut have fallen into
the there should be amendments to
Tha wnaS eape very & or the rest Of Us % do
Mr. HUNTER ! beg the gentiemans pardon did not
Mr. ToUcEY Nor
Mr. DOUGLAS Nor !; nor any else, believe
neither stated IT, hnted H. said any thing from
which any one could infer IL.
Mi. STUART The remarks viii be published ia the
Giobe and venture to say that it win appear from the
report that the argument of the senator from Illinois
against this amendment was that the subject had no. r.
ceved the attention Of the Committee Indian Affairs
and that the Senate ought not to entertain because
had not been acted upon and reported upon Dy inc com
mittee Now sir that that argument VIII CUT on he
right any individual senator who does not belong to
amy particular committee offer amendment because
il the argument s sound in this instance sound N all
instances That the necessary result OF the argument
Now sir think that the senator from Connecticut has
introduced argument which is still more remarkable
than He says that he nrs that the President has
been called upon make the change and has declined to
do It. Ii the senator himself has called the President
to make that change and the President has declined he
has right TO draw the inference because then he knows
something abon it but there nothing In the proposition
which carries any such inference Then he follows this up
by saying that he objects taking appeal from the
ton OF the President the Senate Congress never
dreamed that any such appeal was being taken had
called upon the Commissioners OF Indian Affairs, and
read the Senate the correspondence in which he
toned this change had called upon the Secretary Of the
Interior who has charge OF the Indian Department. and he
told that he would not recommend the change because
II took away part Of the governors salary but that in his
Judgment the change ought to be made That had stated
here were President Of the United States would not
do it and take OF the salary Of the governor Of
Minnesota He could not infer that Congress- would in
crease the salary Hence said the that the pro-
vso to the second section of the of 1851 ncom
pets that while it purported give this power to the
President Of the United States the power vas incom-
petey given that he could not exercise IL without doing
injustice =" ssSr NM MI phi. 'i'1
say therefore II IL quite mmateral to me whether the
the chairman Of the COMMITTEES on Indian Affairs adopt
ed. have the opinion of the Indian Commissioner and
Of the Secretary Of the Interior that the separation ought
conceive why the Senate should hesitate in doing what 1t
is conceded ought to be done but the objection TO doing
which is that this not the proper way and proper place
to do it. should have thought that the general Indian
appropriation bill the very place to provide for
thing connected with Indian affairs
will modify my amendment by adding to it proviso
that the salary the governor Of Minnesota shall remain
at 2500 which his present salary governor and
perntendent of Indian affairs can reason my
selI do not know what reason other gentlemen can see
why which is recommended by the Commissioner
of Indian Affairs and sanctioned by the Secretary Of the
Interior land which have therefore right to e. infer
because he Is in the habit apprehend Of sanctioning the
action Of the officers who have charge of these quesons
be done? What has been urged against til Nothing
cept what conceive beI say it. certainly with great
respect-a very remarkable argument charging me with
asserting right which does not belong to anybody but
member of the Committee Indian Affairs and with the
intention Of appealing from the President of the United
States the Senate and therefore, invoking the power
the friends the President vote down my amendment
Why sir do not know anything about that of
ton 3g1t4 i
portant had little knowledge of what occurred
under Gov Ramsay looked little into those ransac-
charges brought against him. also believe he mpugned
the law and believe that just long the governor Of
Territory holds the patronage ex-governor and the
OF the Indians there is too strong temptation for
men, and shall find that the difficulties will continue
occur 1t is for that tina, offered and urged the
amendments but say again that care not how the OBJ
jec effected would as lief turn the responsibility
T. President II the Senate afraid Of ii laks
s~ d Ames;5ef q Congress to take the re
sponsibity far and action GO change this
law rather than the question over President
and 20 him Sir you must take the responsibility
cause former Congress conferred il upon you imperfect
N propose to relieve the President of Il and to place
the responsibility where il belongs and that is on the
Congress of the United States
Now, in conclusion, land hope this is all shall be
called upon to say the subject let say that predi-
cate my action upon the recommendation Of the Commits
sioner Of Indian Affairs asked OF him for that purpose
and upon the opinion informally obtained of the Secretary
of the Interior and infer from the fact that these two
officers combined upon the question the President
would be OF the same opinion IL the difficulty in relation
the salary removed.
IL
surprising that he prcdcaes his amendment recon-
mendaton Of the Commissioner Indian Affairs II seems
by letter from the Commissioner addressed
ptor In answer to inquiry made by him whether this
change ought 10 be made in Minnesota SAYS
reference to the second section &C. Ayou will find that
the President already has the power the separn-
uon IN Minnesota Then he AIDA; MY individual opinion
mas been and IS that the public interests far Indian
matters are concerned would in all the Territories be SUBJ
served by separation of the Offices there being
similarity in duty necessity for the In any
spect'
What Is his recommendation lie answers--as 10 the
point put to him. whether the separation ought made
IN Mnnesothat the law already provides for IL As TO
the question whether there ought TO be general law
says that his opinion in favor Of general change Ger
tainy you cannot draw inference from that letter that
he thought the change ought to be made in this particular
case while the old system continued in other cases The
y for making special exception Of this case; but IL you
are going to rcorganize the system and make general
change he says he ia in favor OF it, otherwise says the
law as 1t stands sufficient enable the President TO
act Then his recommendation far there is any rec
communication at all is against this special act instead
being in favor of It.
Again II the CommSioner Of Indian Affairs had in
tennsa 70 make recommendation for this change he
would certainly have sent il the chairman OF the Com
mtiee on Indian Affairs who Ia the appropriate person to
hold communication between that Committee and the Conn
missioner OF Indian Affairs n question of this kind
Sir regret that have been under the necessity of rising
again this point but say a few words nrther
The senator that here exception to the general
ruehat the act Of 1851 abolished the subaqence and
All that kind OF thing east Of the Rocky mountains with
this exception Why sir II he will look into that matter
remove an agency in any organized Territory the
Nned states, and does ~ T,r