Minnesota weekly times. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1854-1859, 1854-08-22
MONDAY, AUG. FL, 1854.
WHAT WILL THEY THINK OF US,

-
This is question Of great Importance to our
people. What will the members of Congress and
the civilized world think of us, if we permit the
odium of fraud to rest upon us ?-f we do not
repudiate the acts of the guilty, and show to the
world that the citizens Of Minnesota are what
they have been represented to be, an upright,
worthy, intelligent people? Is it not generally
known that the Delegate of Minnesota is respon-
sible for the recent act of Congress? Most assu-
redly; why then should the people be made to
suffer for his acts ? If in his efforts to accumu-
late wealth, he proves recreant to the trust i'm
posed in him, it is no reason why we should de-
fend or uphold him -it is the very reason, on the
contrary, why we should repudiate him, and if
we do not do it, honest men will repudiate U.S.
At present we stand in peculiar situation. We
asked of Congress favor. Congress granted that
favor. Honest men supposed everything was right,
when 10 fraud is discovered, and it is ascer.
tanned that Congress has been imposed upon
Where was our Delegate? Did he Immediately
come forward and aid Congress IN indicating its
honor, its integrity? Did he exhibit any solicit
tude in the unraveling of the mystery? If SO,
where is the record? Did he not wink at the fraud
himself, and was he not party to it Let his
acts speak. How did Congress view this matter?
Why, that the very party that asked for the favor
had been guilty of perpetrating the fraud, and
therefore unhesitatingly the members repudiated
both him and the blood-hounds that have tracked
Minnesota for the past eight months. Why did
not II. M. Rice come forward and say" Gentle
men, all this matter is without my knowledge and
consent. 1t is not right for you to deprive Mime
sofa of her grant of land, because Mr.. Stevens or
Mr.. Forney, or any one else, not representing the
interests of Minnesota, has altered the bill. Pun
ish them and not innocent people. am sent here
to defend the interests of my constituents, and l
would be unworthy their confidence and support
if did not seek by every means within my power
to expose the rascals who perpetrated the fraud.
l ask you, gentlemen, not to repeal the bill."-
Did Mr.. Rice do that? No. Suppose he had done
it, would not the members of Congress have paus-
ed before they "passed the Rubicon," and visit
ed upon the people Of Minnesota punishment for
an act of which others were guilty? There is no
doubt about it. What was the reason then that
Mr.. Rice did not step forward and save the land {?
Simply because he acds identified acith The parties
acho were instrumental in altering the bill. This
fact was known to members of Congress, and
this is the reason why they repealed the bill and
repudiated the acts of the Delegate of Minnesota.
Now then, what course shall we pursue? Will
the people of Minnesota uphold the acts of the
man whom Congress has repudiated? If so, Con-
gress will make US party to the fraud, and when
we ask for grant of land next session, they will
repudtate u.s. But let us come out manly and dis
card all who had anything to do with the altera-
tion--take bold stand and maintain it, and we
can then ask Congress for favors, and stand some
chance Of getting them. What will honorable
men in the States think of us if we utter no ex-
preston of condemnation? Will they not be led
to believe that we are all set Of swindlers p
governed by no principle ?-actuated by no mo-
tives but those of sefshness? The brandy man
or the New York Times may we'll Cry out-''Eu-
reka Eureka we have found it, we have found
it 20 The time has come for us to vindicate our
selves and to prove to the world that the people
Of Minnesota will not sanction deeds which, if not
iebuked, will only make us odious in the eyes
of Congress, and in the eyes of those who hther-
to have considered our Territory one of the fair
est portions Of Gods earth. We again ask tho
question-what will they think of us?