The daily Minnesota pioneer. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1854-1855, 1854-10-04


the matter, with proper and definite instruc- d
tions from the people u
But the honorable Senator says that myself, +
Mr. Rosser and Mr. Sibley are to blame for s
the action Of Congress in repeating the land l
grant once made.
now propose to- look to the official record t
as made by the Investigating Committee, and
sec what cause was assigned by Congress for /
this repeating act I
LIST. The alteration of the bill was the cause l
assigned by all for its repeal-to wit, by strik-
ing out the word or in the Sd Sec, and in l
sertng the word and" Il
I'd. With the word /" or" in the Sd sec as
the bill passed the House, the lands came
again into the hands, power, and control OF the
people of Minnesota.
3,l. With the word "or' in the Sd sec.
struck out. and the substitution of the word
:. and" it gave the lands into the hands, pow
or and control forever of the old Company and
took them irrevocably from the control of the
people of Minnesota.
Although the charity of the Committee is
thrown over any fraudulent design in procur-
ing and making this alteration, yet no reason
able man can fail to see that the deep solicit
tude manifested by certain persons to have the
clerk strike out the word Z" or" and substitute
the word and" irrcsistibly forces conviction
upon intelligent minds that they knew its le-
: gal, or supposed legal effect.
Senator Jones told Mr. Patton las Mr. r..
Committee on Public Lands of the Senate
J would report an amendment correcting it,
/" and then it would Lave to 60 back to the
: " House for concurrence, which might cause
; " considerable delay in its passage, which the
} friends of the bill wanted to avoid. For his
: part, he did not see how it could affect the
: " meaning or sense of the bill" I cannot re-
frain from feeling amazed that Senator Jones
should say he would have it amended in the
+, Senate if, as he said, he did not see how it
could affect the sense or meaning of the BILL
If the sense is not changed, all the clerks swear
such verbal changes could he made by them.
If the sense is not affected, why amend it III
S the Senate? l know that this must strike the
S honorable Senator himself with much surprise,
to find himself in this extremely unpleasant
knowledge of this remarkable word ''or" and
: :" and
Il Even Senator's sometimes live in glass houses,
: or the evidence reported by the Committee
q must have some marked verbal alterations or
= clerical mistakes, to be corrected hereafter
n 1t occurs to me that the Hon. Senator will
find that he is hot regarded as novice in Leg
islatiOn, by the country, after so many years OF
4 service in the House and Senate and will
II most probably find that the country will be
+ slow to believe-high as his position elevates
:. him. that he should ignorantly ask to amend
l bill, when the sense and meaning in his own
y opinion would be the same without the amend
d ment as with it. But the Hon. Senator said
If more which the record proves, to wit: That
it the friends of the bill wanted to aroid delay"
n When this is analysed, what does it mean ?
'e Why simply this BY the 10th sec. of the
| L., fro,, fhn 1ocfI
ID lature of Minnesota, it is provided that unless
f. the Company be " organised on or before the
1T LIST day of July, 1854, the grants therein con-
D. tanned shall be roid.' Hence delay was dan
g gcrous to this E.vorite Company of the Hon.
n Senator, or will the Hon. Senator say that he
it did not know this fact to exist in the charter.
1t IF so if will he interesting To the country tn
have the Hon. Senator inform us, why he and
er the other friends wanted to aroid delay?
III 1t is easily solved, without the aid of the
S Hon. Senator. Delay was dangerous to the
Il interests of the old chartered Company, and
hence the deep solictude to have the clerk al
a. ter the bill without the Hon. Senator being
it put to the trouble and singular necessity Of
to amending bill that would mean the same in
r his opinion after as before the amendment
lie ris said that where ignorance is bliss It's f)
s. y to be wise.' Here l leave the Hon. Sena-
IS master artist, the officially recorded evidence
a. Although | took no part in ferreting out
O. this alteration yet feel that Congress could
ly not do less than they did and vindicatc the pu
I'd rity of their Legislation and the integrity o.
n their public records. And although the Com
err mttee found no intentional crininality in the
ID alteration the ma jorty report speaks OF the ac
v thus =" But while your Committee make this
IN report in regard to the motives of the partie:
I'll "they would express in strong language theil
II, q conviction that any unauthorized change il
g the text of a bill or resolution of the House
;h " no matter what the intentions of the parties
I'd .'may be, is of the most dangerous tendency
We % and in this view of the case they express the
in opinion that the change an question DESERVES
q, SEVERE CENsURE.' ...
il The minority report speaks as follows -
I'd whilst we are neither disposed nor prepared
&c :" to deny the purity of the motive, are condemn
I'd .tle act as culpablc error. If such system
We "prevais there can be no certainty or reliabil
he d" itv in Congressional action. There can b'
nc g no safety to members under such practice
It. because it falsifes the votes they give under
OF /" the solemnities of their oath by making then
ld "appear as voting for measures which they
I'd would have opposed. 1t brings odium upol
O. " Congress- and destroys public confidence il
rs " Congressional proceedings"
But it is reasonable to suppose from thu
If style of the Hon. Senator's letter that he jus
I'd titles the alteration which the majority ant
ly minority of the committee, and two-thirds O
lis Congress, declared to be culpable error" ant
o. observing severe censure," and yet the Hon
n Senator would have the country believe that
e- new system of legal Jurisprudence has beer
n adopted to fit this particular case. That is
n to convict, condemn, and execute the witness
to who exposes the criminal, and extol as para