The daily Minnesota pioneer. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1854-1855, 1854-09-02
N. Have you seen the House Bill

SAFE VI eHtTy vi tllc IdHIS aloiiS tIiC iOutCUl
that road, and along the proposed extension
of it, in Wisconsin and Iowa.
Question. Were those lands withdrawn
from entry?
Answer. The lands withdrawn are in Min
nesOta Territory, and extended to Iowa and
Wisconsin.
Question. State whether you have been
consulted in relation to the House bill No.
342, after its approval, by any person or
persons in regard to its legal effect; and if
so, by whom?
Answer. BY the Hon. Mr.. Eastman, and
by no other person, to the best of my knowl-
edge and belief. The object was to know
whether this grant extended to Wisconsin.
Question. Has your attention been called
to the alteration of the bill
Answer. Has not until yesterday.
Question. Has any other person convcrs-
ed with you other than Mr. Eastman?
Answer Has not, but in general terms
to inquire whether the road would probably
succeed, &C.
Question. Did you ever know or hear of
a company claiming these lands?
Answer. have not.
Question. Has your attention been direc-
ted to the Sd section by any person
Answer. 1t has not.
Question. Have you any knowledge of
any railroad from Dubuque, Iowa, via St.
Paul, Minnesota Territory, to the mouth of
Left-Hand river, at Fon du Lac, Wiscon-
sin, or any other grant of land to aid in the
construction of said road, or of any bills
pending in Congress to provide for such
grants?
Answer. The act based on House Bill
No. 342, "to aid the Territory of Minneso-
ia in the construction of araroad therein"
makes a grant to said Territory for the part
of the above mentioned railroad within said
Territory. In relation to the extension of
said road north into Wisconsin and south
into Iowa, know nothing further than is
shown in the application Of the senators,
Representatives, and delegates, for the with
drawal of the lands along the route of said
road, from Dubuque, via st. Paul, to the
mouth of Left-hand river, at the head Of
Lake Superior.
John W. Foruey, suorn.
Question. State to the committee the of.
flee you hold
Answer. l am Clerk of the House of
Representatives of the United States.
Question. AS clerk of the House of Rep
resentatives, state whether you have seen
original House bill No. 342.
Answer. Never, until exhibited to nc
yesterday
Question. State to the committee whcth-
er you have ever seen the cngrosscd bilnOw
exhibited.
Answer. | saw the cngrossed bill after it's
passage in the House
Question. State What you know in rcla-
ton to the alteration Of the 81 section of
the bill after its engrossment and enroll
mcnt.
Answer All know inrcIation to the bill
is since its engrOsSmcnt. Then Gen. Ste
vcns, MIR. Patton, engroSsing clerk of the
Senate, and Mr.. Sproulc, cngrossing clerk
in my office, came to my room after the bill
had passed the House. General Stevens
stated that there was a mistake in the bill,
and that, as lie understood, pointing to the
word ''0r' in the Sd section, the Committee
on Public Lands intended that the word
''or" should be '"aad;" said the alteration
was immaterial, and hoped that l would
agree to make it, because unnecessary delay
would follow. Ipaused and looked over
two lines of the bill, and not over, and said
to General Patton, who was standing near
me: "What is your practice in the Senate?"
He said 1--WE make immateral alterations
frequent alterations that do not interfere
with the context" Said l.: "DO you think
| ought to agree to the alteration. for this
seems to me to be immaterial p He said
I" If l were in your place, l would do it; l
think are should do tor words to that ef-
feet. General Stevens was so positive as to
the fact that he understood the committee
intended "amd" should be in the place of
: "or," that, after this consultation, direct
cd Mr.. Sproule to make the alteration. At
that time, if my recollection serves me,
: General Stevens retired from the office. l
have heard nothing of this matter until Sun
day, when friend called to let me know
that Mr. ROsser complained that Mat al
1 iteration interfered with certain private rights
l in Minnesota Territory.
; Question Did you know the legal effect
| that the alteration would have on the bill
Answer. l did not.
Question. Had you any knowledge of the
motive Of General StavanS in wichin,r tho