Minnesota weekly times. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1854-1859, 1854-09-12
MINNESOTA LAND BILL FRAUD.
Proceedings Of Select Committee Of House Of Repre-
sentatives. ~ $500
FRANCIS j. GRUND-CONTINUED.
TvrpoD.v Anvil On 1QSd

sensauves' sN
francis j. GRuND-CoNrINuED.
THURSDAY, April r., 1854.
"Mr. Sibley and other gentlemen were heard
on the subject of the Minnesota Railroad and q
bill similar to the Minnesota railroad BILL which
has passed and been tabled in the House, was
ordered to be drawn, but the proposition to re-
port it to the House, out of it's regular turn was
negatived,"
lowing entry is made in the Journal:
"The committee met pursuant to adjournment,
MIR. Cobb in the chair. The Minnesota land bill
| was further considered, and ordered to be re-
ported by the committee, so as to be considered
during the territorial week."
These are all the entries on the journal in re-
| gard to the Minnesota bill.
From individual recollection, l can state that
| several unimpOrtant amendments Gas they apear-
ed to meg were proposed and debated, and ac-
ceded to but, as l understood that should not
be troubled with drawing the bill, l took no men,
orandum of them, and made no minutes of them
| on the journal. have no other recollection on
the subject, and have not heard it spoken of, till
| member OF the House directed my attention to
Zen. Stevens, who had obtained the floor to
make personal explanation. The explanation
was IN regard to the subject now being investi-
gated by your honorable committee.
SIS. JONES, SWORN.
Question. Are you secretary Of the Chicago,
st. Charles, and Mississippi Airline Railroad
Company; and if SO, how long have you held the
| position?
Answer. have been secretary of that company
| for sixteen months.
Question. State whether, during that time, or
any other time, to your knowledge, Mr.. Wash
burne, of Illinois, was the attorney of that COM
pany, or was he employed by that company in any
way to promote its interests?
Answer. Not to my knowledge.
| Question. State whether you are now, and
have been while in that Office, conversant with the
business of that Office, and whether YOU would
have known if Mr.. Washburne was so employed?
Answer. | think am perfectly conversant with
all its business transactions since its organization.
| am myself the attorney of the company, in con-
junction with Mr.. Judd, of Chicago: and if MIR.
Washburne had thus being employed, should
have likely known it.
| Hon. BENJAMIN G. EASTMAN, SwORN.
Question. Do you know ANYTHING in relation to
the alteration in House bill No. 342, after its en-
grossment and passage in the House and when
did you first see and examine manuscript bill No.
342, reported to the House by General Stevens, of
Michigan?
Answer. My attention was attracted to the Min
nesota bill with the motive of ascertainng wheth-
er the rights of the State of Wisconsin were in
| any way infringed upon. On the day in which
the bill passed the House examined the manu-
script bill reported by Mr.. Stevens, and my i'm
preston is that there alterations except in
the handwriting of Mr.. Sibley, who drafted the
bill. | cannot state positively, who drafted the
bill. cannot state positively whether the word
''future," in tie third section, was or was not
| then erased. My purpose in the examination was
to conform the grant of land to the Territory of
| Minnesota.
| HUGH TYLER, Sworn.
Question. Do you know anything in relation to
| the alleged alterations in the bill which passed
| the House of Representatives, after it was en-
crossed, granting lands to the Territory of Min
nesota; from whom and in what manner did you
learn that alterations had been made, (if YOU had
| such knOwledge) and what do YOU know in regard
| to the agencies or influence used to produce the
| change?
Answer When MIR. Sibley was here, some time
| IN the spring, had a conversation with him and
MIR. Billings in regard to the contemplated grant
OF land to Minnesota Territory for railroad pur-
poses. Sibley had prepared a bill which under
stood did not suit Mr.. Billings he wanted the
word 'future" stricken out, and the word ssand''
substituted for sor." l will not say positively
that the bill had been prepared, but the features
of bill were discussed. The bill which Mr..
Washburne and others had agreed to support was
the subject matter of conversation.
Mr.. Billings said, that to be useful to their
company, the alterations were necessary. Mr..
|
tons. Mr.. Billings said it could be done without
Mr.. Washburne's knowing anything about it,
MIR. Sibley refused to have anything altered, and
| said that it must be put on its passage in the
shape agreed on. Mr.. Billings said that, in some
stage of the proceedings of legislation, the change
could be made without the friends of the bill
spoken of knowing anything about it, and men
point it was that he said it could be done. When
Mr.. Billings spoke of the manner in which the
alteration cOuld'be made, MIR. Sibley said such
plan would be highly improper; and agreed
with him on that point. Another remark which
MIR. Billings made in this connection was, that it
need not be known except by the pers who did it.
MIR. Billings said, at the sametime, that MIR. Wash
burne's interest Or sympathies were in favor of
some road which was rival, and whose interests
| he (Bilngs) represented that Mr.. Washburne
was hostile to the Illinois Central road influence.
l think he said that Mr.. Washburne had an inter
est in the road called the "Air-line road" un-
derstand this interest in the ''Air-line road -
spoken of by Mr.. Billings, to be deeper interest
than that of representative merely.
Question. Was there any proposition, on the
part OF Mr. Billings, that the bill could be put in
House and the Senate?
Answer. don't know as ANYTHING was said
about the Senate. l think he did not make such
a proposition.
Question. Did he give any intimation as to the
time when, or the mode in which, the alteration
could be efected9
Answer. Yes; he said a word could be written
in pencil. l understood the idea to be, that when
the bill came to be engrossed it would come ont
| as he wished it-that was the substance of it. In
the conversation, l do not know that Mr.. Slbley
made any objection to have such bill reported
as Mr.. Billings desired, except that he thought
that it would defeat the grant of land to the Ter
ritory, which he (Sibley) was anxious should be
made.
| B. 3. FRENCH, SWORN.
| Question. How long, and in what capacity,
were you connected with the House of Represen-
tatives of the United States
Answer. In December, 1888, l was appointed
by Walter S. Franklin, then Clerk of the House
of Representatives of the United States an enroll
ling and engrossing clerk in his Office and from
that time till 1910 had the principal supervision,
under the clerk and chief clerk, of that branch of
| duty in the clerks Office In 1888 Colonel Frank
lin died; and in December of that year Hugh A.
Garland was elected Clerk. In 1910 Mr.. Garland
removed Col. Burche from the chief clerkship of
the Office, and appointed me: which Office held
until Mr.. Garlands term of Office expired, when M.
St. Clair Clark elected Clerk, and he restored
Col. Burche to the chief clerkship, and ! was
again specially charged, among other things, with
the duties of enrolling and engrossing. In Decem-
Der, 1843, G. j. McNulty was elected Clerk, and
| Immediately appointed me chief clerk which Of
| fee held until was elected Clerk of the House
of Representatives, on the 18th of January, 1845;
which Office held until December, 1847, when