The daily Minnesota pioneer. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1854-1855, 1854-09-08
MINNESOTA LAND BILL FRAUD.
Proceedings Of a select Committee of the
House of Representatives Of the United
States, under a Resolution I'm relation
to a change of a word i'm the Bill No.
342 after its EMgrOssment.
(CONCLUDED.)

AUG. 8, 1854.
The Committee met. Present: Messrs.
Washburne, Breckenridge, Campbell, Bar
ry, and Davis. -.e /
Testimony and Documentary Eridcnce taken
before the Select Committee of the House
of Representatives., umder the tolloaeimg
resolution of the House:
Resolred, That special committee of
five I've appointed for the purpose Of inquir-
ing whether the text of House bill 342, to
aid the construction Of railroad in the
Territory of Minnesota, was altered, or in
way changed in its language, subsequent to
its engrossmeit or passage by this House;
without the authority of the House, and if
So by whom and under what circunIstali
ces, such change was made; ard Also in Re.
gard to all other cases of Interpolation of
bills or joint resolutions Of the House dur
ing the present session; and that said conf
mittee be empowered to send for persons
and papers, and to examine witnesses on
oath in the premises
E. 8. WdMburne, srorn
Question. Do you know anything in re-
gard to any alterations III House bill No.
342, which passed Congress, to grant land
to Minnesota Territory for Railroad purpo-
ses, Or anything touching an agreement or
understanding in regard to the form said bill
should assume before it passed the House !
And if SO, state what you do know about
it.
Answer. In my answer / will state the
facts so far as l know them, as connected
with the grant of land to the Territory of
Minnesota for railroad purposes. The first
bill "a Senate bilD was laid on the tablein
the House on the 1clh of March last, l
think. While that bill was pending in the
House, | stated my position in regard to it,
and the reasons l hadwhy | desired it should
be in particular shape. Those remarks |
append, (marked A, and make part of
this statement. After the billwa defeated
| had various conversations in regard to an
other bill which was proposed to be intro
duced into Congress. / stated what kind
Of bill that thought would be proper,
and would suit me and my constituents; and
that all | wanted was, that the grant by
Congress should not be in such a shape that
one road running through my district should
have all advantage over any other road
that must insist upon both roads being left
on the same footing; that would not con
sent to give the Illinois Central Railroad
which was built by grant from the govern
ment, any advantage over another road
which was to be built through my district
by the farmers along the line Of it; that
would suggest that we should take tic ole
bill, and, instead of the provision that the
road should be extended to the northern ter
minus of the Illinois Central railroad, that
it should be so changed that any compan!
that received the grant should not be bount
to take that direction, but might take an
other direction if they pleased, and strike
the Mississippi river in Jackson or Dubuque
county, Iowa, to meet the terminus of G;
ther of the proposed roads running through
my district / therefore, at that time, chan
ged part of the first section of the old bil
to meet my views, leaving it so the termi
nus might be in either Dubuque or Jackson
county, Iowa; which bill, and the ch'ngt
made by me at the time, are made part O.
this statement, and marked B. After thu
time, and before anything was done, how
ever, and l should think about the middle
of March, l heard that certain parties il
Wall street, connected with the Illinois Cen
trail Railroad Company, had sent out t.
Minnesota to get a charter from the Legis
lature, which charter was obtained, ant
which l soon after received During thu
tendency of the bill in Congress, it was TN
known to me, and l presume to nearly ev
cry man in Congress, that any effort hat
been made to obtain such a charter. A
that charter gave to the company all thu
lands that might thereafter be granted b.
Congress to the Territory for railroads, ant
as believed it to he controlled by compa
10y that would so locate their road as to de
prive one OF the roads in my district Of an,
advantage of the grant, l said at once
could support no bill which would give such al
advantage, and which would be legislatin!
the property of the government, in the frs
instance, into the hands of a corporation
instead of into the Territory, to be dispose,
Of after it had been acquired in name
most conducive to the best interests of tina
Territory.
Such being my known position on tina
subject, some time, l think, from the ST
to the 10th Of last April, Hon. Rob't Smitl
and George W. Billings came to my roor
to talk with me on the subject of anothe
BILL expressed to them my views asabov
set out, and gave them my reasons for ell
PERTAINING them They wanted something
like the old bill, but told them that sue
bill would not be likely to 60 through i
the face of the charter that had been grant
ed by the Minnesota Legislature, givin
ouyov oil +ho lands RI q comuanv hut tho