Minnesota weekly times. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1854-1859, 1855-04-03
THURSDAY, MARCH 20, 1855.
THAT MEMORIAL ONCE MORE. I.

lHOHOOAY ~MARCH ~, 100o.
THAT MEMORIAL ONCE MORE!
The editor of the Minnesotian has never yet
met us fairly in discussion, and probably never
will. In his issue of yesterday morning he uses
the same means he always has at command, to
dispose Of questions which it is impossible for his
narrow mind to comprehend, much less to eluci-
date. These means consist of low blackguardism
and personal illusions. We pass over these and
notice the only point in his article worthy of at
tention. He remarks
Old Noah Webster says, in his third clause de-
fning the word, that memorial is ga written
representation of facts made to a legislative or
other body as the ground of petition, or the re-
presentation of facts accompanied with petit
tion.'
Very we'll. Now sir, do you mean to say that
to be memorial it is not necessary that the Gre
presentation of facts" as spoken of by Webster,
should pass both Houses of the Legislature and
receive the signature of the Governor? Do you
mean to say that set of resolutions passed by
one House and set of resolutions passed by the
other House, Gas was the case with those un-
der discussion,) not jointly and not signed by
the Governor, constitute memorial: If this is
parliamentary, ssgood Lord, deliver u.s." If this
doctrine prevails, the Governor becomes non
entity, legislation farce, and the door is open
for fraud and rascality of every character. If
this is the basis upon which you would build the
law-making power of this Territory, we fear that
the food-gates of corruption would soon be
thrown wide open and villains from all parts Of
the land would walk in and take possession of our
Capitol. Why, sir, you set this as precedent
you lay this down as sslaw and gosrel,' and with
the same propriety the Legislature (no matter
how corrupt) can pass bills scithout the signature
Of the Governor and they become laws, because
the same rule which requires the Governor %
place his signature to bills, also requires him to
place his signature to memorials, and if, as you
claim, the mere passage of the resolutions cithout
the signature of the Governor, make a memorial,
then the passage of the bills, without The sigma
ture of the Governor, make laws. Let this pre-
dominate, and what moral, interesting Legisla-
ture we should have! We have claimed that our
Legislature never passed memorial, which is at
all binding, of the nature claimed by the Mime
sotian, but that which the members did pass, were
merely resolutions, (not joint but separate ones,)
expressing the views of both Houses, which were
not signed by the Governor, and consequently
could not legitimately be called amemorial. We
insist that we are correct notwithstanding the eff.
forts of the Minnesotian to make it appear other
wise.
Now in regard to the articles which the editor
quotes from US. The first article contained an
error of the compositor, who left out line read
ing-ssand the U. S. House of Representatives"
annuled, &c.-making the paragraph correct as
follows
ga fraud was ommitted-Congress repealed
the Bill in consequence of that fraud, and the u.
S. House of Representatives annuled the Charter
for the same reason.' As soon as the error was
discovered, it was corrected, and the article ap-
peared corrected in part of our edition. This is
small potatoe business for a cotemporary to seize
upon when he we'll knew, that it must be an error
of the proof-corrector, as at that time the U. S.
House of Representatives had only acted upon
the Charter and this fact was we'll known to every
one. So, Mr.. Rag Picker, make the most you can
out of that You are welcome to your triumph
there.
As to the other article, it was predicatcd on
the ground assumed by our opponents, not our
own ground, and therefore it had an entirely diff
fercnt signifcaton than it would have had had we
based it on our own premises. This the editor
we'll knew, but it does not suit his purpose to
place this fact before his readers. 1t is not the
first time however, that our articles have been
garbled, nor do We suppose it will be the last
time, but if the editor can make any capital out
of the operation, we say to him now, as we have
said on former occasions-"pitch in.''