The weekly Minnesotian. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1852-1858, 1857-03-07

The copy of the bill which Mr.. Wilson
sends us is certified by the chief clerk as
follows
II hereby certify that this is a correct
copy of the Bill as passed the House of Rep
resentatives, February 81, 1857.
II. L. EDWARDS, Chief Clerk, H. of R."
That's all right, Mr.. Wilson. Just as we
stated on Tuesday. The bill did pass the
House, but it passed by being struggled
into the file for third reading, and was read
third time by its title only and passed.
And it never saw official daylight in the
House until this final action was had upon
it, of which action you were cognizant; but me
fnd no other member OF officer that wos! Now,
can't you comprehend the force and meaning
of our charge? We charge you with having
by some illegal means, got that bill to it's
third reading, by its title, without its ever
having passed through any of its previous
legitimate stages Of legislation, and before
we get through with you, we will come SO
near proving it, that you will not rise to any
more questions of privilege" this session.
You refer to DR.. Adams, and say he de-
mics he ever saw the bill in the hands of his
committed on interpretations. Precisely -
That is just what the Doctor stated to US on
Monday, and just what we said he stated in
our article of Tuesday. That is one of tie
main links in the chain of evidence which
convicts you. The bill was struggled through
to its third reading, by title, wuhom beng
allowed to be examined by the Doctor and
his committee. Its villainous provisions
would allow no such scrutiny /; and none
knew this fact better than yourself when
you, as is certainly suprosable, got hold of
the file of bills ready for third reading.
snuffled the pack, and stuck this one in with
out its previous examination by the House
or any committee thereof.
But if you do not believe u.s. just listen to
Dr.. Adams himself:
SAINT PAUL, MARCH 4, 1857.
Mr.. j. P. OwENs-Deur SIR In reply to
yours of the Bird inst, will say that on yes
terday in the House of Repre- sentativcs,
when the question came up on my own Res
olution, which read as follows: THAT the
Council be respectfully requested to return
Bill No. 237, H. of r., for the further con-
sideration Of the House," reiterated the
assertion made to you the day previous,
that the Chairman of the Committee of In
corporations had never considered or report
ed bill with the provisions incorporated in
that one; but that bill bearing a like title |
had been reported by the Committee on In
corporations.
Again, if Mr.. Wilson asserts that ever
authorized him to say that had not made |
the statement before mentioned to you, he |
uttcrs a falsehood of the darkest dye
Respectfully yours, &C.,
C. P. ADAMS.
There Mr.. Wilson! You can now take
all the privileges" you see fit to get out of
this bad 'scrape." 1t appears from DR.. Ad-
ANS testimony that you had two bills of the
same title ne you allowed his committee to
examine and report upon in order to swindle
he House; the other, embodying a fraud,
7ou nut to its third reading and passage by
greater and more dishonest trick.
Come, sir; if you are man, own up and
make clean breast of it,