The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1857-02-26
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

Mr. DAVIS of Maryland, remarking that this day was
set apart for the consideration of the reports of the select
committee appointed on the attn ult 70 investigate certain
sired to call the attention Of the House to the resolution in
the case Of Mr. GILBERT, of New York. .al.a.-a
The resolution read and is as follows: ,s sa
'. Resolved, That WILLIAM A. GILBERT, member of the
House from New York. did agree with F. r G. Trpett
the passage of resolution bill through the pres
Of the book Of the said Tpet on the Pension and Bounty
Land Laws in consideration that the said Trpett should al
low him to receive certain Of money of the appro
priation for the purchase of the book.
2 Resotced That WILLIAM A. GILBERT did cast his vote
gress for corrupt consisting Of square
miles of land and some stock given to be given to him.
House from New York, be forthwith expelled from the
House."
Mr. DAVIS inquired If the gentleman from New York
Mr. GrLBERrl had submitted written statement in
cordance with the leave granted by the House. If such
statement had been filed he would call for it, he
thought this was the proper time to receive it.
Mr.. BENNETT, of New York, replied that Mr.. GILBERT
had not filed his statement He would charge that por
ton Of the evidence Of Sweeny not published and that
1t that part which goes to show against the witness
and which was material to the case There also evil
dence given by Smonton pointing out these witnesses that
was not here and which they deemed material He would
ask that before this subject should be discussed these
omissions should be printed, with reference showing the
connection it has with the evidence already printed He
had a proposition to submit and made this statement
merely to show why he should do It, -....
Mr.. DAVIS There is no evidence that has not been
Mr.. BENNETT, ofNew York. understood that there was
and that it would 60 against the witnesses.
Mr. WARNER Of Georgia, desired to ask the gentleman
upon what authority he made the assertion
MIR. BENNETT declined to answer that question If the
gentleman would 60 to the printing office he could ascer
tain what was, and what was not, stricken out
whether the motion made by the gentleman from New
York presented the idea that the person implicated was
willing to be put upon, his trial upon the record
that the party not only wished but demanded be put
upon his trial. but he wanted this parte testimony print
ed in full.
Mr. H. MARSHALL. If the party intends to have trial
not see the necessity to go into the matter in that way
If we going to try him the record then it is not
necessary to have this omitted testimony printed.
Mr.: NICHOLS, of Ohio in reply to question of Mr..
CRAIGE, of North Carolina stated that Mr. GILBERT had
made answer which in the hands of the gentleman
from New York Mr. BENNETT, and which would be pre-
Mr. BENNETT then submitted the following resolution
Resoved That all the proceedings of the committee APP
pointed to investigate the charge Of alleged corrupt
and in particular ali the statements and inquiries made or
lions which to the same Or in any way may relate there
to- with reference showing where the should be in
manner all the omitted statements and evidence Of the witt
Smonton, with the inquiries and suggestions &c.
e his
put or az to other Witnesses and that these matters
far as omitted and all other suppressons omissions
whether made at the request of the Witness otherwise
corrected and fully printed originally taken down by
clerk of said committee and where the have been
ted suppressed the instance Of the Witness that that
part shall be stated and and after such corrections
made the be verified full and true BY said clerk
Mr.. ORR of South Carolina stated that with reference
TO the statement of Mr. Simonton 1t due the COM
mittee to make this explanation. After his examination
bad been concluded the committee had asked him to give
the names Of the parties to which he referred Mr. Simon
ton had declined when the committee informed him that
he would give the should not be treated as tes
mony and Mr. 0. would submit that II not testimony
and was merely surnise After such assurance on the
part OF the committee Mr.. Smonon had given the names
With reference to the charge that there had been sup
preston OF testimony the part of the committee he
would say that they had adopted the rule wherever they
could adopt 1t after the testimony of witness had been
aken down by the stenographer and written oa to let him
have the privilege of making corrections wherever he said
ne had been misunderstood. There had been perhaps
changes made in that way in the testimony of Mr. Swee
Exchanges which the committee deemed wholly imma-