The weekly Minnesotian. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1852-1858, 1857-03-14

Messrs. Foote, Benjamin, and Bayard. a,
vocatcd the bill and, Messrs. Jones of Tenr
ana Butler, opposed further consideration
e II, was suspended by the arrival of the tim
h ior resumlng the special order, it being tt
) Dill authorizing the people of Minnesota
4 form State Government and Constitutio
$ preliminary to their admission into the IJr
o ION. Mr.. Hunter gave notice that as soon a
]; the Minnesota bill was disposed of, he shoul
: move to consider the Tariff bill.
The Senate by ayes 81 against noes "a
reconstructed the vote by which the amend
ment was adopted, restricting the right q
, suffrage to citizens of the United States, an
then struck out the amendment by vote O
81 against q, and passed the bill in the pre
else form in which it came from the Hous
by ayes 81, noes 90.
1he Senate resumed the consideration O
the submarine telegraph bill. -. =,
After discussion Mr.. Iverson moved to la,
the bill on the table. Lost.
The House amendments were agreed to
and the bill now only required the action o
the President
On motion of Mr. Hunter the Tariff bill
was directed to be taken up, in order tha,
II might not be among the unfinished bust
ness at the time of adjournment.
Mr Gwin presented the credentials o.
MIR. Broderick, Senator from California fol
six years from the 4th of March next.
MIR. Slidell, from the Committee on For.
elgn Relations, reported resolution allow
ing the officers and crew OF the steamer Vix.
Ell to accept certain tokens of acknowledge
ment from the Government of Great Britain
Adjourned.
HoUsE.-Davis, of Nd, called up the res
olution of the Select Committee Tor the ex-
pulslon of VIM. A. Gilbert. Bennett, of N.
T., said parts of the testimony of witnesses
Sweeney and Simonton had not been pub
l'shed. This testimony he deemed material
to Gilbert's defence
Davis, of Md, remarked there was no ev-
idence that had not been printed.
Bennet said he could prove Sweeney was
induced to swear to just so much as would
convict Gilbert and nothing more. Every
honest man would rebel against such con-
duct.
Warner asked on what authority Bennett
made his statement.
| Mr. Bennet declined to answer. IF the
gentleman would 60 to the printing office
he would see what was stricken out.
MIR. Humphrey Marshall wished to know
whether MIR. Gilbert wished to have trial.
Mr.. Bennett replied-Mr. Gilbert not only
wished but demanded trial on presentment
against him.
Mr.. Humphrey Marshall said, that being
the case, 1t did not matter whether all the
testimony was printed or not, as he supposed
the witnesses themselves would be pro-
duced.
Mr.. Craig understood the accused had rut
IN an answer to charges.
The Speaker remarked it had not been
filed.
Mr.. Nichols said, in this particular case.
an answer has been made and printed and
would be filed to-day by the member partc-
ularly implicated.
MIR. Bennett caused to be read a paper
from Mr. Gilbert, who denies the truth of
the charges preferred against him and de-
mands trial, and asks that certain testimo-
ny er parte, of Sweeney and Simonton, be
produced and printed, deeming it to contain
matters material to his defence
Bennett moved to recommt the report.
Orr, on the part of the Committee, said
that Simonton declined to give the names of
certain witne ses, except on the condition
that they should not be published as evi-
dence. He, Orr, assumed this was not testi-
mony affecting the merits of the case 1t
was merely the surmises of Smonton He
had no objection to sending to the printing
office and obtaining everything SUI pressed.
Bennett remarked, they have right to
SmontOn's statement which would show
that Sweeney swOre to order.
Davis, of Nd, said, the Committee are
not aware of any suppression of evidence
touching any facts affecting the persons ac-
cused, or which could bear on the fairness of
the proceedings. Simonton did give the
names of witnesses by whom testimony was
given; but Simonton was not compelled to
give them as testimony.
Mr.. McMullen said 1T was the duty of
Congress to give the accused fair trial
This was accorded to the meanest criminal.
In his opinion the committee had performed
its duty creditable to themselves and to the
nation; but he was for giving the accused cv-
erything he could in fairness ask. including
the suppressed testimony, which is deemed
by the accused as necessary to his defence.
After further debate. Mr.. Orr sent to the
printing office for original documents which
were subsequently compared in some parts
with the printed volume in which it appear
ed. The omissions were among others to
the following effect: When Sweeney was
examined Of Gilbert he said "I do not wish
to launch on sea of this kind, as shall be
liable to break down the testimony have
already given" In another part he says:
sit seems to me you have already evidence
enough to convict him [Gilbertl." And
again Witness said to the Committee, "You
should not lead me so far off as to make what
| have said improbable"
Mr.. Orr now said the charges in every re-
spent were made at the instance of Sweeney |
and he wished to present his testimony fair,
ly an properly before the House of Repre-
sentatives.
Mr.. Stanton inquired whether he consent
ed to this mode of trial.
Mr.. Orr replied, 1T was for the House to
determine whether it would give the matter
the 60 by, but himself he would not con-
sent to give the accused members higher and |
greater privileges than had been enjoyed by
members heretofore.
Mr.. Ritchie said that the form of trial was |
not discussed in the select committee. AS
to Mr.. Sweeney, when the Clerk read to |
him his testimony he stated that such parts |
as he desired to omit were mere loose con-
versations, in which he was trying to beg off
from giving testimony.
Mr.. Stanton said if the Committee were
acting as grand jury, then it was right to
take ex-parte testimony. In his opinion,
however, the committee partook of the char