The weekly Minnesotian. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1852-1858, 1858-02-27
lends of Mr.. Burns would insist on their

friends of Mr.. Burns would insist on thei
objections. -
Mr.. Hoard made another Intellectual effort
to make his explanation.
The subject was dropped.
Mr.. Hatch rose to make personal ex
PLANTATION. He said that during his absence
yesterday Mr.. Zollicoffer made personal al
fusion to him. He had right as a member
of the House to discuss any matter of public
interest; no person on earth could deter him
from faithful and fearless discharge of tina,
duty. The other day he spoke of certain
party and their oaths which fact could only
be known to members of that party he did
not propose to discuss the question of verac-
ity with any member of the House. As to
the existence Of these oaths or as to their
treasonableness and unconstitu .ionality be
sought to bring before the House credita
bic authority of their existence, namely "a
journal of New York. He did not vOuch for
the genuneness of these oaths the gentle
man branded this allegation as false If Mr..
Zollikofier were right, then he was at issue
with AL authority when he made personal
issue with any gentleman in or outside of the
House. He was responsible but could not
be diverted from meeting question inyoly.
ing the constitutional rights of his fellow cit
liens, by gentleman giving it personal or
local application. Such oaths may not exist
in Tennessee. lie did not ailcge that Mr..
Zol.icotfer or any other gentleman had taken
such Obligations he had expressed belief
that men taking such oaths acted iu direct
violation of the constitution,
Mr.. Zollicoffer said that possibly he mis-
apprehended the spirit actuatlng Mr.. Hatch.
The obligations which the latter had read as
those OF the American party, were neither in
the letter or spirit Of those administered in
Tennessee, Being a member of the Ameri-
can party, be ieIt it his duty to throw Oft the
impntation that the obi cations were treas
enable.
Mr.. Gilmore, interposing, said that he
would have preferred that Mr.. Z. had not re.
piled, as Mr.. Hatch acknowledged that hc
was elected by foreign votes.
CONFUSED cries of "order," order."]
Mr.. L., resuming, said that he did not wish
to make personal issue. If he had misun-
derstOOd Mr.. Hatch, he had nothing more to
say;
Mr.. Hatch made personal explanation.
He sent the char a paper, reciIing that a
statement had been made by member of
the House, asserting that Mr.. Burns had
stated to him on the subject Of his Burns')
vote on the Kansas Committee resolution,
that he was to have official patronage at his
disposal, and thai Mr.. Burns by thus freely
avowng his sentiments affords grounds for
the belief that improper influences had been
exerted to bias his vote, he amended by offer
ing resolution for the appointment of Sc
lect Committee to inquire whether improper
attempts had been made by persons Of the
Executive Department, or by other persons,
to influence the action of members of the
House by promise of patronage.
Mr.. Hoard disclaimed personal unkindness
against Burns, but said tnat he could not be
diverted from his purpose by side issues.
Last Friday he said in the House that the
Executive Department was endcavoriu. to
influence votes by the bestowal Of patronage,
and circumstances connected with Burns
statement justified the charge.
Mr., burnett objected to any gentleman
bringing q personal difficult y into the House
under the disguise Of privileged question
Mr. Burns had PRONOUNCED the charges false
and he was responsible for what he had said
Pending the question the House adjourned
till Tuesday.