The weekly pioneer and Democrat. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1855-1865, 1859-06-30
The Extent Of Gov. Sibley's responsi-
btlity In the MANAGEMENT Of the n.
4 &. v. H. =. Co.

The Extent OF Gov. sibley's responsi.
btlity In the Management Of the n
4 &. v. H. =. Co.
The Ainnesot,an, Of the I'D inst, take
exception to our article Of the day previous
10 which We exposed its unfair and insidi
COS attack upoO Gen. SHIELDS, on the event
Of his ekction to the presidency Of the Cedar
Valley Railroad Company, and in the
course Of its comments goes out Of it, way
to misrepresent the action, and attack the
character, Of Gov SIBLxY. We have taken
pains to ascertain the extent Of the respOn.
sibility justly attachsble to the latter gen.
man in his character as Director Of the Com
pany, and We state the following Is the facts
in the case
First: That Gov. SIBIxY was invariably
opposed to any connection between the &C.
dar Valley Company and any banking ope.
rations whatever.
Second: That he did not, ~ asserted,
" draw up the contract in bis own hand
writing :" but that the PKAsE contract, Is
prepared for the adoption Of the Board Of
Directors, when Gov. SHELLEY was not pres
ent, and with the knowledge that be was Op.
posed to the whole policy inaugurated by such
contract, was shown to him, and his entire
connection with it consisted In his suggest
ing 10 writing certain changes for the better
security Of the Company, In case the appar'
ent predeterminstion to adopt it should be
Sadly carried into effect.
THIRD. That Gov. SIBLEY has not been
considered by the balance Of the Direction
as an active member OF the Board, nor
has he taken any prominent part in the
management Of the affairs Of the Company,
during several months past.
Fourth: That Gov. SrBLKY would long
ago have Withdrawn from all connection
with the Board of Directors, but for the
fact that the other members protested
against such step, on the ground that the
Company would be injured by any change
in the Directory.
Fifth: That Gov. SIBLEY has not now,
nor has he eves had, any pscuniary interest
in the Company, or in the Railroad, which
he is not, and has not been, willing to trans
fer without cost to any proper person who
might be selected TO supply his place 10 the
Board and that be has never received any
compensation whatever from the company
for his services as Director.
Thus much for the connection of Gov.
SIBLEr with the affairs of the Cedar Valley
Company. The Mnnesottan, Of the same
date, in an article upon the currency, makes
other misrepresentation which, as we have
it under consideration, we will correct. We
state, therefore,
First! That the assertion that the Cover.
nor was only offered thirty cents on the dol
lar 10 New York, for the State Railroad
Bonds, is not true. No such proposition
was ever made to him.
Second That the Auditor received the
State bonds issued to the Cedar Vally Com
pany at IS cents, upon the oath Of Mr..
NORTH, then President of the Company,
that they had been sold By him at that rate,
and after the company had in legal form
provided for first and exclusive mortgage
bonds to the State, in accordance with the
original requirement of Gov. SlBLEY.
Third: That three fourths Of the Repub-
lican party Of the State have denounced both
the Governor and Auditor Tor not receiving
all the bonds issued to the different compa-
MES as banking basis, on the ground that
the State should uphold the credit Of It's
own bonds and We state further, what
must be apparent to all, that but for the
watchfalnsss and determination Of these
Democratic officers the state would now
have been flooded with more than million
and half OF irresponsible promises to pay.
The known chronic hatred of Governor
SIBLEy by the M,nn<sotion, and its persist.
ent misrepresentation Of all matters with
which he is in any way connected, renders
it unnecessary to pay any further attention
to its attacks than We have done 10 the fore
going plain statement Of facts.
THR Charleston Mercury, says, in refer