The register., 1860-04-12
Senator TOombs and the Bobtails,

The gentlemen with abbreviated narratives
nre again ut work. They are making Mr.
Toombs' recent report to the U. $. Senate an
occasion for renewed attack upon our excel
lent Senators but chiefly upon Mr.. Slidcl,. |,
is, Of course, the oft-rcpeated and oIt-refutcd
slanderous story about the IIoumas Land Claim.
With all their aptness for invention, these men
seem incapable OF concocling anything apart
from this wor-out fable, which has been re-
hashcd, re-cookcd aud redished od nauseaa,.
Come, gentlemen, if you aciN not give us trutA,
Mt least let us have morelty; if you will not be
true historians, be SORT of .Esops-f slaves to
fa'sehood, still slaves with somewhat of the
rpice of life about you.
Under such titles as "CoN,pse Of tie Houmas
Swiaale' it is repeatedly asserted that "Mr
Too'nbs reported the Houmas Claim to be FINN
dulent," the report "involvcs the public charac
ter and private integrity of two Senators of the
United States, who are implicated in the dis
honorable proceeding OF desiring personal Gu
rchmcnt by n Legislative fraud" &c. &c., to the
end OF a shameless chapter. The enrontcry of
these talsehoods is the more surprising, as the
report is sometimes published in the same pa
pers But the report is long and in small type.
and unleadcd. The canard editorials are in
large typo and openly printed. Thus these
m"n hope to escape detection by the report be-
ing unread, while their statements are tokcn
us truthful.
Now, must not the reader he somewhat sor-
tltd "hcn informed that the report warrants
none Of these statements. 90, shame, where
islhy blush" But these men have long since
forgotten how to blush So fur as the rcnori
decides the Houmas Claim at all it confirms and
lsgitimafes 1t. The report says distinctly tina,
there is no question about the claim itself. II
is perfectly valid. The only question is as To
the extent of the claim We quote from the
report
That the claimants under the 1Ioumas grant
were emitted to nlnety-siN arpents front on the
MISSISSIPPI river, and the co0,mon depth of forty
a,Pch.s rear, seems to have been conceded by
ait OF the agents and officers of the government.
ana that they We're entitled to u back conces
sioh 10 sons extent, seems also to have been
generally admitted. The whole controvcrsv
rests upon the extent of the back concession
NO officer or agent Of the government, except
Two OF the commissioners. appointed under the
act OF 1913, ever acknowledged the grant 10
the extent claimed. We may except also judge
Bibb. who, when Secretary of the Treasury
held, that under the act of 1914, Congress- had
confirmed it to the whole extent claimed"
The report concludes thus: t-.-.
Your committee therefore recommend that
me second section of the act OF the I'd of June.
1858, and also SO mach of the third section as
refers to the second be repealed, and that he
h9e Of ne claimants under lie Hounas grant be j,l;
etalty settled; and for cdich purposes Mey herewih
report biil,n =
This bill simply provides for reference of
the Houmas Claim to our State Courts and its
adjudication thereby, as was stated by us in our
last issue. Now, what must be thought of the
moral character of men who could torture such