The St. Cloud journal. [volume] (St. Cloud, Minn.) 1866-1876, 1868-05-14

| S''S 6eus'Sut"0 NOu 4iuuOl1 CaUo With
ip about . million acres of the truth
So much for that branch Of the subject
turn to the second question, the
charge that I have been fJso to my
constituents in reference to measure
tor +ho improvement Of the innavigable
waters Of the Mississippi river between
the city Of St. Paul aud the city of Min.
neapolis, in my district. The charge.
you remember, which has just been
read in your hearing, is that the gen.
tleman was ready to make an appropri-
alton in money for that great work of
internal Improvement that would con-
meet the navi gable waters of the Mis-
sissippi with the great water power Of
St. Anthony; and that l falsely and
treacherously lad introduced bill for
q land grant to prevent him from carry
ing through that work. Mr.. Speaker.
l propose to have the Clerk read at the
desk letter from the Postmaster Of the
House of Representatives in reference
to that subject. The clcsk read as fol-
lows:
fOsT OFFICE. HOUSE OF RREPREsEHTATIves
WASHINGTON, D. c., May 2, 1868. !
MY DEAR S1R.-In compliance with your
request l beg leave to state that in the
month Of December last, soon after the re-
assembling Of Congress, had . CONVERSE
ton with Hon. +. B. .Washburne, of Illi-
nois, with reference to the probability OF
procuring, through the recomme ndaticn Of
the Committee Of Commerce, Of which he is
ohairman, an appropriation Of money for
the improvement Of the navigation of the
Mississippi river between Fort Smelling and
the Falls OF st. Antheny.
In that conversation Mr.. Washburne sta.
TED to me in the most emphatic manner that
he was opposed to giving zone cent for
such purposes, unless it might be for the
Improvement Of the slower Rapids" which
he regarded as national matter, stating at
the same time thst'the financial condition
of the country would not justify such ap-
preparations, SC.
The result :of this interview. 1T once
communicated to you, and it was upon nv
advice that you introduced bill for grant
of land to aid in making the improvement
referred to, both of US believing that there
would be less objection to: . land than to .
money grant; and that money grant was
hardly possible in view Of the opposition
Of the Committee on Commerce. I
You are aware, of course, that, % an Of
icer OF the House, have no desire TO take
any part in persona" controversies between
members of the House, but cannot refuse,
in Justice to you, to answer your inquiry,
as have in the foregoing statement
Very respectfully, &c..
WILLIAM 8. KING.
Hon. I. DoNNEl1Y, House Of Representation.
That letter tells the whole story.
Coming here, disposed to obtain if pos
sible, money grant for that work, I
was met by the emphatic declaration If
the chairman Of the Committee on Com
merce, Mr.. Washbprne Of Illinois, I
from which committee such report
must emanate, that he would not give
one cent for that purpose. .
Then on the 9th Of January last I
fell back upon a proposition for a'land
grant I introduced a bill for that pur-
pose, aud the Committee on the Public
Lands approved of that bill, and are
now ready to report in its favor as. soon
as they can be heard.
And then another gentleman enters
this drama. The gentleman from Wis
consin, from. the La Crosse district,
Mr.: Washburn, ,, the, brother of the
gentleman from Illinois, mousing around
and discovering that this committee
were prepared to report such bill
The SPEAKER. The Chair will
state to the gentleman from Minnesota,
that such language is not parliamentary
when addressed toward a member. who
is absent, and who is not, at least d.
rectly, involved in this controversy.
Mr.. Washburne, of illinois. I hope
the party will be allowed to 90 on.
Mr.. DoNNELLY. I will say, then,
Mr.: Speaker, "making inquiry" for I
will change my language, as I have no
desire TO use any words which may Of
fend the sense of deco,um Of this House
making inquiry, and discovering that
the committee were prepared to report
in favor of this bill grant of two hun
dred thousand acres of land in the
State Of Minnesota he then in my ab-
sence from this citv, while l was doing
my part in the State Of Connecticut, or
the State Of New Hampshire, I now
forget which, for the success of the
party in which this side of the House
believe-the gentleman from Wiscon-
sin Mr.. Washburne] entered into my
district and, without notice to Or auy
consultation with me, after first solicit
ing my colleague Mr. Window to iu-
troduce it; who refused, he then intro
duced bill for a money grant for the
improvement Of an innavigable portion
Of the Mississippi river, surrounded on
both sides by my district. Sir if there
was any faith here; If there was any
attempt to prevent the passage Of my
appropriation ifthere was any attempt
to impede my efficacy here, and to co,n-
pei the people Of M district to send
some other iodividuals lu my place,
that bad faith surely does not emanats
from me. The record is Conclusive
the refusal to appropriate money and
the fact that I only sought a land grant
when l found money grant was i'm
possible. So much for that branch Of
the subject. - .:>
/ turn now to the question in REFER
ence to the Clinton bridge. The gen.
tleman states that I came to him and
said to him that I was in favor of bis
course 10 that matter and told him to
stand firm. Mr.. Speaker: the history
Of tnat matter is simply this; one day
in July, 1866, as I passed the gentle.
mans desk he stopped me aud entered
into a TRADE against that bridge, and
told me it would be destructive to the
lumber interests Of my region j.; aqd
assented to his statement, Tho bill
came up next day-on the 18th of .Ju,
| ly, 1866-and I voted with the gen.
tlemah. The bill to legalize that bridge
and make it a post road was defeated
Six months afterward, in the next ses
sion Of Congress, the subjec: agair
came up. In the mean time 1 had beer
home among my constituents. I hai
given the matter reflection. I 6iscov