Year: 1859

g. cussion to those whose own course needed defence, to such as wished to expose the conduct of others, and especially to the sovereign people whose right and duty it IS to see and criticise the acts of their ser wants. Being satisfied with my own re- cord, had no disposition to meddle with an others, and presuming that each mem ber's constituents would hold him to the same accountability that I expect mine to hold me, l have felt that there was no necessity, nor even propriety in my dis. turbing the already turbid waters. And even now it Is with much reluctance that I yield to the necessity of violating my pre- determined purpose. But the contest has assumed so strange and unexpected a cha racter, that 1 and those who refused to take the per diem pay for the recess and have modestly claimed no credit for it, are sought to be made the scape goats which are to bear the burthen of the recess and per diem iniquity.

 In letter of MT. Baxter, of Indepen- dence, to hls constituents, published by re- quest III late number of the True Demo- crat, he little more than intimates that those members who refused to take per diem for the recess were actuated by no higher motive than pandoring to an erro- nious public opinion. But to this charge which applies to me only in common with few others, was not disposed to make any complaint, as Mr. Baxter could not have known at that time who did and who did not accept the per diem pay, and was not personal in his remarks. And vet the charge was an unsavory one, and stands against some of his friends, of whom he will entertain no such opinion

 But in the last True Democrat (Sept. IA, J IS communication from Mir. Gar land, of Hampstead, q believe his third one, upon the per diem question, in which he makes direct allusion to me, and the part l acted in the affair, with seemingly more unklnd feelings than supposed he entertained toward me.

 The sin of my offence seems to have been, that in publishing the action of the house upon the Jelfery resolutions, you saw proper to give the reasons that impell- ed me to make the motion to postpone to day certain, which reasons I gave in de- fence of the motion, and indeed the apology was almost part of the motion | had voted against the motion to table the reso- lutions, against the one to indefinitely nost- pone, and l desired to vote for their adop- tion. But when the long train of If not ridiculous, at least time consuming amendments came pouring in, making the whole affair farce, 1t was certainly respect : tul to both the resolutions and the house, to make the motion I did, and it was as certainly due me that my reasons for so do ing should be known.

 But MT. G. says, "upon further infor- nation 1t might be found that this gentle man (1, was an active abettor of the re- cess, while some of the remainder whose ridiculous amendments aided in killing off the resolutions, were opposed to this mea- sure, and at least received money for no other services during the recess han did he."

 By some of the remainder, etc., Mir. Gar land must allude to himself. and why he makes any allusion at all, by way of com parison is to me a mystery. We both acted upon the same principles, viz: that per diem was wrong. Both of us voted aSdihob tHt ilHH icSOlutiOH, requiring the speaker to certify to per diem pay, and both of us refused to receive more than our mileage: neither of us was so venal as to take what we conscientiously did not be- lieve to be ours, although rendered us by an overwhelming majority, in what has been termed solemn act of the legisla- ture

 I 1ypou- of oo+b,,or ,n NI, record upon this or any other point, that he should be so dissatisfied with, as to cause him to write so much, and I cer- tainly know of nothing that should cause him to wish to crimnate or even " parti- cularize'' me. But he says, it might be found that 1 was an active abettor of the recess, whilst others, (of course himself were opposed to it. Now, what can Mr. Garland mean by my being an abettor of the recess? What had l to do with the recess more than he or any other member? Was it not the result of an act of the Go- vernon adiourning the legislature over from the 23d of December until the l7th Janu- ary ,and that too, in consequence of official in formation that both houses had voluntarily reduced themselves below a constitutional III. cess, and cant sec any reason why MT. Garland should suppose me more respon sibe for it than himself. 1 asked for leave of absence for few days. in consequence of sickness of myself and family, which he and all granted. Others, some for one req son and some for another, obtained permis- sion to go home, until it was announced that there was no quorum left, and yet leave of absence was still granted, and con- tinued to be granted until there was scarce a corporal's guard of the house left, and finally, to crown the whole, the principal clerk was parolled with or 10 days holy day and perm ission to visit his better half and the Traveller. All this was kind, it is true. but as it was done mostly in my absence, should neither be thanked nor blamed for 1t. But was 1t not a virtual adjournment of itself, and, too, with a stu died purpose of throwing the responsibi- litv upon the Governor. And l would ask, is it not clear that, that responsibility was tried to be made as great and as fearful as was possible by reckless and unnecessary increase of expenditures, as will appear in the fact that the pay of the several clerks was raised to $6 per day, even including the 24 days of the recess, whilst the law allowed but $5 for actual services Eight dollars per day was allowed during the recess for door keeping, when in fact the doors were not opened during the time, and yet the incidental expenses of Me office moued gently on ot quite becoming rate.- It is true, that these, with many others, that might be mentioned, are small items, but straws unerringly show the direction of the wind.

 don't know that Mir. Garland is at all responsible for any of these things, for some of them know he is not, nor do I believe that many of the members design ed what few intended to effect. But that there was strange influence coming from different quarters, converging to the same point, designing to break down certain per sons, and to pave the way for others, and all too at the expense of the State, no one who witnessed its workings can for mo- ment doubt the fact.

 If Mr. Garland had said that 1 favored a recess extending through the Christmas holydays, and even to the 10th January, and that too with tho Sanate'S amendment