THIRTY-THIRD CONGRESS, 1853-1855. 529 



niiscondiict may be exposed and that some steps may he taken either 

 for their punishment or removal, or else as an intimation that the dis- 

 tinguished gentleman who writes this letter thinks that there should 

 be some amendment of the law )>y the intervention of the legislative 

 power of the two Houses of Congress. 



In regard to the first view I can not m3\self understand how thit^- 

 body or the other House of Congress is to exercise a judicial super 

 vision upon the question of the interpretation of this law. It is our 

 business to make laws; it is the business of other officers and classes 

 of persons to expound and execute those laws. In a strict judicial 

 sense we can not exercise any jurisdiction or supervision over the 

 judgment which may be so pronounced; and therefore, considering 

 the letter in that respect, it seems to me totally inappropriate to any 

 functions which either this or the other House of Congress can legiti- 

 mately exercise. 



If it be considered as a letter intended to communicate to the two 

 Houses of Congress malversation in the conduct of these public officers, 

 however proper that application ma}' be to the other House it is 

 plainly out of place here. The other House, from what we learn of 

 their published proceedings, seem to have taken the subject up in that 

 idea — that this is an imputation by the writer of the letter that a gross 

 abuse has ])een practiced 1)y the majority of the Board of Regents in 

 the administration of this fund; and they have accordingly raised a 

 committee, referred the letter to the committee, and vested them with 

 the power of sending for persons and papers — a power appropriate to 

 the investigation, if the object be what I have just said, but utterly 

 inappropriate and absurd supposing it to be a mere question of legis- 

 lative inquiry with a view to found legislative action thereupon. If 

 it is a question of the interpretation of a law, do you want to send for 

 persons and papers to enable you to interpret a law ? What papers 

 will you send for to enable the committee of the House of Represent- 

 atives to ascertain what is the meaning of this law? Do you want the 

 statute i Surely the committee can get that without having power 

 to send for papers. Do you want the proceedings which took place 

 at the time when this law was enacted, the parliamentar}^ historj^ of it? 

 Surely that can be obtained without a power in the committee to send 

 for papers or for persons. But if you suppose the investigation is 

 pursued for the purpose of ferreting out a delinquency, an abuse, a 

 malversation, then that part of the resolution becomes all appropriate, 

 and the object is to drag up witnesses and compel them to testify to 

 the conduct of the perpetrators in this stupendous fraud, not onl}^ on 

 the law of the country, but on the noble charity which they are 

 appointed to administer. If that be the aspect in which this subject 

 is taken up, we have nothing to do with it; we should not conmiit our- 

 selves in advance upon it; for, suppose the proceedings of the House 

 H. Doc. 732 84 



