known, as we have above stated, the last item was omitted, the chairman of the committee of ways and means declaring his intention of introducing a bill for the purpose of providing for the payment of such arrearages as were chargeable to the treasury of the United States. Accordingly, on the 29th day of August last, congress passed a law, "for the settlement of certain accounts for the support of the government of the territory of Wisconsin."

By this law, no definite sum was appropriated, but the accounting officers of the Treasury Department were directed to audit and settle those accounts. By the act of 18th May, 1842, the sum of $27,125 was appropriated to defray the expenses of the legislative council of the territory of Florida, and by the act of 29th August, the accounts and arrearages of expenses of that territory were directed to be audited and settled, in the same manner as those of the territory of Wisconsin.

Yet, so far as has come to the knowledge of your committee, no doubt has ever been entertained in either of the territories of Iowa or Florida, but that their legislatures have an undoubted right to hold their annual session without any further act or appropriation by congress. By reference to that part of the act of 18th May, making appropriations for the territory of Iowa, it will beseen that no part of the sum appropriated for arrearages shall be used for any other purpose, than for the payment of those arrearages. Now if, as it is possible the governor may suppose, the $20,000 last appropriated, was "for arrearages of expenses," why was it not limited and restricted to that specific object, as was done in the appropriation for Iowa ?

No money shall be drawn from the treasury of the United States, but in consequence of appropriations made by law, and in such law must be expressed the precise nature and object of such appropriation. And your committee believe since the organization of the government, no instance can be found, where congress has made an appropriation for arrearages of expenses in any branch or department of the government, unless it be so expressed in the law making such appropriation. Had such been the object of the appropriation, now in question, your committee cannot but think it would have been so expressed.

The mere fact that congress has every year since the organization of our territory, appropriated what they thought would be a sufficient amount to defray the annual expenses of the legislature, previous to the holding of the annual session thereof, is conclusive evidence to your committee that the appropriation of $20,000, contained in the act of 18th May, was intended to defray the expenses of the present session of the legislature. But if any doubt could exist it would be removed by reference to the act of 29th August, the object and intention of which was to pay and discharge all arrearages of expenses of the legislature of Wisconsin, owing to the legislature having incurred an annual debt greater than the annual appropriations of congress.

The object of the act last referred to was to relieve the territory from its pecuniary embarrassments, not to crush it, by depriving it of the invaluable privileges of legislation.

It cannot be supposed by any honest and rational mind, that it was the intention of congress to deprive the people of Wisconsin of all the rights of legislation, or that having failed to include, as it is possible the governor may suppose, an appropriation to defray the expenses of the present legislature, in the usual law, they would afterwards, on the last day of the session, pass another law, prohibiting a session of the legislature because they had failed or neglected to make such appropriation. In looking at the usual course of congress in defraying the expenses of our legislature, no doubt exists in the minds of your committee, that in passing the act of 29th August, it was their belief that the appropriation of $20,000, previously made, was to cover the expenses of the present legislature.

By the 11th section of the organic act, there is "to be appropriated annually a sufficient sum to defray the expenses of the legislative assembly," and by the act of the territory already quoted, "the regular session of the legislative assembly shall commence on the first Monday of December in each and every year."

These acts are plain, explicit, and unrepealed, and if it be true that congress have not "appropriated annually, a sufficient sum to defray the expenses of the legislative assembly," and if true, that for that reason, "the regular session of the legislative assembly" cannot "convene on the first Monday of December," then are both these laws to that extent repealed. But can it be believed

that congress ever intended, by, to say the most of it, so strained and remote an inference, to repeal laws which lay at the very foundation of our political existence? Such a construction would be an insult to the understanding and the good faith of the congress of the United States.

But it is said, that whatever may have been the intention of congress in making the appropriation, it has in point of fact, been received by the secretary of the territory and paid out by him in defraying the expenses of the last session of the legislative assembly. A conclusive answer to this is: of this we know nothing officially; and if the governor possesses any information upon this subject, he has not deigned to communicate it to the legislature. But assuming such to be the fact, does it affect in any degree our right to sit as a legislative assembly? It must be borne in mind that the restriction upon our legislative powers, arises only from the want of an appropriation, not for the want of money in the treasury of the United States, nor from the misapplication of that money to any other purpose, nor even the refusal of the Treasury Department to pay it out when made, nor from any circumstances whatever, except the want of an appropriation. Your committee admit, that if no appropriation had been made, there can be no session of the legislative assembly at the present time; but if made, the mere fact that the secretary has not yet received the same, can furnish no valid objection to the legislative assembly holding a session at the present time.

Your committee are at a loss to know upon what ground the governor refuses to meet the legislature; whether it is because no appropriation has been made, or whether, if made, it has been misapplied by the Treasury Department, or the secretary of the territory. If the appropriation has been made, we have clearly the right to hold a session of the legislature. If made, what evidence have we that it has been misapplied, or if so, that the full amount will not be forthcoming before the expiration of the time limited by law for the close of the session? If, as we contend, the appropriation has been made, there was, on the 29th of August last, in the treasury of the United States, to the credit of Wisconsin, at least 40,000 dollars, being the amount of the appropriations, and a sufficient sum to defray arrearages of expenses of former ses

sions; and if the sum of 20,000 dollars has been misapplied in the payment of arrearages, it leaves an equal amount in the treasury to be applied as originally intended, to defray the expenses of the present session. While your committee are fully of the opinion that the matter will be satisfactorily adjusted at the Treasury Department, and that the secretary will return with the appropriation, yet we can have no assurance that the governor will then recognize our right to sit, because he might not consider it as the identical and specific sum appropriated by Congress.

In examining this part of the subject referred to us, in every light in which it has presented itself to our minds, we cannot hesitate to give it as our decided opinion, that there is no valid objection to the legislative assembly holding its annual session at the present time, by reason of no appropriation having been made by Congress

In considering the second question referred to us, your committee feel that it is one of great delicacy and importance, and its decision may seriously affect the prosperity of Wisconsin. Your committee are aware that there are many important subjects, deeply affecting the interests of the people, upon which they are now anxiously desiring legislative action.

A few of the more important of those subjects your committee will briefly refer to, that the legislature and the public may form some idea of the necessity of holding a session at the present time. Some immediate legislative action is required in relation to the acts and condition ef the Milwaukee and Rock River Canal Company. With this subject the legislature is sufficiently familiar, without requiring at this time an extended notice. Your committee would merely suggest, that some legislative action is required to ascertain the condition of the bonds, to the amount of 100,000 dollars, issued to aid in the construction of the canal, and whether the same have been recalled by the governor-the amount for which the territory is actually liable on account of said canaland to lease the water power at Milwaukee, if the property of the territory and to save from forfeiture for taxes, about seven thousand acres of canal lands under mortgage to the territory. On the 20th of this month, your committee are informed that these lands will be forfeited for taxes, to redeem which about three hundred dollars is required. A suit is now pending against the territory on one of the canal bonds, amounting to one thousand dollars, involving some important questions, and possibly heavy pecuniary liability on the part of the territory. To defend this there is no person authorized by law, in whom your committee have any confidence. During the present winter the offices of canal commissioners will expire by their own limitation, and should there be no session of the legislature, the governor may appoint these officers, as he has heretofore done, in violation of all law. Under the present laws he may force into market all of the unsold canal lands, amounting to about one hundred thousand acres, and thereby involve the territory with the general government; and, without responsibility, assume the control of a large amount of public money.

Suits are now pending in favor of the territory against James D. Doty, governor of said territory, as a public defaulter, which, on account of the term of the court to which the suits have been removed at the instance of the defendant, being limited to one week, can never be brought to an issue; and thus if his excellency can succeed in preventing all legislation, he may riot with impunity upon the property of the territory, and bid defiance to all her courts and judicial proceedings.

It will be recollected also, that the term of office of the.commissioner of public buildings expires with the close of the present session of the legislative assembly, and cannot be supplied, except by a joint ballot of both houses of this assembly. Inasmuch as this officer is the agent of the territory in conducting those suits, and the only person who has any authority in law to procure the attendance of witnesses, and generally superintend their management, hence a failure to elect such officer by the legislature, would be placing the management of those suits, in which a large amount of the money appropriated by congress for the erection of our public buildings is pending, in the hands of his excellency, who is the principal defendant. How far this could have been an influencing motive to induce his excellency to the extraordinary course he has taken, your committee will not express an opinion.

The capitol is in an unfinished and exposed condition, and un