Berkeley and Jefferson intelligencer. [volume] (Martinsburg, Va.) 1802-1810, 1803-02-18

expres. x. 49,, ~
regret the necessity which eomPeIs lhcnIl
TO make the representation, andtkey con.
iide that it will be attributed to : convic.
ton, that they ought mot voluntarily %
surrender rights and authoritiess entrust-
ed to their protection, moi. fof their
personal advantage, but for the benefit of
the community.
~ WM. TILGHMAN.
Mr.. Griswold moved q reference oftho
foregoing memorialtoa select committee.
Mr.. Gregg observed tbaf, according
TO the usual mode oftrans6rting business,
il ought 10 60 TO the committee Of Claims.
He therefore made that motion.
Mr.. Griswold said ne entertained i
high respect for the committee Of claims,
and was always in favor Of referring 10
them petitions that merely involved de-
naands for money. But Re thought tho
memorial stood upon very different
ground. Il proposes . revision Of the
laws, in order to assign the judges duties
proper 20 be assigned 10 them; and Il Il.
30 Proposcs the Submission Of the questi-
on OF compensation to Judicial decision.
These points are Of q very distant nature
from those referred to the committee Of
claims forwhichre reasons he drought such
references improper.
Mr.. Randolph did not think select.
committee or the committee Of claims, Q
proper committee 10 whom to refer this
memorial. What Is In nature Does
il embrace any point Of fact, on which .
committee Is 10 enquire !! No. Il il .
broad constitutional question. He was
therefore, in favor ofhaving itexamined
where il must eventually besettled inthe
house. If therefore the memorial had
any reference, i ought 10 be referred %
the committee Of the whole House. To
which effect he made motion.
Mr.. baconhoped this lastmotiunw would
not obtain. He did not know what there
was IN the petition 10 distinguish Il from
any other petition from any citizen Of the
United States. L was suggested thai jt
involved q great constitutional question.
He did not know that this vas the case.
Any thing might be made constitutional
question. But he thought this question
had bcen already determined blythe whole
Legislature, ON the most mature Deliberate
ON. He saw nothing 70 distinguish this
petition from other petitions. He would
not say thar Il would be doing il TOO much
honor, but it would be making toowide .
difference between similar applications TO
adopt this course. Hewas therefore, for
pursuing the common course.
Mr.. Griswold had no objection TO 1 70.
ference of the memorial to Z committeeof
the whole. Perhaps that would Be the
better mode. II was true, as the gentle-
man from Virginia had stated, thatp very
important constitutional question may
arise on this memorial. Nor did he know
as represented BY the gentleman from
Massachusetts Mr.. Bacon) that al the
constitutional questions involved in this
subject hadbeen settledhy the decision Of
the last session. He had understood the
gentleman himselfih his speech during the
last session, to have said that the question
of compensation was avery different ques-
ton from that then under discussion.---
He was not absolutely thatthe gent
tlemsn expressed such an opinion. but he
was certain that some gentleman Of the
majority did. As the memorial was
couched interms Of greatresPsct, hetrust-