The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1804-08-22

''tl' Cs'tliiot OUT rejoice ~ the aCQuiiltIOn
which this caute has made. But to thoie ofits
friends, who are too new to it to underi(and its
ntere,ts, as yet, would recommend, that
they would take the conduct ofthe Georgia de.
legation as an evidence OF the rights and inte-
felt OF that rate They furely are not 10 deitute
OF information or fidelity, IS TO mifunderitsnu
Or abandon the rights of the people whom they
long however as / have the no.
nor OF concurriug with them in opinion, fhall
be very ea.y under any clamor which the new
trends OF Georgia and of the rights of itates
may endeavour to excite. If however, gentle
men arc unwilling to rely on the opinions of 70
few, howeverreipe6ta6le men, | refer them to
the act of the Legislature OF Georgia herlelf ge-
morally called the reicind;ng act, pailed under
Of unparalleled unanimity and
confirmed by the general voice OF the people,
who iuotequently recognizeditin, & engrafted 1t
upon their contribution. Iftill they remain dii-
fatisfed would ak them if the recognition OF
the claims againit Georgia, iii the bill which
they are 10 eager to PATS be not equally viola
ton or the rights Of that fate, with the rejection
OF thoie claims. Does not the bill before you,
in pronouncing upon the validity of the act of
Georgia, equally involve the principle aganit
which gentlemen protect 10 loudly, with the re-
iolutions themtelves? They have their choice
either TO pronounce the corrupt at of 1898, or
the reicinding act of 1896, invalid. Are not
the rights OF Georgia as much affected by the
one as by the other and even more by annull-
ing the act of l796, iince The alone recognizes
that to be her own. But gentlemen not only
annlhilate this act, without fcruple, but they
fupport bill predicated upon a principle
which involves the validity of the other alto, and
then charge us with bringing forward propoii-
tons winch, becsuie they pronounce upon the
acts OF Georgia the fame fentence which lhc her.
DatiPd ft,a.,
tubveriive of the rights of Georgia, & with them
OF every fate in the union. Will theie gentle
men give themielvesthe trouble to examine their
right to egii,ate on this fubiea, at all Will
they retuie to fee that we hold it by folenn
grant from Georgia herfelf, without which we
could not conttitutionaly pats any law in re-
iation to the territory in queiton 1t is this only
when authorizes us, in any fhape, to interfere
IN a matter which, otherwiie would excluiively
belong to her. The act ofinterfering, and not
the manner Of that interference, with flbiects
cognizabe by the fate alone, would continue
an lnfraction of her rights. The bill which is
advocated oy gentlemen themielves would e.
quaiiy infringe the rights OF Georgia with the
ProVlion which has been attempted to be in
lerted IN 1t, but for our compact with her. Will
any one pretend to fay that theie refotutions
have for their object any thing forbidden, either
expressly or by implication, in that compact
that 1t itipulates for any provifion for the
CLAIMS under the act Of 1906? Would the
Georgia delegation unite in defeating thofe fti-
pulations if any filch indeed exted? Is not
the right to reject involved in the right to grant
thoie claims! Georgia having transferred the
ioi, and Juriidiction of the country to the Uni
Tea States fubJect to the exiting claims againft
~ we have acquired precifely the fame rights
over It that The hertelf had. We ftand in her
NOES. mere cannot be a clearer petition on
earth, than that the moment fhe transferred TO
us thofe lands, iubie6t to prior grants, (thofe
grants not being fpeci6cally enumerated) we
became the Judges of their validity. So fenfi-
ole were we OF this that we have appointed
commlifloners 70 audit and ad;ua thcfe claims
and repeat, that the bill which is 70 ftrenn-
Gully Imported by the opponents to thefe refo-
lutlons does pats upon the validity of the acts
or 1895 and 1896, modifying and abridging the
grants under the frlt, and altogether abrogating
the lat, to fay nothing of the act of 1889, I'M
der which the Virginia and S. Carolina compa-
mes claim. But, fir, thefe unfortunate refoluti-
ons, 1t ieems, contain that damnable hereby in
politics, abftra6 proportions. What are many
ciauies of your conftitution-of your bills and
declarations OF rights, but 70 many ferries of alb
tract principles? Let us examine whether the
of whatever defcription, contain
ed IN theie refoutions, are indeed foreign to the
lub]ect before the committee-whether, on the
contrary, they are not intimately and indiflolu-
bly, connected with the provilionS of the bill on
your table. If indeed they were 70 vaguely ex-
prefed, or 10 loofe in their application, they
might have been ffely left to expire in their
own imbecity. But gentlemen have feen in
them the evil genius of this bill, and hence their
oppofton.
Here Mr.. R. read the 1T and end refoluti-
0nS.
Rej0iUe6, That the fate of Georgia were
1T no time invefted with the power of alternating
he right of foil pofeGed by the good people Of |
hat itste IN and to the vacant territory of the |
anne but in a rightfu manner and for the gener- |
Il good % Who will deny it If Georgia has
made valid contract we NUT execute if. IF |
Invalid there is no obligation OH us to perform
"That whenthe governors of any people fhall |
iave betrayed the confidence repoled in them, |
md ihall have exerciied that authority with |
which they have been invefted for the general |
Welfare to promote their own private ends; un-
Ter the baieit motives, and to the public detri-
nent, it is the inalienable right of people, thus
Ircumftanced, to revoke the authority thus
buted, TO refume the rights thus attempted TO
'e bartered, and to abrogate the act thus endea-
oring TO betray them"
am afraid if we deny this petition we have
10 title to ihew for our own exiftence as a
ation.
Mr.. r. here read the third reColution.
That it is in evidence to this Houfe that the
CT OF the Legislature of Georgia pahed on the
b T,fI ..-,-