The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1805-03-21


contains nearly double the amount of acres
which it was fuppofed to contain 1T the time of
The f1le. Shall this pretence vitate the contract
Are we to fuppofe that men feleeted from all
parts of the itate poGcGed efs knowledge of
her vacant territory, than purchaiers at a diff
lance? Shall the merchant ahfo!ve himielf
from his contract by faying that he was cheated
in the bale OF goods which he had fold, and
which for long time he had had under his
eye! VIII :. avail the vendor to fay, fir, you
have cheated me in the worth Of the horfe ! fold
you, and which had ufsd for long time
The lands in Qucfton were unalcertained. The
quantity was equally unknown to the vendors
and 10 the vendees-of cou,fe no fraud can be
imputed 70 the tranfaSton or thar fcore.
The fame gentleman from Pennlvlvania, and
he is Joined Ivy his colleague (Mr. Grege,) and
by gentleman from Virginia mir. Clarke Oh
jeSts TO This claim on the ground that the deed
TO the New-Eugland purchaiers contains CO.
venant of fpecial and not of general warranty.
Thence they infer, that thrit purchaiers might
prefune that the ACT was fraudulent and would
be reicnded. In my opinion, that inference
cannot fairly be derived from the premiies.
The granting legislature Of Georgia, being ig-
norant of the extent of former grants as well as
of the quantity OF acres in that tract of country,
very prop rlv provided that the fate ihoud
not be fube6t to any fuit, claim or pretenhon,
on account of any deduction in the quantity of
fad territory. The limits between the United
States and the king of Spain, were not at that
time defnitively fettled. Hence the proprety
of the fpecia covenant that the Georgia COM
panies ihoald not be liable TO refund to the
New-Eneland purchafers any money in confe-
quence of any defect in their title from the
fate of Georgia. They knew, and were will
ling TO encounter thefe hazards, but they had
been too much accuftomed to yield confidence
in Legislative contracts to believe that they
would be wantorly violated.
Mr.. Speaker, have attempted as far as my
feeble abilities would permit, to anfner all the
objections recolleet TO have heard aeainft this
claim, and which appear to pofiefs he merit of
argument. II ] have been fuccefsful, trult
the HOufr will pardon in declaring, that I
believe the claimants are not only equitably but
legally entitled to that relief which thew ak,
That Georgia had the right TO convey, / think
cannot be doubted. And even admitting for
argument fake, that the original file was frau
dulent and void, and that it is competent to a
Legislative or Judiciary tribunal to enquire in
t. the motives which influenced prior legifa-
ture in making contract, fill the purchafe is
good in the hands of fubfequent purchaiers
who come in for valuable confederation and
without notice of the fraud and the lubfequent
purchafers would more Especially be protected
agalntt an after purchafer, who purcbafed from
the frt grantor and with notice of the prior
Georgia, with notice that that fate had years
before fold the fame lards to certain companies,
an that thofe companies had fold To the prefent
clainants---and fhall the United States avoid
the frf contract as fraudulent The law books
contain no frch doctrine.
BIT fuDpofe, fir, that the act of Georgia of
1875 yss ftamped with nfamy, was generated
in corruption, 70 that no fibfequent transfer
could ceanf it of the foul ftain, lfil let me ak,
would it not he wife, wonld it rot be prudent
to effect compromife with thefe claimants ? |
Thistra If country is now ettimated ut about !
100000 of acres. IT is not propofrd, and |
indeed we are not permitted by the convention
with Georgia to allow more than five millions |
of acres to MI the different clai nants, in conf
Iteration of their relinqufhment of claim 70
the torty-hve millions of acres. IF their claim
is bad one it would be for the advantage of
the United States to give 10 per cent. for IFS
tinction. SuppOie the Indian title TO that cOun- |
try was extinguilhed and land Office was open |
ed-would the induftrious fettler pay you as
much for that land with this claim impending
over it, as he would for the fame land If it
were free from all conflicting claims (? If he
would in the latter cafe pay you two dollars an
acre, which is the medium price for which the
United States lands are fold, would he give you
one dollar and eighty cents an acre, knowing
that he NUT encounter a law fuit /? No, fir,
induhrous farmers are unwilling to purchale a
law fuit. That country will never be fold to
actual fettIers until thefe claims hall be e%tin-
guiihed or confirmed.
Having offered my fentiments in oppoftion
to the amendment, and in favor of the refon-
tion reported by the committee of claims. !
confefs, Mr.. Speaker, that feel myfelf not a
little embarrafIed. feel myielfin an awful di-
lemma. feel that am reduced to a fad, a
desperate alternative. | mutt either acknow-
ledge that have been bribed, that am bafe
and corrupt, or what is almon equally terrible |
to my feelings, that | have leagued in ienti- |
ment with the gentlemen on this fde of the |
Houfe (pointing to the federal gentlemen)
Unwilling to acknowledge myfef corrupt, or
that have been influenced by any circum-
ftance without thefc walls, ] think it iufice to
mvfelf to declare that neither myfelf, nor any
OF my connections, nor any of my connituents
within my knowledge ever claimed a Jingle
foot Of this Iand--If therefore, am influenced
or this location by any impure or unworthy
motives it NUT be by dire6t bride. Unwilli r
TO acknowledge this, ] am driven to the other
alternative, however pt afnI that election may
be, ard NUT acknowledge mylelf federalif.
The gentleman from Virginia (Mr. ]. Randolph)
does not helitate to denounce to the people all
thcfe republican members who dare to think
differently from him ON this quehion, as ha-