Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1808-05-03
lie 1-3 Gents Siagie. ]

States could not be sued The gentleman had
|eontrovsrled the right of the Uoted ststs,
on the ground that there was no proof OF tire
in the United Sta,es. mr. Z sait the rrcpc,ty
had been always claimed BY TIE Spanish saw
srnment' and held a. public property by Spain
and various instances were upon record in which
application had been made b. individuals ana nh
lscIed TO, 1st because i, was pubic pr3peytv and
End, because buildings might affect the health Of
the City. Individual rights were NOT in question:
for he trusted in God that such a BODY as tb;s
would never attempt to try rights between ran
and mar.
The motion to pospone lost---Yeas 90 Naya
IS.
Mr. Bibb moved 70 strike out Tie ID sec,;on or
the bill. This section provides for an appeal
from final decree on this subject in any courr In
Orleans TO the supreme court Of ". States I He
thought it went 10 establish principle BY which
the Yazoo claimants may hereafter bring their
claim before the supreme court of the United
STATES For whenever it came before tina, court.
il was not ficult 10 fcresee how it wou,d be de.
ci ed
Much discussion took place on ,his question -
Mr. EpPes contended that this section Itself shey,
ed that this was only particular case of appeaI
Authorised by special law. How could an ap-
peal be had, except by special iaw, passed for
tina, purpose Or how, if ~ any time he,eaf,e,
the house determined allow an appeal. Could
i be prevented, even surprising this bin nor m
pass In the present case, there were va,;or,
reasons to authorize such an appeal In case
that involved property 10 the amount of pe,haos
l,cOO,OoO dollars, 1t being the only spot of Land
@hsnce the bitches which KEPT the kfissies;nn;
IRON irundating the property coula be constructed
where every caTt -load OF sand Constantly rs-
oswed By the mississippi was wort 81 centa
and the property therefore almost inyalu. bJe-;n
iuch case 1t world be perhaps impossible 10
/ n f9i- md, ~
;e1ision At distance would promote ius.ics ne.
tween the individuals and the Unitei STAGES IL
nc thought that this law could IN an, shane hr;no
the AGO case before the supreme court. he
would be the last 70 support it.-Mr Rinb con.
ended, that it established precedent for such
N appeal MIR Randolph admit, d Il as his os;.
n'ou, tina. the right was in the United S,a.es 90
N the corporation; IF in the United States. he
Sisied to tranter it Ia the latter. He was vii.
Ing TO give the corporation the right of ths ~
ates. and let them establish il il hey could :
3ut he thought this bill squued 4, Yazo. ism !,
vas apreceeent which might hereafter be ;rane
israb'e to Mississippi court lie had a,wavs
thought, that cases of empires he mich, saw
A5' II hundreds OF acres, but Of thousands
d square mics, were not subjects for iudi
a decision Hcwould - soon mink of tying.
Vheinei the declaration of Independence was a
t@wiu act. before pe;ty ju.y wi,i appeal r. ,he
supreme court. Mr. Troup from Georgia, couiJ
not see the danger apprehended b. his Colleague
Fha' the Legislature were disposed 10 dc indirect.
y, they would not h~si.ate TO do directly Tc
hey would give the 44zoo claimants rigb, of
appeal from the cou'os OF the Mis.iss,pn; IT.
f!'ory to the supreme ccu.f, hey would 70, he.
iItate to make donation in fee simple Of 40
n''Iions OF acres. 1t was clear a. the moan dav-
ha IT a legislature were disposed to do one or
ne o'heT, yney would oe as corrupt as the Yazoo
1i'lman' themselves. MIR Bib persisted in his
-onst 'uc,i9n $50
a quorum Of members not appearing within
the bar, The house adj 1u ueI SO 10 %.