Alexandria daily advertiser. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1803-1808, 1808-04-27

81 !, dgh' ,-,,;ng il to The corporation
= : d uan'' f.sor of pos poning the bill
u h wa s'''ios c grounds He 'housht with
10 ,l rom Georgia { M. B,bO) that
\ fisnS US .oa,o.iog towards Yasoolsm
COL, ~ ,ba. it mighs be precedent
ha' W. =. same power TO the supreme
4 siss 'u ul,,iop 20 cases decided before a
VII 's :; eoert as i, went 20 give 10 this
la'su'Rap had ever been OF opinion that
tss = - hat alluded to bs his FREUD hon
- ',,i,, cases Of e"p''es DC "ssa' sa , !.
Gs''s1 1s.odreds of acres but OF thousands
loI'l w.. miles, were rot subjec.s OF judi
gus s.';sioo. He said he should as soon
ii % e uyiug tie independence OF the
S'. : : bether the declaration OF Iode-
, uas lawful &C, before petty
go ,sb ,ooeal 10 supre court, as to
-. Of this immense magpi'ude. he
- j f,vor of postpooemeo' on ano'ner
~ This case CT the Bsttore' the
1 ~ which had been enjoyed long
n, sshcugh perhaps essential 70 the
~. SO. > dlgersnt case entlrely from
~ .n,cq 70 cover claim TO territory ct
~ stSedted mllcs 10 ltngth anc b esdsh; II
,sy msch snch case as mpgnt pre-
.imeif withio sight of he house, Sup
COMES, be,ween Mr.. J. Mason ADD
4, to,OOra;ion of Georgetown as 70 The
Id deposited On his island by the roo
\. she,brr il should be considered as
\. nroOerly of Mr.. Mason or Of The CT
'',,,,oa Of Georgetovn There was a
=, difference between case like this, and
!. giving power 10 decide whe her anim
,.O,. country shall b long to swindlers ;
d p.rhsp, the means which m'gns be re.
,,,d 20 10 The one case would DOT bs jos
IA 10 tbs other. Mr.. r. said, he had
lard If no eorrups grants 10 relation 10
j, tIsia, which had bssn busni as they
Isys ought to be by the hands OF the
SIMON hsrgmsn bus il was one OF nose
i- and subtle points with which sn2se
,eemeo learned in The law like TO amose
like a case which
,h.d Istelv heard OF, 10 Which man SAID,
IS the lawyers said his laod was his ex-
aiYr prcprriy from the hesseos above
seward 10 the centre, his neigebor bad
right plant poplars on the groood ad
.si 10 his, because the roots would 10
Gbly sx,Sed io,o his soil Mr. Il, SAID,
/; should not pass law respecting
.ci.Icas4 while il was sub judice between |
cooperation and the 0on'nAt claimant
had heard II sald was widow wo
%, though he uedrfs,ocd the real claim
vas very different person.
ar Z. went at some lengch sato a view
The subject. He was wiling to give
corporation the righ' Of the y. 5 s'd
hem establish that right If they could
is vas as far az be should So.
Mr.. Holland remarked on Mr.. Ran.
ph's observations. lie questioned the
rse,ness Of the gen;ieman's doctrine
he had taken singular Distinction 5 be
Nd permit cases tesolviug property OF
all value 10 60 before the supreme court
ina case involving properly OF great
Ne he wooid DOT lress them bur legs
specially for 1t Mr.. II was wiling.
give all territorial courts the right OF
pysl-to adopt The universal principle OF
ing universal justice. He said he sho nld
I have expected 20 hear from aoy gentle
70 90 his lloor iha, cur Judges were not
be trusted; aud .he decisrauoo OF ehe
aepau from Georgia Mr. Bibb) that
Y.zoo business could b. decided 10
'Or Of the claimants, was clear evl.
nee that i, ought TO be so decided.
Nh. Smile opposed the motion For re.
nslde,aiion He was of opinion that
ssecond section of the bill was consu.
OOOal and expedient; and il could not
suspected thar he would supports any
'0e TO suppor, The Xazoo claim, hrs sea-
mems on it being well known.
M. Tr0xp could rot see the Danger
'sa his colleague spprehended /; nc was
himself governed be precedcnt uor e.