The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1814-03-30

wing notice Of the fraud at the time OF their
purchase, shall be entitled to any benefit a
rising from the provisions Of tr,s tile: but
all such claims shall accrue to the Uni; ed
States.
This proposition produced considerable
discussion, in which M.ssrs. Oakley. Bar
nett, Fisk Of n. Y. Wright. G,undy Web
ster. Pickens, Jackson Of Va. Fisk ot VT. and
Sharp took part.
Mr.Sharp cf Ky. took occasion to express
bis opinions respecting the principle Of the
bill. He rcproba;ed IN an energetic and clio.
quent manner the fcana Of the original pur
chase. and invoSed the house NOT 10 sanction
so corrupt "a transaction and prostrate the
principles of justice itself, from motives Of
expediency and ptlicy, &c.
Mr.. Robertson of Lou. oppes ed the a
mendment. lie likewise reiterated the rea-
sons he had before submitted in support pt
tie bill in its presen, shape, aud disciaimed
Tor himself any intention either directly IL
indirectly to give Counienance To the orig
IA, fraud. His object was to extend relief
to Innocent and uncon,aminated sufferers.
who, but for the compromise contemplated,
would be involved in undeserved ruin, and
TO ,hat ruin he would not consent to abandon
them.
Mr.. Jackson Of We. briefly replied to Mr..
Sharp, and vindicated his reasons for advo-
eating the bill.
Mr.. Nelson of Va. explained cor cisely
some Of the opinions advanced by him yes
terday against the bill. and rep! ed TO seve
RAJ gentlemen on the other side. He like
wise disolaimsd ally design to impeach the
motives Of those gentlemen who advocated
the bill.
Mr.. Fisl, Of VT. spoke with much zeal
against the amendment. He said that
while TIE House was unanimously condemn
ing the fraud of the first purchase, the pro
posed amendment, by requiring an oath TO
cn.itle claimants e Naturalization, was. in
effect, Offering bribe TO swear falsely. He
entered at SOME lergth also into an imvesti
cation of the policy of the bill. which he
supported.
and again urged the propIiety OF the amend
Eient.
Mr.. Hall Of Geo. followed in support Of
the amendment. & adduced various consi
Gerations in its favor.
Mr.. Ghclson of Va. made few remarks
90 the amendmert and on the bill. ii
said the claims which gave rise to the bill
were founded on the decision of the Gu
preme Court so often alluded to, YET in all
the classes of claimants compfeherded II
the proposed amendment not case could
be found similar to the case decided by the
court. He tock occasion also to disclaim
in remark ne made yesterday and which
had been noticed in the course Of the debate,
any intention 10 wound the feelings OF gen
tlemen in favor of the compromise, or TO re-
fact on their motives.
Mr.. Oakley of n. Y. replied to Mr..
GholsoD, so far "a respected his allus;on Il
the Supreme Court /; which decision he ex
planned and illustrated in an srgun ent a tive
and perepiGu us manner. lie likewise
touched upon and advocated the validity
OF the act making the original Ya2oo grant,
and the consequent naility Of the resciad-
ing act which opinion he Supported by the
great principle OF she contt;tu.icn that de
c!ares no stata shall pass Law TO impair the
obligation OF coutrnc 3, &c.
BaYnetf'@ am snd nent end loss.
For the amendment II
Against il Sc
FINELY tine questioDwas stated or engrors-
ing the smendu?ents, and togeth with the
bin being passed to third reading when
Mir. Pickens Of y. c. asked leave substan-
tally to state the reasons which would 90
vern him in voting against the bill. He the
took brief siew of the subje., & declared
his belief in the expediency & proprIety OF q
cornprotnise but the bill was defective, he
said, in certain particulars, which in his o.
pnioh, rendered its passage improper, and
which could not be remedied at this late.
hour. even though he were able to frame
the necessary amendments, &c.
The question as stated above was then ia
ken and decided in the affirmative.
For eDg,ossing IS
Against j. 65
And the House adjourned at 6 o'clock.