Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1821-01-30


solution OF the Senate, a report Of the
condition OF the several banks in the Dis.
trio, OF Columbia, according 10 the latest
statements rendered TO the Treasury
which WAS read.
The bill from the other House for ex
tending the time for locating Virginia
military land warrants (ior Two wears
longer WAS taken up i'm committee of the
whole. Mr.. Hing. of Alabama i'll the
chair.
This subject. gave rise, az usual when
under consideration heretofore, TO a good
deal OF discussion.
| MIR. Thomas briefly explained to the
| Senate the considerations in favor ofrx
tending the indulgence proposed by the
| BILL
Mr.. King. of N. Y. thought i, was time
that something explicit was done, as to
The lime when this subject should b.
| closed. auh some report made of the
lands located and those which remained
| tor the disposal OF the u. States, DC. He
gave brief narrative OF Tie circum.
stances which produced the reservation
by Virginia, of The country between HE
SciOio and Little Miami, for SATISFYING
her military land warrants. The body
OF land in Ohio, reserved by Va. Tor this
purpose was oi great extent, and The sur
plus belonged as much 10 The u. S. as
any other land III that state aud it was
time, he thought, that something was
done TO shew lat quantity WAS lett ; how
THIS matter stood; and 10 begin to think
oisome termination 70 this !oRg standing
subject Instead ot passing this bill with
an extension OF two or three years; he
would give but Que year, with al under
standing, That II would moi be extended
longer, unless some explanation shou ld
be given t" justify il, &r.
! MIR. barbour entered into history OF
The snbIsct, To sliew the difficulties whcI,
had impeded final adjustment of this
whole subject. He advprtcd 10 The &c s.
sion made by Virginia, TO the Union. of
all her immense north western posses
sionss presumed 10 cXiend to The Pacific
ocean, out oi which territory she had
reserved tract Tor satisfying the pledge
she had given 10 her revolutionary officers
ana soldiers. This pledge was made as
ven 10 Hose 81 the state line as ut the
continental line, but IN the contract OF
ce'sion and reservation, by SOM un
known means, The word state was omIi
lie ; ard The Congress OF The u. States
iau taken advantage Of this omission,
III 'he lace ut the most conclusive ciI.
|
prInciplr, III one OF The aTiic les, TO reject
all applications To satisfy warrants Of the
state line. Me. B. ammadvrrtei on this
conduct, which he would MOI characierIz
by the epitiiet whic II would be applied
To II IN private life. Leaving this part Of
TIE subject, MIR. b. argued tn slIew that
most Ut he persons originally possessing
these INDICATED titles, beng scattered
Tar ANA wide, were either ignorant, or
their defendants or heirs ere ign"raut,
OF their tli'e-malfy o! these we're orphans,
who would sooner or later learn their
right and claim il: that j, woul.i be cruel
and unjust TO ioreclOse them, &c. aud he
defended the bill as il stosd.
Mr.. IrimLls mad. some remarks exp!a-
natory OF the circumstances OF this reser.
vatiun, aud The course heretofore pursued
BY C1ugres', as we'll as by Virginia the
difficulties which had grswu out OF the
conduc, of Va. herself, from turning out
The Surveyor appointed by The officers,
&c. and 10 shew the reasons why all the
locations had not been made; one of
which was that The Indian title t;a great
part of the tract between the Scioto AVID
Miami had not until recently "a part of
1t as late as 1879 been extnguisiied, and
which of course could mol previously be
located. He was decidedly of opinion
shat it would be great injustice in Con
gress TO refuse ample time for the leca.
ton OF those warrants.
MIR. johnson, of KY. thought This question
| simply whether Congress would enforce The
principle OF the statute OF li'niiaii.ns against
| the Just claims OF the poor war,W orn sold er or
| hstiiendl,s- phans. Against such course h-
| protested aud reasoned. These claims had lost
| no part OF their validity by delay; much less
| mad they heeD forfeited and he did not be.
! lie'e II could, he hoped ii could not ever be-
| come serions question in Congress whether
| time should be 81 ow- tor them 10 be brought
| in.
| Mr.. Thomas referred to the several acts Of
| Congress on the subject, aud spoke as TO the
legislative history OF this subject illustrative
| OF The ptopriety aud justice OF eXtendIns the
| full time proposed
Mr.. RHggieS, OF Ohio moved 10 strike ont
| tro years, aJd insert one year az the time of
| extension. He argued that those lands which
| W"re not taken up by tue warrants, remained
| unsettled aud that the further extension of
| indulgence operated 10 prevent the popuIat-
| ing OF the country in question; that there
/ ought TO be some limit established TO this in
! diligence, aud he thought one year more
| would enable Congress to iHdee when this ii
mit c9uld be hxed, aud termination be put
10 tbi' drawback on the settlement of the
| country
The motion was opposed by Nfessrs. Barbour,
Talbot and Trin,6ie and il was uegafIved
without division.
The bill was then reported to the Senate
and ordered 10 third reading
Aittr spending short time on Executive
business ins senate adjourned to Moudtv.