Alexandria gazette & daily advertiser. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1817-1822, 1822-02-18


peh hafoSe the Judiciary, where they must
lyo.,atsly be brought, as they could
ulsll . he finally adjudicated in any other
ps'o' md in such manner as would en-
way : carly decision, as it was all-im-
sure ,. ~ to the claimants, to the United
p0r saa and. more than oil, to the state
s.a'o onis,ana, so large portion of which
o. covered by the claims, and itspros'
va; ~, ~, so much affected by the delay
peru sy should be speedily adjusted &
ina No :sttled-accompanying his re-
npa .ss with brief history of the pro,
na sa;ncs on the prominent claims-and
'sS wing also his belief in the business
,ftbe present claim.
Tr Barton was averse to the refer.
ofthis special case to the Judici
CIV ~. hat would prefer general act re-
n all such to that tribunal; and he
I'D few remarks to shew the su-
On s;ority of that mode of adjusting such
p I.. over settlement of the legisla
Mr. Otis was IN favor OF the amend
ant but if not agreed to, he should
Ill vote for the general proposition,
''"nsidering it highly proper that tri-
S"nal should be provided by which these
s;rbts NAV be decided correctly and IL
nsy; and deprecating a decision of
hem and this claim in particular by
Mr. Holmes of Maine, could perceive
~ reason for referring this claim to the
Judiciary, any more than the various
ether claims which are presented to
Congress. pecuniary as we'll as others;
and epdeayored to shew that if Congress
aould not trust themselves to decide
these claims for land, it would be much
more dangerous to the public interestto
submit them to jury or tribunal OF
the vicinity in which the claimant re-
aides He also went considerably into
the merits of this claim to shew its IL
lsgality, and that it was not entitled to
the preference proposed.
Mr. Brown, of Louisiana, replied to
The latter part of the preceding remarks;
and indicated his former arguments in
support of the genuineness and validity
ofthe title of Maison Rouge.
Mr.. Talbot also replied to Mr.. Holmes,
and enforced the expediency of the
course he had proposed; supported the
superiority of courts and juries to ex-
anime and determine such claims; that
all claims were worthy of it; that it was
the most prompt and most cheap, if not
{ the most enlightened mode of adjudica
/ ton; that even Is Congress were proper
/ " constituted for such decisions, there
was no hope of final decision here;
some of thess claims having been prose-
cuted before Congress 10 or Is years
enc of which (Winters) turned on the
construction of single word, wherein
there was no shadow of doubt as to the
genuineness ofthe Claim-and in follow
ing it up to obtain decision, the origi-
nd claimant died here in penury. He
had no particular objection to the a.
nsudment, if was thought best, though
he had no doubt general provision
would have, of necessity, to be passed
before long.
Mr.. Holmes Of Maine contended that
for all those purposes, Congress was
court Of Justice, and an impartial court
OfJustice-that it was as capable and
as willing to do justice as any jury
that Congress was not party, but the
umpire between a petitioner and the
peops-though he professed the high
sstveneCation for the Institution of the
trial by jury.
II Mr.. Johnson of Louisiana replied,
that admitting Congress to be COM
getent and impartial tribunal, still their
decision could not be final, as it could
not diyest right, nor the individuals
q De deprived of Judicial trial; SO that.
after wasting years on them, the indivi-
euals could resort to the courts; and 1T
was expedient at once to refer these
Claims to the ultimate tribunal; conclud-
ing with some remarks on the claim of
Aalson Rouge, which he believed, after
q sPartial examination of the title, to be
legal and complete.
II Ar. Macon though it was immaterial
low the question was decided, as the
special law would soon bring on gene
saiOne. As to the blame of delay, the
ue'ay IN deciding cases arose often from
Aet'lends of petitioners, and there was
u'' as much delay in the courts of JUS
wee as here: the laws delay had become
s'0ast. He did not like this unj ust
aAne OF Congress Pass the bill, and
would be for the rich only-for the
Oeseould not afford to 90 to law, much