Alexandria gazette & advertiser. [volume] (Alexandria [D.C.]) 1822-1824, 1823-01-04

coknlzed by our laws
Nr' Wright supported the bill in a
.os,cb of some length, IN which he nain-
,p,nsd that the right derived from occu-
na,;on j. m some respects divine right,
I'd the right OF these individuals was OF
~ . character as Congress had almost
IS Ii,i,s right to take from them as il had
- t.ks the lands from the Indians with
out their consent. -.
Mr. Vance quoted the Ordinance Of
1899, to shew, as he cOnI.nded, That tnese
;ndiyidusls had right to continuation
Of their claims independent OF cOnsldera-
t;on. of grace, good viii, or generosity.
Ar Cooke expressed his regret that
the b,ll had been again brought before the
House, 10 winch he was not less opposed
TODAY than he was yesterday, II these
neople have a legal right, as 10" con-
iepde6 to tie lands on which they are set
led il is N itself All argument against the
hin. ,oh DOT M Ills favor. because making
IL unnecessary
Mr. ] nainga rose, Ia move recOmmIt"
mani of he bill 10 the Committee OF pub,
i;c Lanis. He thought 'hese people had
: certain claim on the gOrernmeni, out
no, n the exten, OF this bI!L He was DOT
Wiling 10 recognize the title OF settlers so
far down as the year 1913 c,,
Mr. Hardin, OF Ky. was in favor OF the
yaconmifmert OF the bill, delivering at
length his reasons against ne bill as II no"
s,nnd on the same grounds as were yes
terdsy assumed against 1t. ,... .
Nr Woodson, of Ky. delivered his sen.
timents; a go at iength, 10 favor OF this bill,
and Of the general policy OF granting lands
10 the earle settlers on The remote bor-
ders OF toe cOuntIy, among the Indians, NC.
TO whose hardihood and enterprise the
falrsst portion OF our country Is owing -
He drrlt, too, on the superiority OF the
,nultable claim of these settlers over the
claim OF the u.au, who, with floating IT,
tIe. was attempting 10 dlspossess them OF
their humble Cabins aud the little improve
ments which constitute their all.
MIR. Rankin supported the recommit-
men, of The bill, ii The house was disposed
10 pass il. He a3serted TO the principle
Of ih,s government IN regarl 10 settlement
rights, which had beeH, 10 recognize Sell
tleupnt rights down TO the time al which
The last military post was surreGcered,-
This time. in Illinois and Indiana, was
1888. Il, then, these claims were recog'
nized up 10 the year 1918, congress Nd
establish new principle. In doing so,
they would tread On dangerous ground,
and the ext6nt 20 which the precedent
would carry them could not be toreseenn,
a. there were claims OF this de upton IN
several other of the states ana territories.
Nr. Cook mex, took tn door IN support
OF the bill. aud to shew that ms was pc
culiar case. requiring peculiar legislation,
owing 10 these men being driven from
their possessions during the late wal, and
moi having therefore had an uninterrupted
no,sesSion OF their lots in Peoria. though
m.ny had .een there since i7T6. He
1,v.I, spo1 the peculiar situation OF these
people, poor ISOLATE partly oi lGd!an
and partly of French descent. &c and in
capable of asserting their own rights.
Mr. MaIIary supported the bill, on the
ground OF The es Vitab,e right. ,nd even
legal right, of these Individuals, 10 re
cOgnitioa OF their niles, and also on the
ground Of the policy o. the measure. In
answer to the allegation that :he govern
msnt Iegislates too freely % the subject
OF Western lands, &c. Mr.. NJ argued,
that in every new country there naturally
exists perpetual source OF legisiat.on.-
The early settlers in il deserve our pro-
lection. and our Interference to see that
tbey are protected in their equitable rights.
Dir. Walker, OF North Carolina, also was
10 favor of tue bill on the ground OF hu-
manity, than which he knew none more
worthy OF being a motive for legislation,
&c. &c.
Vii. Floyd spoke in favor OF the recon-
nitmsnt OF the bill not SO much from hos
Iillly &c granting these particular lots, as
from hostility 10 the principle on which
the grasts IS proposed 10 be allowed.
Some further debate took place, Messrs.
Wright, Vance, Floyd, Jennings, Sterling,
OfN,Y. Williams, Of n G Rhea, and
Wood.
The question was at length taken on
The recOmmitu,ent OF the bill, and decided
n the negative, "a votes 10 90.
The question: was then taken on the pre-
viOusly pending question, 10 strike out the
cbacting clause, and decided in the nega-
tive
Dir. Hardin moved 10 amend the bill so
as to hnH the recogsi,ioD to settlements
previous to the year 1888,
hr Campbell, of Ohio, delivered bis O.
Pinlon that this bill was not new princi-
PIE, though not cOniormable 10 the general
principles uf Our laud laws. He adverted
10 The grants To the Moravian Indians, sc.
made under peculiar circumstances He
thought the circumstances Of these Peori-
ans such as 10 authorise this grant TO them,
at least as much as the grants 10 Moravlans
and Others.
DIR. Vance said tbat, if the grant was Ii
mlted as proposed by the amendment, it
would be 10 vain to pass the bill, these
people keeping no records, and not being
able 10 trace their titles &c
DIR. Cook confirmed this view of the
oDerat lnn nj ,hs ampndmoot