Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1824-04-06

uS"iS"'i 10 o'N SiSatooJect IN carrying them into
court of justice. Ifthesc claims are rejected
half a dozen times by Congress, they come nm
again, and are continued year after year, until
at last, by some means or other, the case is made
out, and Congress is induced TO allow it, The
members are worried out, and are glad to ret
rid oft. Mr.. Van Dyke said he was, therefore.
determined To vote against sending the bill back
to the committee. The whole evidence on each
side, he said, could be taken in a court ofiustice
and he thought the plan well worth the experi
ment
MIR. Rugglcs hoped the motion to recommit
would prcvail-and that the Committee would
see the necessity of providing for a Board of
Commissioners, at the seat of governments to
decide upon these claims. All these clai,ns
for the settlement of which provision is to be
made, will have been iirst rejected by the Trea-
sury Department There is scarcely case of
this kind, that comes before Congress, but for
items of accounts that have been rejected at the
| Treasury. Suppose person comes to ask thai
his claim may be allowed is he bound To furnish
evidence against himself? Mr.. r. believed the
most judicious mode would be, to establish a
Board OF Commissioners, consisting of three
persons--they should be under the direction of
the President and the Secretary Of the Trcasu-
ry; and sit in this City; where all the informa-
ton OH the subjects before them would be at
hand. If they were 1T q distance from the seat
OF government, they would not be able to OBJ
tain thus information readily. The gentle
man from Delaware has said, that we had some
experience on the subject of appointing Com
miss!oncrs for this purpose-it was true we had
| but the difficulties which affected that Com
mission, might be remi;lied now. Such rcpula-
tons might be adopted, as should be found ne
ccssary. BY this mode, uniform system for
! the settlement OF these claims, would be alop-
ted, ana known throughout the country. There
would not be rule for one place, and differ
ent rule for another as might be the case, iftlle
decision was left To the Courts. The gentle
man from Maine has remarked upon the deci-
/ sions OF Jurics, in cases where the government
is concerned There can be no doubt of the
vigilance of the claimants, in prosecuting their
own cascs---and the bias would ALWAYS be a.
gainst the government.
| Mr. Bell saii there were strong objections to
tie mode Of acting upon these claims in the
| Courts, both from the delay that would take
place, and the expense TO the claimants. The
claims arc first to be presented to The proper Of
kcers OF the government. Ii they are not al
lowed there they are to be carried into the Court
| in the district where the claimant belongs He
| must produce the same evidence in both cases.
4 III the decision is against him, then he is to ap-
bpeai to the Supreme Court. He must procure
counsel i'll the costs, ard will be subjected to
enormous expenses. There is such q press of
business in the courts that he would probably be
get discussion in the District Court and when
he comes to the Supreme Court, he mHst wait
several years longer. But if the plan Of ap-
pointing commissioners is adopted if the claim
is disallowei by the accounting officers of the
Treasury Department, the same evidence NAV
be produced before the commissioners, and the
claim decided on the spot, without expense TO
) the claimant. He had not a doubt that this
would be the best plan, both as regards the in
tcrest OF the government, and that of individual
claimants. He should have more confidence i'm
the decision of commissioners, than IN that of a
jury, to whom the claimant would be known,
and who might be prejudiccd in his favor. He
was, therefore, in favor of re-commitment.
Mr.. Taylor, of Virginia, said he only rose to
request gentlemen TO recollect, that not single
case, under this bill, was 10 be decided by u
: ry; they were only to be empanneed, under
certain circumstances, to Judge Of certain facts
i'll the case.
The question was then put and carried in IA
vor of re-commitment.
Mr.. Lloyd, of Massachusetts, from the Com
mittee on Naval Affairs, reported The bill from
the House of Representative 6. making appro-
prlations for the support of the Navy, for the
year 1924" with amendments. On the motion
of Mr.. Lloyd, the bill was then talk en- into con-
sheraton, III Committee ofthe whole, Mr.. Smith
, in the Chair.
, The first amendment, proposed by the Com
mtec, is to strike out ali the specifications OF the
various items OF the contingent expenses in the
Navy Department, & insert thclni.l gross. Itpro-
poses, also, to raise the amount ofthat appropri-
I alton from 100000 to secs, 900. Mr.. LLOYD,
of Massachusetts, stated, that the object of this
amendment was, la the first place, to restore the
bill to the same frc7n that had always been adop-
ted III the bills making similar appropriaiions--
, the conangcR expenses the Department lrav-
ing always been put down IN gross. He said
; that s;225,OOG was the sum originally reported
III the House, for this itefn-and that il was the
least possible amount with which the business OF
2 the Department. could be conducted. This a.
: ncndmcnt was greed to.
4 The second amendment provides for the pur-
chase of strip of land in the vicinity of the
: Navy Yard at Charlcstown, Massachusetts. Mr..
Lloyd stated that his strip OF land was required
TO build a wall, fJr the preservation of public
property. The amendment was agreed to.
E The next amendment is to strike out - 90
? 000," as the amount ssior ordnance ordnance
: stores; small arms, and the manufacture of pow
: der" and insert, in lieu thereof the sum OF 81 =
t Ooo, together with the unexpected balauce OF
2 the last years appropriation for this object.
lhiS amendment was agreed to.
Cir. LowIic made an inquiry, as TO the csti-
mates for ti!e price of rations--whch was an
J sHercd By Mr.. Lloyd and MIR. Parrot.
The bill was tl.cn reported TO the Senate, as
taincn'ed-tha several amendments were con
Cured in, ana ordcrcIito be cngrosscd-and the
bill passed 90 third reading.
1hc amendments were subsequently report
ed as being duly cugrosscd and, on MIR. Lloyd's
motion, the bill was read the third time, passed
: and sent to The ether House, for concurrence
in the amendments.
The bill r,rC.yi1r, E,r tho