Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1824-04-06

and fourth sections Of the hill. Mr.. Rueeles
WAS in favor of retaining the second section
and Mr. Hing Withdrew his motion, in order
to give way 10 an amendment proposed hy
Mr.. Rugsl.s; upon which some discussion
took place between Mrssrs Rugglcs, k,ug Of
n. Y, Lowrie, Noble, and King, of Allah.
and it was then adopted. Mr.. King nj Alah.
then renewed his motion 10 strike ont the third
and fourth sections of the bill which WAS
agreed tn.
The bill was then reported to the Senate I;
the several amendments made in committee
of the whole were concurred in and the bin
was postponed and made the order of The day
for tomorrow.
On motion of Mr.. Taylor, of Virginia, the
bill providing for the settlement nf certain
pecuniary claims against the United States"
WAS taken up Tor consideration.
Mr.. Taylor, of Virginia, spoke in support of
the hill. He advertrd TO the numerous evils
of deciding private pecuniary claims against
the United States, in Congress :hc conceived
that it could not he difficult Ia find remedy.
There was no individual who must not be con-
WINGED of the improperly of deciding trivial
| claims by Congress. Such trials diminished
he dignity of the Legislature. and would be
| likely tn avert from il the affections of the
people. 1t would save the time OF Congress,
10 be directed To higher objects. such as the
important reports from the different Offices
Matters of importance We're mingled up
with trivaities that sufficient attention was
not paid to them. Ii had been suggested
that Il Board Of Commissioners ought to
be appointed for this purpose. This plan
was not liable to so many objections as
their trial by Congressman this would
have its attendant evils. At present, re-
lrcted claims cost more than those which
are allowed Many are acknow lodged To be
bad but yet, year after year, they are before
Congress. In this respect, Board of Com
missioners would be better than Congress. II
is said that the people have always RICH, TO
petition Congress. tIe denied t.e position
To obtain the passage Of general laws. they
might have that right {; but not to make re-
Peated appeals, on private claims. He
spoke of the practice in Courts of JUS
tice, where claims, when once decided.
could not again he brought up. II was
not consonant with the principles of liner.
~ To allow these CT prrfe trials I; i'm which. a
case WAS too often gained by teasing, rather
than by its Justice. The practice was, as nlr
II. thought, at variance with the Constitution
Th- United States could not prefer petition
To Congress, TO obtain pay of an individual -
One party, then, had recourse whirh the
other had not. This Court ought to be equally
open TO all parties.
I WI. it'u 'pbN uD tIie DllI, IPHt u
section by section, To shew the merits OF each
The first section provides thatevery claimant
against the United States shall have the righ
10 bring forward all his claims whe Their legal
or equitable, in any District or Circuit Conr.
in the United States. Mr.. II. held that this
would he much better for the claimants-;hey
would be tried at home-and, although there
would be no partiality, or incopgruity, in the
judgments, yet equal justice would be DOME
Justice would, also, be done To the United
States. The accounts must be first submit
ted to the Accounting Officers, and If the
claimant, afterwards, should see iit To bring an
action, in the nature Of a suit of chancery. he
may do it, and that court is 10 be furnished
with a statement from the secretary of the
Treasury, of the reasons upon which the
claim was rejected by the Department.
The second section provides, said Mr.. IT, a
substantial regulation for the attainment of jus-
tice-the witnesses in the case are to he regu-
larly examined, and questioned by the Attor
ney General. an impartial person. This, Mr..
II. said, would he vastly better than the prac-
tice now pursued, of taking such kind Of evil
dence as was taken by Congress, which, if il
deserved the name, was only en- parte He did
not propose to plunge into system which
could not he remedied afterwards.
| The third section provides for Impanneng
| a jury, when there should he such circum-
stances as, in the opinion of the court, should
require a jury to try facts.
! The fourth section gives the Attorney Cen
eral the power to file Suggestions or intrrrega-
tories to the claimapt--the facts suggested TO
he taken as truth, if not properly answered.
This, Mr.. II. said, was similar TO cross bill IN
chancery-it was to operate when there was
a fraudulent concealment Of facts.
| The fifth section gives the claimant right
Of appeal to the Supreme Court Of the United
States, without bond to prosecute the suit
furnishing the creditor with every possible ad =
vantage, which could be expected to be al
lowed.
The sixth section provides that the officers
of the courts shall be paid for services perform
ed for claimants, but no costs to be rendered
against the claimants in case the suit is dismiss
ed, except for counsel.
Mr.. II. hoped the observations he had made
would be duly weighed, and that the bill would
be engrossed and read third time.
Mr.. Holmes, of Maine, said, he was too
timid politician to wish to go very deep, at
| first, into any new plans Of government. He
wished to- propose another amendment, 10 limit
the time of the operation of The bill He pro-
posed new section, TO limit the continuance
of the bill to three gears. This was agreed to-
An amendment was adopted, 10 include the
District Of Columbia in the provisions Of the
bill.
The blank in the bill, limiting the amount
Of any claim TO come within the provisions of
this hill, was filled with $4,000.
The blank, fixing the amount of any claims
which should be allowed an appeal to the Sn-
with 1000 dollars.
Ale fbonobf hat H..