The central gazette. [volume] (Charlottesville, Va.) 1820-1827, 1825-01-01
Charlottesville, Va Saturday,, January 1, 1929

, now mernbsF of the other House,
showing that a esgal opiniOn was for
varied, assuring the General that, in
contest with tASehy OF New Orleans,
HE must succeed. Another document,
which Mr.. Hsgse bad obtained from q
different source sttte6 that the value oi
the land had evep then been discovered,
and that $50, O0G could have been OBJ
tanned for the Generals title to it,
and what was the conduct of Lafayette,
on being informed Of these facts2 He
promptly, and without hesitation, COM
municated to his agent "t that he would
not consent eyento inquire into the va
lidity of his title; that he could not
think Of entering into litigation with
any public body in the U. s.; that the
property had been gratui,ousiy bestow-
ed upon him by the u. States, aud it
| was with them to say what had been
given" and he accompanied these de-
ciarations by positive direction to his
agent 10 reIinquish his entry and TO
make location elsewhere. This has
been done, and the certificate from the
Land Office proves, that the land sub
stituted for that which has been lost, is
of very inconsiderable value. General
Lafayette, however, did not stop here
he had been induced to dispose of part
| of his interest in this land, TO an Irish
baronet, Sir Josiah Coshiii. His con-
traci with this geat.cmen created, Of
course, much embarrassment TO him;
but the general only considered that il
might also embarrass tkegorernment Of
the United States. He made an appeal
to that gentleman; who, With IiberaIi-
ty worthy Of all praise, agreed TO re-
linqdish his claims to ths land in ques-
ton, and accepted claim on other
lands in satisfaction for them. Lafay-
etle stopped not even here he was not
satisfied while any thing remained 10 be
done. have myself, said MIR. ii seen
and examined on file, in the Land Of
nee, this deed of REIMBURSEMENT, de-
posted there by General Lafayette
himself. to secure the government from
all future difficulty. 1t. only remains
for me. sand Mr.. ii. 10 add, that, on n
portion OF the land, thus generously re-
!inquished, now stands valuable part
of The city of New Orleans, valued by
gentlemen well acquainted with it, lac
eOr,ling to estimates now before him, at
from f9ar. 70 fire hundred, Thousand dol
lars.
1t perfectly immateriai,said NTH.
TO inquire whether snme legal difficulty
might not have existed IN establishing
the Generals title. Nothing but iu-
dicial investigation could have settled
The rights of the parties; and, as the
General has reIinquished his claim. and
has never at any time, claimed indem-
nifty. that investigation would now be
| useless. But the point on which he de-
! lighted TO dwell was the magma nimily,
the refinement of feeling, the noble de-
licacy of sentiment, which prompted
| the General ut once to abandon his
! claims, to refuse even to inquire into
them, and wholly regardless Of his own
interests, to look only to the interests Of
our country.
Gut, there are still grounds almost as
s.rong as its equity and Justice, said
Mr.. I'll. upon which this claim may be
placed. According even To precedent,
If precedents were consulted in such "a
case, the government would be bound TO
| recOmpense the services of Lafayette.
Do gentlemen doubt npon this point ?
L could refer to numerous instances Of
legisIatios upon the same principles Oh
which tins bill depends. Mr.. Fl. here
referred to several--to the act making
compensation for the s'sacrilices and
services" of Baron Steuben: to that
which appropriates. in the language of
this bill AN entire township of land "
for recompense to Arnold Henry
Dohrman for similar services-io the
act making provision for1the daughters
Of Count de Grasse, and to that provi-
ding for the widow of Alexander Ham
ilton.
But, Mr.. IL. said, lie would not RELY
upon precedent fer Il Justification Of
this measure. When the government
of nation corsuIts the dictates of JUS
iice, and obeys the impulse Of noble
sentiments, it does what contributes to
the glory and interest of the people,
Neither was there any danger to be
appreheBGed on The score Of precedent,
from the passage OF this bill. Can this
bill, said ne, ever be drawn into prece-
dent? Can such case as Lafayetie's
ever again occur? Can the nation be
born agains Can It assume second
childhood. Cau IL ever be reduced TO a
state of such poverty as TO require sim
liar services? And, if this nation
could be shorn Of its powef--be reduced