Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1826-01-07
BONDS OF PUBLIC oFrfCERs.


hands of Clerks of Courts, Attorneys, and Mar
shas, and their Deputies
Mr. Chandler inquired why the Attorney Cen |
eral should not be required by the BILL TO give bond
as well "a the District Attorneys.
MIR. HOLMES said, The same query had been sug-
gested TO him by several members of the Senate.
The District Attorneys are Receivers of the Pub
lie Moneys. though not recognized as such by the
Treasury Department and OF the principal
object, OF the bill, is, that they should give bonds
for money cOmisg into their bands. MIR. III. said, |!
he could refer TO TO show that they are and
must necessarily be, Receivers of the Public Mo-
in the execution OF their duty and as this was
the case, and there had been public defaulters
amongst them it necessary to guard against |
it. Such il the difference of practice in the diffe-
rem, States of the Union, that though in some of
them the Attorney has little 10 do with the colec-
ton OF the public money, in others he does almost
every thing he Issues the writ, lie receives the
return OF it in bis Office, he enters the suit gets
judgment, and takes oft execution, and perhaps
1t the money IL likely soon TO be paid he keeps il
in his office without giving il the Marshal and
az such is the practice in many of the States, il is
necessary he shorld give bond Mr.. *. said, he
was not sure that the bill might with proprietv be
| 40 amended as 20 include the Attorney General,
though he was not prepared TO say, present. that
such provision was proper. He should, there
fore, move That the bill be postponed and made the
order OF the day for Thursday next, that the Judi
ciary Committee might drec, amendment to he
bill, without its being referred back TO that Com
mttce; which motion prevailed.
| The Senate then spent some time in the consid-
| ertion OF Executive Business and then
Adjourned
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVE
Mr.. Rives, of Virginia, and Mr.. Long of North
Carolina, appeared, were qualified, and took their
| seats in the House.
MASSACHUSETTS CLAIMS.
Mr.. Hamilton, from the Committee on Military
| Affairs, reported the following bill
- a Bill TO authorize the settlement of the claims
OF the State o! Massach usetts for certain servi-
ces rendered during the late war.
Be IT enacted &c. That the proper account
ing ofhcers oil the Treasury, under the direction of
the Department OF war, be, and are hereby author
lied and directed 10 audit and settle under the usu
al rules In such cases. tie claims of the State of
Massachusetts for Military services rendered during
the late " ar Let In all where "a militia
OF the said State were called ont in cosformy with
desire or requsition of officer of the General
Government BADLY. In all cases where they
were called out 10 Iep'l actual INVASION or under
a well founded apprehension OF Invasion Propi.
ded the number of toops so called out were not
IN undue proportion 20 the exieency and prori-
ded, Tthfr, That the services OF the said militia
Tor which compensation may be asked, were not at
variance with the views of the General Govern
ent, or In cases where he troops enploye ed in the
sane were not withheld specifically from the com
'aahd oil ai' oncer or officers of the General Gov
err ment applying for the same''
| The bill was twice read and committed
| SEDlriON LAW OF 1893
| Mr. Webs er, from he Committee on the Judici-
ciary made the following report on the petition of
| Thomas Cooper
The Committee on the Judiciary. 10 which was
referred the petition of Thomas Cooper, report :
| Ihat The petitioner sets forth that, in the wear
$500, he as indicted and tried, under the provi
sions OF The act of July Is, 1898, commonly called
the Sedition law, for publishing an siedged libel ON
| the then President OF the United States tba,
he was found guilty, and sentenced to be imprjson
ed six months, and TO pay a fine Of four hundred
dollars. Having paid this fine, lie prays Congress
that 1t may be restored 10 him, with interest OH
the grounds, first, that what he Published was mo
libel, and, secondly, that the act before mentioned
| was unconstitutional.
| The Committee having considered the case
and agree 10 report that the petitioner have leave
| TO withdraw his petition''
| Mr.. Hamilton said, that he hoped that the pen
tleman from Massachusetts would add to his mo-
| uon that the report OF the committee, with the
petition OF the petitioner, be printed" He would
| much prefer that the motion should come from tina,
gentleman, a it more than an act of ordi
narv comfy 10 the individual concerned and IL
moreover, surely, WAS little else than an act of
bare justice, that the House should be accurately
informed, not only of the grounds on which the
petitioners petition had been rejected but that thev
should likewise be made acquainted with the char
acter and extent oil the claim of the petitioner the
| wrong OF which he complained, and the reasons
| by his o"n showing, Why redress ought now to be
accorded TO him Mr.. III. said, he would " ait
with the hope that The gentleman would make the
motion in question before lie troubled the House
with one oil similar import.
Mr. Webster said, that, supposing there was no
possible objection to long argument against the
| law OF t79S being read, he doubted whether i,
would be worth while 10 print it. He had no per
sonal objection TO that course if preferred bv the
gentleman from South Carolina. II thai gentleman
meant TO call up the report for the purpose of con-
troverting the conclusion TO which the committee
had come, then ii might be proper TO have all the
papers printed. But he was moi particularly dispo-
sed Tor the qualification of individuals merely TO
have their disquisilions printed for the use of the
House He had not been instructed by the COM
mtee to move The commitment or printing of The
report but, II the memorial was printed he pre-
suned II would be proper TO print the report also
Mr. Hamilton said, that the gentleman from Mas
sachusetts had admitted all for which he contendet
And that he would distinctly inform that
gentleman that 1t was his intention TO controye
the report OF the committee, and that II was with
that view that he WAS DESTROYS that the argument
OF he petitioner contained in the petition sbou Il
he printed, that 1t might be laid on the table of
every member Of the House. that the view taken of
his own case by the petitioner might be familiar 10
each, as ne, Mr. H.. perfectly satisfied that
there was nothing which he could urge of equal
cogency with ibis statement Besides, he frankly
confessed, that, whatever might be the Ultimate
fate OF ne petition, he was anxious to enrich the
public documents Of this House with the luminous,
constitutional, aud sia,esmdn-like argument embo-
died in the petition, a subject the interest of