Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1830-10-15


and kinds or service wilt admit OF pretty near ant
accurate estimats say be made. | believe Regi
mental or Garrison Surgeon, which last think ,bt
Doctor was, ranked nearly in point of pay, raons &c
with Regimental Q uuster master or Adiuant-cer
tainly not above captain OF the highest grade A
captain of Artillery Cavalry who receives the high
est pay of that rank. who shall have lived till th
time. would be entitled tojust S1200-half pay. DIR
McCiurg having died some years back dimnshe.
even that amount One OF the above captains wht
shall have received csmmutation in lieu of half pa,
i've years back, sane have, is righteousy entitled
to SI5l 90 interest Oh that communication. These are
taken as the highest possible amounts. 1ehce it vii
be readily seen, that uch false reports aud eXay
gerated amounts canony be intended to increase the
popular prejudice andaarn against those claims AMI
the unjust ndignatos, against upright and indie
pendent court who have. pronounced them just.
knowing your personal lberalIty and correct views
as well as do on those feeling Revolutionary sub
jects, have no susp t1ut yoa, Messrs Edito,
were the originators OF such Ill designed report
though you do not sa. whether you derived it from
your correspondent. or from what other quarter.
The next grounds fof objection that YOUR CORES
pendent takes To the decision, are, the repeated re.
lection of these claims by former courts nearer to
the time and as able, If not ADLER: the acquiescence
in those decisions; their being mostly now in the
hands of SPECTATORS aud shavers; andthe decision d
the last Legislature On them
Had this ,oise oteor looked little more carefully
and otsey into those repeated reflections of forne
courts he would lave found that their dac;s,on.
were swthout prejsdice"-tha, is, that these abe,
courts had some doubts themselves about their owr
able decisions, or that they perceived something lack
ing, though nearer the time of the origin of these
claims that might possibly throw further pbt on the
subject by collecting and combining circumstanc al
after, though not farmore distant periods. And as
to the acqnescence IN those DECISIONS what was that
more than rightful obedience to the legal authori
ties and sufficient cause for abandoning those
claims in despondency?
Because a number of them have gone into The
hands OF SPECTATORS and shavers does hat warrant
the unjust Withholding of those which remain in the
hands OF the original owners and long suferers' And
where would be drawn the just line of dscrimna
Nr Madison, believe, once attempted somerbino of
the sort IN Congress but with all his penetration and
acuteness IN economy and arrangements he
could not devise reasonable and satisfactory plan
But let US examine his Specializing and shavinD b
siness little further Is the private shaver and sne
culator who gives tht needy officer and soldier some
thing and that on a rir bargain, TO keep him,srom
starving, more reprelensble, than the Pubic whom
he hos served at the rsk of his life and the sacrifice
of his ALL and who the debtor who keeps him near
" half century out of his pay, and then gives him.
without ehaFein the bargain on his part Just one
third of his right The officer who received FIVE
years iu pay as compe nsaiion for half pay FOR fe
tive years ago, without interest as MANY have done
gets just about third Of his right and that in the
wane OF life whenit is least productive to HMM as
much, as wren principal is thus acknowledged to be
caezsRes-1s .sithheld 40 long and sewers
cIEe4pstances interest follows necessary conse
quence OF right and if not allowed, subracts ius
that much from the right amount. This is shaving
and specuiating then to nxact SHYLocK flesh ana
blood degree! And here again the repeated rejection
of these claims by former courts come in as an mile
hand maid to the other powers of Governments to de-
ter the injured officer and soldier from further pro.
secuton OF his rights. and TO sanction the eHorutv oil
those public speculatons md shavngs!!
In all ordinary cnses hsdween man and man thr
commission OF fraud, any advantage taken of the
ignorance of party blythe superior information or
commanding influences OF the other, me absence
OF any material crcums ances that ought to govern
the case, always reckoned among the lust causes
for the Inerferances of the courts who re bound 10
do solid and substantial Justice in all such cases Rut
where STATEs are concerned, all their remisnesses
equIVocations, and o0 contradictory octs are to be
passed over and their most glarng deficiencies sane
toned and they left 10 profit ny their own wrong
This is precisely the between the STATE and the
Revolutionary sufferers They 1.-THE as1 are adj udo-
ed aganst--egislated agains,-and because they are
compelled TO acquesce" is because they do not
rebel against the legal authorities, presume which
is one Of tie convincing proa and arguments Of your
a6te correspondent against Hen-they have cert anly
just Legal CLAIMS the STATE for any of its de-
llnqsences and wrongs-for any of its foreitures OF
former promises, later acknowledgements and scnn5
retributons OF all these evils!
Their own lets, of the above description are now
offered as conclusive and final evidence of the full
pToprIety OF those very actsa species of geLfteSti
mony inadmissibe in every other case. The deci
sion of the last Legislature your rise corresDonden
exchequer against these CLAIMS Let us examine
this evidence little closer.
From the time of the first decision of the Court O
Appeals against these claims. those of the Assembl,
were uniformly in the same way until 1919 and 20
two particular cases turned the DECISIONS in the AS
sembly in their favor, which fixed the principle tina
brought in train of others in succession after n
VIII be seen by the Legislative Acts themselves
These all received communication after being kept on
of forty years generally without interest, ex
cept In the Two first cases where paid in yer,
scanty part; all which being clear and unequivoca
admission, by the Assembly of the justness of the
Claims for both principal and interest," ought to have
LETT but little doubt for The after decision Of the right
Interpretation and understanding of all these various
Legislative Acts
In the case of these latter decisions of the Leeis
lature, commencing IN 1919, there was no proviso in
favor OF the State, to justify after Legislatures to
revise and annu those principles there LAID down and
established; as there in the first decision of the
Court OF Appeals, in favor of the claimants which
Lett the whole subject open for further investigation
consideration, and correction of their successors
Upon these decisions of the Assembly IN 1890 one