Phenix gazette. [volume] (Alexandria [D.C.]) 1825-1833, 1831-12-31

South Carolina against the United States, and
the question bein. on concurrng with the Com
mi,tee of Military Affairs, in the amendment
proposed by them. which appropriates $500 to
reimburse that amount paid by the Legislature OF
South Carolina. for blankets furnished to the MI
litia serving in that State during the last var
MIR Blair, from s. G.. expressed his conviction
that when the report OF the Military Committee,
relating to this item of allowance, should be read
and considered, many remarks IN support OF 1t
would be unnecessary.
Mr. b. then entered briefly into statement OF
the peculiar circumstances under which this mo-
ney had been appropriated by the state, lie ao-
yertHt to the inability of the General Govern
ment to aflor, S Carolina the protection 10 which
by the Constitution she was entitled; its request
that the State would avail herself of her own re-
sources. and the manner IN which the Government
and citizens had volunteered for that end. lie
admitted that the allowance Of blankets to mlliua
SERVING less than twelve months was unusual;
but insisted on the necessity OF the case, and the
equity of the claim. His State had never been
n troublesome suit0r before the House-she had
rarely pettioned at its bar for any thing. and all
she now demanded was sheer substantial justice.
She had been large contributor to the National
strong box. and he submitted it to gentlemen,
whether it was liberal just. or polite, to deal
with South Carolina as If she were swlndicr.
and to apply to the equitable demands OF pa
triotc State. the same rigid rule as if they were
adjusting claims in shop.
| Mr.. McKennon Of Pa said that he had listen
ed with attention TO the arguments adduced, had
read the report with care. and felt al anxious
desire. If he could C nsistently do 1t. to support
the bill! but after an examination OF the subject,
he was constrained to say: that he agreedm sen
tment with the gentleman from Virginia (Mr.s
McCoy) and could not conscientiously vote in
favor of the item now claimed. He would brief
Nv state the reasons of his dissent 1t was con-
lceded on all hands. that the State had no claim
in law to this allowance; and it was sought to
be snppogted on grounds of justice and equity.
What we're the facts? The troops in question
had been drafted in the midst of summer, and
beforerhe season arrived when blankets would be
necessary, enough of their pay had become due
to enable them to supply themselves with blan.
kets out of their own funds, as the law required
they should do. In other parts ct the Union,
when militia had stood in need Of blankets, they
had sometimes been furnished by the States, but
the amour, had always been deducted from the
1 soldiers pay. Itwas said that these militia were
poor, that they were called out onsa sudden
emergency, and the exisency OF the circum-
stances bad been such assto induce the Lcglsa-
ture Of South Carolina, out Of humanity and
Iiberality 70 her own citizen soldiers, to make
the advance. for which remuneration was now
claimed He admitted the fact, and accorded TO
that State all praise for her iberality, but there
he must stop. Such an expenditure furnished no
groundsof claim upon the General Government.
Were all the sacrifices aud sufferinsssOi our mi
l,ia confined to South Carolina? Her soldiers
had served in the midst of a rich, fertile, liberal
and humane community. and their sufferings did
not amount to drop in the bucket In cOlDparl
son to those which had been endured in other
parts of the Union, and especially on the North
western frontier. In other parts OF the country,
when the citizen soldier was in state of destitu
tion. his appeal was made to his fellow citizens
s. his wants supplied by the berality OF the pub.
lie. Mr. NJ. here adverted to the exertions which
had been made in Pittsburg and its neishborhood.
in furnishing the volunteers with all they needed.
and he insisted that il the present items should
be allowed. all who had made such contributions
would be entitled to remuneration, rs much as
South Carolina. The amount might be compa-
ratively small. but where was the difference in
principle? Claims of this kind might be advanc-
ed by the whole Western country. Other States,
Virginia and Pennsylvania, could present large
demands on similar ground. Should this door
once be opened. where would be an end Of the
drain upon the Treasury? Could any gentleman
say where these demands would termiHate7 The
law had fixed the principle, and he could see no
reason why it should he departed from.
| Mr.. McDufie said he should be sorry indeed
that South Carolina should establish the preced-
ent of an unjust demand upon the Treasury.
But he should he equally sorry OF the other hand,
should his State b. deprived OF her rights because
other States had similar rights The true view
of the question was this: shall the U. States re-