Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1832-03-16
CONG EsEI
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, March 5.
Deb AT T.
On The reference of The Nc7c York Ne
mortal IN behoV Of he Chcrohees.

gentleman from massachusetts,. lie considered |
that motion in effect The same with motion
to lay the memorial on the table Indeed, the memo
rial would I've To the action OF the House
if it lay on tho table. than fit was referred to
Committcc on the state of the Union. Mr.. G..
had himself made the motion To lay on the table,
nor should he now have said word respecting it,
but for remark which had fallen from the gentle
man from South Carolina iMr. DRAYroN,) who
had observed that it would not be respectful to the
mcmoriaStSto take such course. Mr. G.. had
too much respect for the 81 members of the House
who had supported his motion, to suppose
that they had any intention To treat
these mcniorIlists III uncourtcous man
ncr. Gentlemen should remember that AT
the time the memorial was got up, it not
known what the decis ION of the Supreme Court
would be. That Court had since made decision,
which in fact rendered this memorial a nullitv,
and he therefore supposed That the only order the
House could take respecting IT was 10 lay ii the
table. 1T, however, gentlemen preferred To send
it To a Committee of the Whole on the state of
the Union, aud let it be buried there, (tur such
would be the rcsult) he had no objection. He
could not imagine how the House could act upon
1t, without an impcrtinen: interference with the
Judiciary.
Mr.. DODDRIDGE of Va. said he should vote
for the reference proposed, though he should
have preferred having the disposal Of the mcmori-
al deferred until the House Sh oud hear from Geor
lia. Two or three weeks would he sufficient 20 bring
that intelligence. He understood that the SUPERB.
or Court of Gwinnctt county (whose decision had
been reverscd) would sit Monday week. There
was, therefore, time enough to know whether the
mandate of the supreme Court would be respect
cd there He rose for very different rea.
son from that given by the gentleman from New
York. He thought that the memorial would be
more within the grasp Of the House, if sent to a
Committee of The Whole on the state of the Uni
on than II laid on the table. The House could 90
INTO Committee at any time and take it up ~ plea
sure. tie thought it would be wrong to submit il
TO Select Committee, because that would look as
If the House anticipated that resistance would come
from quarter whence it ought not. He entirely
agreed with the gentleman from Georgia, Mr.
Clayton) thnt when threats come from any quar-.
ter, little else is to be expected, and if that gentle
mans whole speech did not couss; of that, and of
on invitation to the people OF Georgia to rise in
arms he did not know what it was.
Mr. CLAY, of Alabama, said that before the
question should be taken, he desired to submit one
or two remarks. 1t true that the complaint
aud the memorial seemed to be directed exclusive.
ly against Georgia, but it was due To- the House
and To candor to say, that the question involved
Alabama quite much ii did Georgia lie
might go farther, and say, that it also applied to
Mississippi; nay he might proceed farther still,
and observe, that the memorial called Congress to
wage all the Southern States. And for
what! For exercising sovereignty, and the rpht
Of jurisdiction within their chartered limits
lie did not object to the memorial being sent
to Committee o: the Whole on the state of
the Union, if it the desire of gent Icmcn when
so many other exciting subjects were already he
fore the House to 20 into this also: be it with the ma
JOrty they pleased. AS regarded the province of
that House, there nothing in the matter for
its legitimate action. The House was not u
dicia tribunal, and in what other character couId
1t be applied to! How could for lis action be
made out! Did the mcmoriaIists pretend that the
existing laws required modification? Not at ALL
Was that House called to cooperate with another
branch Of the government? Was it to Congress
that appeals were to be made to carry the decisions
of that branch into effect? 1t was not Was il
shewn that any of the Executive officers of Govern
n,t IL t,,1nl L.. . ,,.-
then could the House be called upon to act? And
how, he asked did it happen that a memorial like
this should drop into the House on the very first
day after the decision so trismphant!y alluded to?
This was not question for him TO decide He
saw no practical purposes TO be answered. 1t was
usual for mcmorialists to have some definite object
In view. But was any such thing pointed out bv
this memorial? Did the petitioners recite any mat.
tcrs which required the action of the House? The
memorial did indeed refer to certain treaties which
aPortiop of the people of New York undertook to
decide had been violated. If the charge were true
was this the tribunal to appeal to? Congress did
not sit to execute the laws, but enact them How
happened it that at this particular moment such a
question should be presented? lie believed that
there were persons both i'll that House and out of
it, who very well understood the object.
Mr.. G. stated that Alabama had also been i'm
PEELED to legislation the Indians, by causes
similar to those which had operated in Gcorgia
tie had himself witnessed the discharge of muir
dercr and thief, for want of jurisdiction over the
Chcrokec country, ana as tue gentleman from
Georgia had truly said the Indian country if left
without laws, would he a den of thieves, murder
ers, and out laws of all kinds. Was that a state of
things to be submitted to by any pcoplc2 1t was
not. And Alabama had gone Just as far in lcpis
latlng for the Indian country as Georgia had done
Mr.. DODDRlDGE here called the gentleman
to order.
The CHAIR admonishcd Mr.. Clay to confine
himself to the question Of commitment.
Mr.. CLAY resumed and observed, that the zen
tleman from Virginia (Mr. Dbddridgc,) had been
himself more liable to correction, when the gen
tleman in his speech had attempted to hold up this
memorial in te,rOrcm the head of at least one
sovereign State, and by consequence over two
others who were in similar situation. The gen.
tleman talked about threats, yet he had himself
held rod iHtcrrOyem, and shaken it at every State
who had Indians within Its territory. When the
gentleman interrupted him ne had been cndcayor
ing to show That Alabama was gully Of the same
sort of legislation complained of i'm C;eor
gla. In the organization of the Supreme Court
of Alabama, the very first question raised involved
the right of jurisdiction the Indian country
and TO show the dreadful dilemma that would Col
low from State exercising 1t own rights he sta
ted the TACT That white citizen charged with the
murder @f an Indian, had been tried and convicted
by the unanimous decision of that court and exc
cutcd. Thus Alabama consigned to the scafTold
one ot her own citizens, IN vudIcnlion Of Indian
rights. These were facts he would vouch for and
seeing the Representatives Of "A sister State made
alone the object OF attack, he could not refrain
from making the statement.
He would not 20 INTO the question os 70 the
right possessed by Georgia and other States >,
the South to exercise the same power with the re-
naming States Of tho Union nor wopld
he undertake to say what change of cir
cumsfanccs had led the Representatives, Of
those states to a change ofPrnciplcs. Should the
question come up, terrible as some gentlemen
4 Inc ell I,