Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1832-03-16


The gentleman from New York MIR CAMRELENGl
had mentioned II circumstances, that although the
petition came from \. lork, 1t had not been present
cd by one of the members from that city. In re- |
ference to that remark, MIR. \. would observe that
hc believed the why the memorial had not |
been sent to one of the Members, Was conviction |
on the part of the Committee charged with the |
transmission OF the Memorial that to ask either |
oi those gentlemen 10 present it would be mpo- |
sing on them disagrccablc task. 1t certainly |
had not been an agreeable task to him; but on re-
cclvIng the mcmorIal and examining il, he felt |
himself called OH by very respectable portion of
ms fellow citizens to act in the case. Had il not
been Tor that cause, he should not have taken a
part IN any OF the discussions on this subject dur
my the present session of Congress. He had felt
1t ms duty to move the reference of the papcr to a
Select Committee, not from any disrcspcct to the
Committee on Indian Affairs, who were already
charged with the couSidcrat ion of IL part of the
subjects III the memorial. Certainly out of no dis
respect towards the Committee of the Whole on
the state of the Union, "a thing that vould hardly
be imputed To any one,) but from belief that it
was due to the cmorIalists, and to the special and
momcntouS matter of it concluSionS--as none but
Il Select Committee would, in his Judgment, he
competent to discharge those functions which the
prayer of the memorial called upon that House
TO perform. The matters of the memorial did not
relate solely to tho subject of the Indians. There
were three things in it which called for the act
| ion of the House. One a statement of
certain treaties long since concluded, which the
memorial charged, as having been violated
| Ahotncr was Il law OF the United States whose
date was given, and which, as the memorial allcg-
ed had not been carried into effect. The third thing
was, That under those circumstances two free cti-
Zens of the United States had been unlawfully i'm
INJURED in dungeon. Were not these circumstan-
COS To call for the action of that House? If not,
he did not know for what the House had been insti
tued. gentleman had alluded to Vcrrcs; it seemed
TO him that the allusion might well be applied TO
the circumstances in this case. In one of the most
splendid efforts the Roman Orator, there was a
reference to the prptor of Sicily which had close
analogy TO the facts complained of in this memoir
al. NcrIes had crucied Roman citizen, and one
of the greatest efforts of the was, in desert
oing the scene where in the very agones of death,
the unfortunate man exclaimed IL am a Roman
cItizcn.' Were not the two men immured in that
dungeon entitled to say, American citizens?
and was not that House the guardian of the free
dom OF American citizens? lie would not pursue
the subject further. 1T the House could consider
the memorial as not presenting any legitimate sub
Jcct for its action, then he had no more to say.
III is with great reluctance that he dissentcd
from his colleague, as to the proprety of refer
ring the memorial to Committee of the whole on
thu state of the Union. That motion, he consi.
dcred as in substance precisely the n mo.
'lon to lay the memorial the table. Should it
prevail. never more will this house hear a word in
reference TO this petition. lie did not absolutely
know that under ordinary circumstances the me-
norialists would be entitled to that particular con-
sideration which he thong that they now descry.
ed 1t was possible there might be other memorials
upon the same subject already before tho House.
although he was not aware that any such had vet
been presented. The general subject of our H.
dian Affairs, and particularly the state of the Che
rokees had been referred to the Ipdian Committee,
or to Committee of the Whole the state of
the Union, but he did conceive that the
memorial stated facts, calling for the solemn ac-
tlon OF that House, and that recent decision in
another part of that building gave these subjects
socmnity which they never had before, he had
been induced to ask Select Committee
Nothing could be more remote from his mind
| than the idea of going to with Georgia The
subject, however, involved inquiries which would
occupy any committee during greater number of
days than would be required TO receive informa
ton from Georgia, whether the mandate from the
| Supreme Court was was not obeyed.
No select committee of that House would re-
| port plan of blood aud destruction, or would
desire to make wilderness of Georgia What.
ever such committee night propose would doubt
less be OF character that might bear the sober,
discreet, and concatory discussion OF that House.
Respect for the memorialsts, and for the objects
OF public interest referred to in the memorial, had
been the motive under which he had acted; but
whatever might be the fate OF the memorial, he had
discharged his duty 10 the memoralists, to that
House, and to the country.
| Mr.. WARDWELL, Of New York. remarked,
that, when this memorial was presented by the
gentleman from massachusetts,, he supposed that
the gentleman himself, with his usual candor and
fairness, would have moved that it should be laid
upon the table, or the consideration of it pospon-
cd to a future day. He considered even the pre-
ton OF the House upon it altogether unnecessary
And II the petitioners possessed the same know
ledge OF the recent decision of the Supreme Court
| of the United States is possessed by the
House, In relation to the important subject of this
memorial, he believed they would not, at present
| request the action of the House upon it.
Ever since the trial. conviction and imprison-
mcnt of the missionaries to the Cherokee tribe of
Indians have been known to me, said Mr.. W., |
nave viewed the whole subject, relating to them,
with the greatest anxiety and the most intense in
tercst There has been much feeling excited upon
this question, in different sections of the country
and particularly in the State of New York. Much
has been said, both in the pulpit and out of it,
among certain class of citizens. Much has been
wrote and published which designed to infu-
cnce the public mind OH this important subject. l
have considered ali these proceedings as rather
premature, and beg leave to give my reasons for
such opinion.
This question is purely between two citizens of
The United Stotcs and the State of Georgia; citi-
zens who have been tried, condemned and mpri-
soned Tor refusing to submit to what suppo-
sed to be the laws of Georgia. After sentence of
the court was pronounced upon them, they had
the offer of pardon by the Governor of Georgia,
on condition that they should obey her laws, or
| leave the State. They chose not to accept the
offer OF the Governor, but preferred being impri-
soncd III the Pcnltentiary Of that State, with a
view to put themselves upon the laws Of their
country tor redress; with intention to appeal to
the Supreme Court Of the United States, and
abide by It's dccison-such appeal was madc-.he |
Missionaries desired this course, and refused pa r.
con from the Governor, that they might pursue it..
One OF them expressly said, that his decision was
made up from the beginning of the controversy
ana that he should abide its consequences He .
SAID further that he should not have proceeded so
tar as Inc had done, but should have submitted
quietly and Pcaceably TO the laws Of Georgia, or