Mississippi Democrat. (Carrollton, Miss.) 1844-18??, 1845-07-30

.io claims Selued ny Congress, rather thai
have them waste their means in feeins
lawyers and prosecuting expensive law
suits. AT his suggestion the bill was lai,
over till the next day, to enable information
to be obtained on the subject.
II was. however, brought up no more
tih the 24th, when, on Mr.. Walkers mo
'ion' Inc previous orders of the day were
postponed, this bill called up, and, aftel
one or two verbal amendments, reported
from the committee of the whole to the
senate, and ordered to be engrossed for
Its third reading. At the evening session
OF the same day, when, as the Globe of the
21tn February states, there were "but foug
or fce Senators present, 1t was called up
again and passed.
4 snort time afterwards, Mr.. Jarnagin,
OF Tenn, came INFO the chamber. and
learning that the bill had passed, got Mr..
Evans 10 move reconsideration, so as to
enable hIm TO oppose il. He made nearly
Inc same objections to the bill as Mr.. Sc
vleF had adyanced-showed that testimo.
ny could be procured TO prove any claim
before the courts--and declared that II
would save money to the government as
web as to the Indians, to pass the claims
at once, rather than adopt The manner of
settlement proposed.
AIr. Walker defended the bin, and the
claims expected to be prosecuted-stated
that the Chlckasaws had sent an agent TO
Washington, ian Indian)E[did he mean
DIR. Gwln land that Judicial inyesti-
CATION was the course they preferred.
Mr.. Jarnagin replied at length-agreed
that the claims were valid, and declared
that Congress should settle them without
subjecting Indians to the expense of law
suits.
Mr.. Walker did not attempt a reply;
but stated that he had discharged his duty
to the Indians who were present, and who
desired the passage of the bill.
The reconsideration passed; when Mr..
Dayton, from the judiciary committee, re-
marked that when the bill was befre that
committee they had not the lis hts the
Tennessee Senator had shed upoi il, and
ne therefore hoped it would lie orer until
next day; which was agreed to.
1t slept until the 2Sth, when i: vas call
ed up and advocated by Mr.. Walker, Mr..
Foster, and Mr.. Berrien, mainly on the
ground that the agent of the Inditns pre-
sent (Dr. Gwin, we presume,) wFhed its
passage. Mr.. Jasnigan still opposed it
warmly, and exposed the inconsistency of
passing such measure under pretence
of friendship to the Indians, and subiecting
them to the expense of litigation, instead
of passing their just claims at once. In
spite of his opposition, however, the bin
passed, by vote of Is to 15-which shows
that there were but little more than half
the Senators in attendance.
No man can read the debates upon this
bill without being struck with the evident
surprise with which it took the Senators,
and the uniform CALL III oaever. II caf7fe
before full Senate, for additional informa-
ton. This win be explained when It is
learned that it was marked PRIVATE by
Mr.. Walker, (great fellow for privacy and
that it came from the judiciary committee
1.-The last committee from which bill rela-
ling to Indians could be expected.
Another thing will be no less remarked
the triumphant exposure of the inconsis-
tency of those who advocated the bill
through pretended friendship to the In
dians. Both Mr.. Sewer and Mr.. Jarnigan
demonstrated that if it was the benefit of
the Indians that was sought, the less ex-
pensiye and more direct mode of present
ing the claims at once to Congress would
have been adopted and both declared
their willingness TO pass at once in this
way all the claims that were valid. The
only reply TO this was, that the Indians, or
at least their agents present, desired to have
them in the courts.
1t is not perhaps known generally that
Doctor Gwin (the agent as above,l was
lately licensed rs an attorney at lao. Mr..
Walker, it is known, was anxious to get
practice in the courts at Washington
Can it be possible that the prospect of en-
ployment, and fat fees, governed them in
this singularly inconsistent conduct, more
than the friendship for the poor Indian
they so benevolentIy expressed Or, per-
haps, as We see in the petition that the
Chickasaws are described as san ignorant
people, but one to whom the government
was indebted for kind and friendly treat
ment"--perhaps refinement of benevo-
lence conceived that it would wonderfully
improve their faculties to initiate them into
the mazes of courts and litigation, and for
this purpose that chancery suit, generally
any thing else but benefit, would to them
be the best return the government could
make them for their kindness and friend
ship!
Before we follow the history of this IA
nous bill out of the Senate, we will refer
to another matter connected with these
Indian claims which came before that ho.