Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1846-02-07

them from any intention Of violating the laws Of the country
There commercial treaty existing betwoen this country
carry provisions from Boston the ports SPAIN and in Por
tugal also, under British protection. Their object it
clearly shown by the evidence nothing than traffic
with a view TO profit
Mr. TURNEY said it happened to be the case. however,
that when this profitable traffic being carried -four
worth more in the United States than at Lisbon or
Cadz. This historical fact
Mr.. CLAYTON said the gentleman again mistaken ;
he could not read the evidence Besides that given by
the officers and crew Of the vessel there also the
dence Of insurance companies in Boston, Of gentlemen Of the
legal profession and Of every person by whose testimony the
Government supposed they could fasten fraudulent design
upon the claimants But every witness IN the case absolved
the parties from any intention Of doing wrong The gentle
opposite to sustain his argument depended on the SIM
gle fact that paragraph in newspaper stated that the price
of flour was lower Lisbon than in the United States
But this was in lsl3 and in 1912, when this transaction
took place.
MI COLQUITT said the question appeared to be whether
there had been intention to commit fraud de took It
for granted that the tribunal before which the case was tried
had determined that point.
Mr.. CLAYTON said the evidence SO clear that the
District Judge decided in favor Of the claimants but the court
above, exemptng them still from any intention to do wrong
decided against them upon the simple fact that the protection
under which they went vas British protection.
Mr.. COLQUI'fT proceeded. They were exempted from
an intention Of doing wrong but condemned for the ccm
mission Of papable wrong Was Congress to constitute it.
self court Of conscience and 10 relieve parties who had been
condemned by the legal tribunals of the country He pro-
tested against any such proceeding The avace Of the par
ties putting the very best construction upon their acts had
their patriotism and they asked to absoye them
because their motives pure None but the Ruler OF the
Universe could know what their motives
Mr.. BAGBY addressed the Senate In favor Of the claim.
II question Of law but question criminal in
tent And be would ask the Senator from Georgia he
prepared to refuse refund to these parties the amount Of
their property which had gone into the treasury Of the United
Cs l.. ~. ~
intent.
Mr. COLQUrTT repeated that he wholly unable
to determine what their intent He for the mante
of the laws.
Mr. BAGBY urged that what constituted the test Of crim
nay evil intention, and that not having been proved
exist In this case the parties ought be exonerated
Mr.. PENNYBACKER opposed the bill. He argued that,
even their motives we're pure they nexcusabc fo
adopting unlawful course, through ignorance any ohe
cause It was one of the general principles OF law that gno
Of the law will the wrong doer and he be-
eved that this principle which courts Of equity
would be unwilling to interfere with.
Mr. DAVIS replied to the remarks of the Senator who had
last spoken. provision Of law had existed he said since
the formation Of the Government by which the Secretary
the Treasury authorized power which he exercised al
most day to remit fines and penalties and foeufes where
there was no fraud intended The practice of the Govern
men did not stop here. Occasionally occurred
and this Of those cases. which the law did not provide
for Application made for remission Of the fine,
Visions but is within the equity of the acwhn the prn
cple but not within the letter." Was it question
Did involve principle Not at all there were SOM
forty similar appended to the report But the Senate
from Tennessee had suggested that Of the claimants
this had something do with the Hartford Convention
Was the Senator prepared prescribe public opinion in FREE
country Was the fact of being Federalst goot
for not paying his just claim. Suppose the Senate
should find himself prescribed because he happened to die
from his neghbors in opinion Why, he had always though
that it portion Of the glory and honor Of this country
that could be prescribed for his opinions, that ndvi
duas equally protected by the laws and justice admins
tered equally to all the Senator from Tennessee knew th
honorable and highmnded gentleman Of whom he spoke
Co Perkins, he would say at that he would be the
last in the country plan illegal voyage, the last
violate the laws Of the country any If the Sc
nators hostility to this gentleman however, sron
that it could not be overcome let the portion relating to hin
be struck out but let the claims Of others be preudced
that hostility.
After few further remarks from Messrs. ALLEN AM
NILES in opposition to the BILL and Messrs. JOHNSON
of Maryland and CAMERON in its favor, the question wa
taken and resulted as follows:
YEAS-Messrs. Archer Bagby, Barrow, Berrien, Came
Thomas Clayton, John M Clayton, Corwn Critender
Davis Dayton Evans, Greene Huntingdon Jarnagn, John
Of Maryland, johnson, of Louisiana Mangum, Miller
| pearce, Phelps, Simmons, Upham, Webster, Westcot
Woodbridge-26
NAYS-Messrs. Allen Atchison, Anterior, Benton
reese, Calhoun Cass, Chalmers, Coqu Dickinson, Dis
Fairfield Hannsgan Lewis McDuhe, Miles, Penny hacker
Semple, Sewer, Speight, Sturgeon, Turney-22.
So the bill ordered TO be engrossed and read hir
time.