The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1846-08-25


rlOSl Upon the grounds taken by Mr.. Ramsey, the
ball was improper, and ought TO have been vetoed.
Take Il upon the grounds specified by Gov. Vance,
Mr.. Whittlesey, &c, and the bill ought TO have
been vetoed. In either case, and in both cases, Mr.
Polk did right, Allow me TO give you another dem
! Oeraiie authority in addition 10 Mr.. Cary. Mr..
Cobb, Of Georgia, says:
"Claims for remuneration for losses inflicted by
public enemy have been presented by individual cit-
Gems; and the subject has, consequently, become ia
mar 10 those who have been called on To examine
| and provide for them.
"Certain principles have been established which
have their foundation ia the great code Of public law
| and which now may be said to be Incorporated INTO
our own practice, and have furnished precise and
distinct rules by which OF this description are
10 he examined and adludged.
"Since the formation of the government, the doc
trlne that the nation is 10 compensate for all losses
sustained by the citizen from the public enemy has
been distinctly repudated. No such obligation Is
imposed upon the government by any system OF
law, and no naloR has ever assumed It's existence
In public war, every citizen is an object OF
hostility TO the common foe, and must submit TO
those inconvenience, losses and dangers, to which
he, in common with every other individual In the
community, is exposed. "-House Report, (minor.
ity,) No, So, LIST session, 18th Congress.
Mr., Cobb, in the same report, says further;
That when the private property ofthe citizen has
been taken and used by the nation for the common
purposes of all, and, In consequence Of such en-
poyment, il has been destroyed or damaged, the
nation is bound TO make good the loss Cases of this
description various in their peculiar elrcum-
stances they uniform in the recognition ofthe
general principle. Where horses or wagons, YES
sells, any other description of property, have been
impressed into the public service, such exercise OF
the supreme power necessarily carries with II the
obligation to pay for the use Of the articles thus
taken, and, In of loss, remunerate the own
Ter M NUhe nroy he If Dri-
yate citizen, mpeptively required for the sub
slstence Of the troops OF the United States-when
their crops taken from the ground and appropri
| aied 10 this obiect-when their buildings are taken
possession Of, and occupied as barracks Tor the hab
ltaon of the troops as hospitals for the reception
OF the sick wounded, or as places for defence
against, or attacks upon, the common enemy-in
all these cases the same general principle involves
the obligation Of eompensallng for the USE and
munerating for the loss, of properly thus taken and
| consumed, or destroyed in the public service"
This, undoubte ly, is the sound and the true doc
Irine the first quotation clearly shows for what the
government is not responsible TO the citizen, and the
latter shows for what the United States really are
responsible to the citizen.
The testimony of the Hon. Mr.. Cowen TO the
truth of the foregoing doctrine is introduced because
Of its reference TO Mr.. Madison, who was also be-
lever in it, all know who acquainte with his
| summary dealings with Richard Bland Lee, COM
missioner Of claims. Mr. Cowen says, lin report
| upon claim from Black Rock, New York;
| Had Black Rock been fortified garrisoned
| town, and had II held against the enemy until
| reduced by famine the force arms TO uRcondi-
tlonal surrender, the indiscrminate plage and de-
sructIon OF private property in such place might
have been, IN former days, justified in meas
ure by presidents derived from the usage or practice
of conquering army in the eighth or ninth century
But TO be obliged TO trace, in the footsteps of a civ
ilzed nation in the eighteenth century, such wanton
lndscriminate destruction Of private property as
| characterized the action of the British troops not
only in the destruction of Black Rock and Buffalo
but all along the Michigan, Ohio and Niagara from
tiers, well the shores Of the Chesapeake, is
calculated produce in the feelings of every reader
OF the history of those times, only the dee pest
sympathy for the sufferers but adherence of such
savage violation Of all the rules Of civilized war
fare, and that too by nation claiming for her ar
mics the most exalted character for chivalrous mag
| nanlmlty toward a fae. or conquered FIVE.
Where property was Unfortunately de-
stroyeJ as it this frontier by the British and
their savage allies in the late war difficult to say
what house or other property not de-
stroyed for it's military character or occupations
hence the proprety Of President Madisons cautious
instructions TO the commissioner of claims giving
his views of the letter well spirit Of the act OF
April 8, 1916, pointing out clearly and distinctly the
sort of evidence ndlspensably necessary establish
claim under that act for the loss of property de-
stroyed for its military occupation, showing what
that law intended by such military occupation OF
private property as would make it legitimate OBJ
ject of destruction by a civilized enemy.-(See
American State Papers, vol. Claims, pages 497 and
1907
The aggregate amount of property lost by this
devastating war on these frontiers rendered II i'm
possible TO be met by the of the national
treasury, II the principle upon which such claims
rest admissible. But no government can be
expected to indemnify for losses arising its cit
subjects from the wanton destruction of pri
re nartu hu Ita of II
that principle be adopted, and it will operate as
premium TO your enemies in time of war to avoid
attacking your fortihcations armies or other means
of public defence, and steal upon your unprotected
cities towns, and villages for the purpose of laying
them waste, as the most efectua means of Gripping
the government, and rendering it incapable Of per-
forming its legitimate duty to the citizen, and de-
Tending the country against foreign invasion and final
conquest. The committee therefore think that the
petitioners are not entitled to relief, and offer to the
House, for adoption, the following resolution:
"RssOlUed, That the prayer of the petitioners ought
not to be granted"
| will close my quotations with one from the well
known Mr.. Giddings, taken from the report made
by him in the equally well. known "Bulow case, in
which payment had been asked for negro houses
&c, &c. which had been destroyed by the Indians
1t will be seen that he has been forced to take
similar ground with the preceding members of Con-
eress: will his authority be received by the abol-
ton wing of the opposition Hear Mr.. Giddings:
"Immense suferings and losses from Indian dep.
relations were sustained by the frontier portion of
our inhabitants during the revolution. Wyoming
and western Penusy lvania, western Virginia. and
western New York, at various periods, suffered
great loss of life and properly at the hands of our
savage foes. After the close of the revolution many
of our people in the Northwestern Territory, west
ern Virginia, Kentucky and Tennessee, fell before
the Indian rifle and tomahawk, while their entire
property, IN many instances, was burnt in the flames
that consumed the bodies of its murdered owners
AT still more recent date, Ohio, Michigan, Indiana
and Illinois, have presented scenes of slaughter and
destruction by savage barharty. The sutforngs
of our people from the cruetes Of Indian warfare I'll
a large space in the page of our countrys history
with their details all are familiar, With the suffer
ers, we, as individuals, deeply sympathize in their
Affections, and lament their losses but Legislators
we feel bound to follow the presidents, and to adj
here to the policy, which for more than half GEN.
fury has controlled the action of Congress in regard
to indian depredations
"As early as the year 1900 a committee Of the