The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-05-19

sht oil all the States, II was justice tnal an suouu So
The claim ia this case is admitted TO have been q
charge upon lands. which Georgia had appropriated
for the support OF the common cause o. all me Ms1ss
Congress has not assumed il as payment 10 ueosla
for lands which she had thus appropriated pu 70 re-
ieye her from the charge OF incumbrsnee upon ,nem.
50 far Georgia appropriated these lands Iol ne.
ana in discharge OF her liabilities TO her STATE troops 70
ihs extent Of this claim. she incurred pssnniary lao
nv She to the extent Of this claim IN effect appropra
led Gaphns land Congress her s9 n Inc psymen.
Us,nn;arv s6i,y' incurred for the benefit OF all the
Safes Both cases virtually. therefore, rest upon the
same principles All . c J. !,
.; H. material Nor does il vary the case that
Georgia had failed pay i II is fairly to be inferred,
however thai her failure has resulted iIom me convic-
ion ihst The United States ought to pay it, The commu-
eson az The governor OF Georgia 10 President jackson
UPON The subject Of this claim placed her refusal upon
that ground -
based from any obligation 10 Georgia TO pay this
eaim BY The settlement OF all accounts between them in
7s3 under the act OF Congress OF $780, Such settle
ment was no doubt made, and some instrument equva-
lent to receipt given alleged. IL is moi pretended that
This claim did in fact enter into that settlement; but il 10
contended that, whether il did did not, the United
States were thereby released from any obligation they
might be under to Georgia in regard to IL As IL is be-
eyed such plea would not be available TO individual
under similar circumstances, in court of equity, il
il relied on by great nation But the government has
never set up such defence. regarding It. doubt as
alike Incompatible with the principles Of justice and its
own dignity and high character.
When The act OF 1882 passed for the relief of the
State OF Virginia. it does not appear that any plea OF
the kind was relied on, although there had been
taken Nor does II appear that prior the passage Of
the act for the payment OF this claim during the ten years
more il was before Congress. this objection plea
urged against it, Relief in each case EVIL
IDENTIFY granted upon the broad principles OF justice and
equity.
But the obligation of the United States to pay
HAL ri
ground although contained in the report the Senate
In the cessi0n by Georgia The United States 1902 OF
that extensive and valuable territory now composing the
States OF Alabama and Mississippi the United States UNI
dertook, part OF the considerations to extnguish the
Indian title to all the lands within the limits OF Georgia
II is conceded that the Indian title to these ands upon
which this claim charge passed 10 Great Britain by
the treaty Of l773 and that the revolution vested ii in
Georgia But Georgia took il in trust, Great Britain
@ and sd o EspSn e ns &c the
expressly created by solemn treaty stpuaons upon the
Indian title 10 these lands Was the Indian title there
FORE perfect in Georgia, long this ncumbrance upon
remanedi II was Indian title. no matter who held
it, il were not perfect in Georgia, which the United
States were bound to quiet and extinguish.
Could Georgia. before the claim OF Galphn was paid
say the Indian e these lands belonged uncondiiion-
ally 10 the State il not living unexlnguished
ue which Georgia, to the extent OF this len equity
and good faith, had claim to Besides, the Indians
as party the treaty Of l773 had Just right to insist
and require thai lis stipuations should be performed II
submitted then, whether the extinguishment of the
Gdlpnln does NOT come Wtnin the
letter oil that clause in the cesson agreement referred
to- And the aet proceeds already realized BY the
United States out OF the sales OF land obtained by that
ceson exceed twenty millions of dollars, Georgia would
entitled 10 very liberal construction OF IT.
Apart from the grounds suggested constituting an
equitable obligation upon the government for the payment
this claim, might with some propriey be urged that
the interest OF Gaphn in these lands having been appro
pia,ed by member OF the firm OF States virtually for
the benefit OF ALL the whole firm should be held response
e and that ne night therefore, irrespective OF any d.
tn IN all
relief. 4
Such are the grounds on which this claim rested
prior the of 1s4S and the undersigned are by no
prepared TO admit that they constituted obliga
ion upon The government pay it, the contrary they
are Of opinion that taken in connection with the eminent
sss q w Sfpno snf a strong ea % ~
ceded that the government under obligation 10
pay H. and that It's payment bad been gratuitousy
the slightest degree affect he question as to The pay
ment OF interest The act of 1885, The language OF the
former Secretary, MIR. Walker recognised the claim
and the United States became bound 10 pay il whatever
II might be-"
The act referred il to the Secretary for examination
and to ascertain the amount due II was not 10 ascer
tam whether anything was DUE or whether the claim
was just The Senate report says, ''there be no
doubt as 10 IFS justice equity IL was admitted jus, in
IT'S; and has been SO admitted always, and whenever
sss been examined Inc only question has been who
amount due in i773 for the precise amount stated in
NE Senate report The certificate OF Its liquidation at
uues ana OF tne amount was Def0fe Tie SEN
ale But II was referred as Just and merilorous claim,
thai the amount due thereon at the passage OF the act
night be ascertaned and paid.
Having shown, as we thnk, that the claimant
was entitled 10 interest," did the act authorize its al
Owance' IL is conceded that the accounting officer
had no authority 10 allow II, unless the act conferred
But il was not necessary that the authority
should be conferred IN express terms. II weuld be
equally available, and equally the duty OF the account
ag officer TO act upon IL, IL implied We do not under
stand thus position 10 be seriously confoverted but il IL
IS the authorities in support OF IL and
elusive list OF cascs which the accounting officers
have allowed interest, although the acts referring them
were silent IN regard to IT, is hereto annexed II the
preston m the opinion OF Attorney General Critenden,
lowed BY accounting officer unless The act eIprsss
directs its allowance, II Is nanifesty erroneous.
but appehend must have reference 10 the particular
Class OF cases 10 which the case, in which The opinion
was gwen, belonged In that there nothing 10
The ACT or the merits of the claim 10 justify the payment
OF interest
Is authority, then in the act in this case implied
ne Senate report and OF the peculiar character and merits
q me elaim the presumption may be fairly INDUCED that
congress passed the act ID a spirit OF berality well as
asuce Should not therefore, be construed in the same
spirit bbefaly as remedial and not penal statute
me intention was TO do ACT Of Justice long delayed,
benefacior
The naked return OF The Justly due their ances
IN l7I0 without interest, when fund charged with
aymen and amply sufficient for the payment of both,
sd been appropriated in AID OF the OF freedom and
Independence, would TALL far short, only OF the i'm
efsuye demands OF justice but I'll the presumed inen.
on o. Congress But the relief granted BY the act Is
he payment OF whatever amount, upon examna-
uOn, be found due and can any chancellor