Weekly national intelligencer., 1851-01-25

ended that war years afterwards by making Just such
treaty this by striking every thing in relation to in
demny nobody could have pretended that the claimants had
right to for satisfaction, had right TO 20 10
France for payment They bad right do ether
Will any show the distinction and difference which
would justify them in doing il after such hosites as were
waged Upon looking back am struck with amazement
that reproach should have been cast Government for
it's conduct towards these clamans should like know
in what respect failed to discharge Its duty towards them
1t negotiated for years It this for about two
years. in which it raised and equipped fees expended
money shed blood and finally made treaty. and very adj
vanageons treaty. Of peace, by wSich secured payment for
large class of claims Suppose had declared war; pu-
sCsd il to exremiies should have procured sdvsnta-
geous treaty its close Would the claimants have been
better of Would not the probable result have been that
snoad not have obtained advantageous treaty. far
the nture security OF commerce concerned, whilst
we SHOULD certainly have lost the private claims which we
secured In the convention of lSOO and which would have
been conscaed BY France the had been waged
seems TO me We did precisely what best for their in
tere and stopped precisely where it was best for all con-
cerned fhat we should have stopped When we
all further negotiation on the subject Of indemnity was OBJ
vous tnat was not possible to have obtained Had
we pursued the negotiations from that time 10 this we never
should have obtained than has already beep Maid
We justified therefore, in abandoning these neoota
ons We had done enough. and il not proper that We
should hold ourselves responsible for the debt
have Mr. President, examined into the defspces set
for the United States against these claims which tbnk
good, valid and sufficient But sir have said-and
il remark which has occasonsd little crtios-L
have said that these claims had been Just at one time
had failed fifty yesrs ago in the discharge Of
our duties towards citizens that now after that lapse Of
times it has become impossible to 10 justice has become
impossible to ascertain what is due and whom il due
has become impossible to distribute the fund properly there
were any thing due. ....
know the plea Of the statute of limitations is deservedy
odous know tits unjust and wrongful plea where we
bseve something to be due and where the parties whom
it should be paid be certainly assertained. But sir
also know that fdacares, according to the laws Of all
State Governments bound plead the for the be-
n ofthose they represent and acting Of
the people do not say to justify in escaping the pay
ment of debt which is certainly due bat say may use
1t where, owing the lapse of time, ascertain what
is due who entitled Il that the case here Who
the parties really entitled Let US see first as between
the creditor and the heir Suppose the bill passes Sup
pose money is paid into the hands Of administrator.
man who creditor fifty, rty, thirty years ago
is barred BY the statute Of limitations He come
against the administrator Yet if it is debt certainly this
property belongs the creditor So in relation to The assignee
If this property he who may have paid only FIVE cents on
the dollar will be enttledto the whole Of it. If it gra-
tuty would seem to be proper give to the assignee only
what be paid and to devote the rest TO the family And now
in regard to insurers pay Insurance Office an
insurer who received premium for his risk whose bust
ness was to insure against risk who received all the profit
he everstpulated to receive his premium he be paid
twice. t BY the person insured and afterwards by society
large Is this just 10 it right Trace it little further
not reasonable to suppose that the merchants thus trad
ing knew something Of the risk to which they exposed
bly, nsEsed in the shape Of additional profits and so the
community paid the losses and paid them in the shape of
profits Why, then, should these merchants be paid again
1t impossible know how distribute this fund pro-
pery How to ascertain what is due and whom
it is due The clamansw show that their properly
seized but the evidence the other side France
and is probably destroyed They make claims for the
value Of cargohow are to ascertain whether it was not
cenaband They make claim because their vessel was sez
ed for want Of "role Reqnpdge how do know that
they had letters certificates which our own courts would
have deemed sufficient How do we know what evidence
existed to show that in truth they not American but
foreign vessels ,oets. .''
Let uslook to the history mes let us hook that period
when the facts much easier ascertain. We find very
early in the history of this matter that M7 Morris writes
Mr. Pnokney in London that he refused give passports
to vessels because he knew that fraud would be pacsed in
order to cover enemys property with the American
On that occasion he chose the Yue and have
many innocent people suffer rather than who guilty
should escape We know that at the time when the Con-
venion of 1903 negotiated list Of the claims of persons
probably entitled made out by Mr. Livngston with all
the assistance he could derive from the French archives from
the claimants and from the agents Of tho United States He
filed list with the treaty Of all those claims which be sup
posed could be possibly raised against e fund provided BY
that convention. And yet what does he say He says,
page 796: .'a'
others are not dne many greatly oyercharged and many
charged under different heads that, upon fair statement
there is the highest to believe that the whole of that
including the embargo together with the interest on the
debt, will not exceed twelve millions Of francs"
Mr. Skipwth, agent long employed by the Government
in relation to these matters and resident in Paris made
list and sent hoe He had the advantages Of reference
the French archives and of daily communications with the
claimants Mr. Livingston, in letter to Mr.. Madison in
1904, (p 7s9, in relation to Mr.. Skipwih list says:
The whole list is tissue Of errors, and is calculated to
render the of claims large possible. with what
view will pretend judge. The list contains number
OF claims for which there no foundation number that
paid, Mr.. Skipwith himself knows "A number for which
vouchers be produced. number that do
under the treaty"
il impossible for all these contemporaries at that time
make approach fair list OF the claims; if they
a be deceived in relation the due and
the persons to whom due, how ascertain at
this distance Of time, after lapse Of fifty years regard
next to impossible Gentlemen may, upon feeling Of
magnanmy and generosity, be willing 10 throw millions Of
crowdo be scrambled for under the supposon
that dollar may, perhaps hit somebody who may be ent
tied to but the hope will be vain and uiess if they
believe that any thing like fair and just distribution will
take place. that under such circumstances these
if the debt weredue twoud be impossible ascertain whom
was due, and what DUE But in point Of fact. do not
believe due. believe the Government liable for these
claims for the which have given believe, If
give it, it will be gatuty And it is sufficient
after tracing the correspondence and examining
the history of the times to bring up certain distinguished in
dvduals who believed the claims ought 10 have been paid
1t not sufficient to bring up the reports Of certain
committees who believed the claims ought have passed.
Against all that put the striking fact that for than
thirty years these claims did majority Of either
House Of Congress in their favor Iegard that negative
pregnant regard it showing that not believed BY