Weekly national intelligencer., 1851-02-08


the prosecution Of wrts OF private individuals
do not wish to the time Of the Senate The pre-
position Is plain and simple one, and think should
incorporated into the bill N
Mr. BERRIEN, The tenth section, as it now stands i
the bill provides that the district shall application
Inc party against whom judgment is rendered. grant
peal to the Supreme Court of the United States ID
Judgment of the District Court shall be affirmed such
curly Tor costs 10 the District and supem Court the sal
court may prescribe Then the amendment proceeds pro
VIDE that party, no appeal be entered may out Wi
OF error within three years 1t to that the obec
lions to such an amendment are multiplied In the frs
place. tn. nequtabe proceedings il equity proceed
ing TO which writ Of error is not applicable. In the
place the distinction between writ Of and appeal
last Of which the bill Provides that the appeal bring
up the whole case upon law and upon fact while the
error brings up the case only upon questions Of law Their
seems TO me very extraordinary that such provision shou
Dc found necessary in the present BILL when have gone
through the Of settling the land titles in the different
States framed out Of the Territories which we have hereto
lore acquired without embarrassment resulting from the
want Of such provision Sir the effect Of il would be to de-
lay the accomplishment Of the object Of the bill for the length
OF Time which here provided addition that time which
shall be occupied in obtaining the judgment Of the district
court And for what purpose For the purpose of meeting
and anticipating difficulties Now, has il ever been found 10
the prosecution of private land claims in the different States
% which former bills applicable that the parties who had
claims would not give the security necessary the
pose OF enabling them TO enter appeal The great object
has been that these proceedings should be brought to close
speedily possible in order that the ries might be kept
10 their rights and the Government should what was
public domain that might its constitutional power
Of d'sposlng Of it. This amendment conflicts entirely with
object II there be ground Of apprehension that
man who has claim lands give the security reour
ed for COSTS the bill may be made to accomplish the object
the Senator in another way without this delay and sub
init to the Senator from Kentucky better calculated to
compsh his object. You might Ps.-sa. eay case
where the district judge shall be Of opinion that there
sonabe ground for the entering of appeal and shall be
satisfied that the party desiring to enter that appeal unable
give the security which required for costs he may allow
the appeal to be entered without requiring such security
That will accomplish, think the object Of the Senator from
Kentucky and in that would acquissce. because by such
provision the proceedings would be stayed the
Of the public from the private domain would delayed II
the Senator from Kentucky disposed accept that as
modification Of his proposition content to submit il to
the consideration Of the Senate. If not should certainly
nope that an amendment proposing proceeding nconss
tent with the whole frame and tenor Of the BILL amend
ment which proceeds upon supposon Of difficulty which
all former experience ascertains to have foundation and
compishment of the object of this BILL will not prevail but
still trust the Senator will accept the modification,
& Mr.. UNDERWOOD. My object is to afford the oppor-
tunity TO all parties # obtaining justice without being
meed in their efforts to reach il by inability give security in
appeal bond The experience of all the States Of the
union far my makes such provision
as amendment proposes to make to this bill in reference
TO their particular Judicial system 1t is rule therefore,
which the experience of the judicial systems of the various
States authorizes to say, good 1t is rule which
applied now by the Supreme Court Of the United States in
reference the circuit courts Of federal systems and accord
ing the experience which have the operation Of the
era Judiciary the rule safe and good regard 10 decs
ions Of inferior federal tribunals only objection therefore,
to the rule upon principle is that suggested by the gentleman
from Georgia, (Mr BERRrEs,) that it may initiate
against the speedy adjustment of these land claims which
very desirable the part of the Government and
which admit to be Now, it that objection
that reduced the time from five to three years. still
further willing to reduce to two years if necessary would
have objection TO reducing the limitation to that period for
oCu
from Georgia have in view. But would much pre-
fer letting the rule stand sanctioned is by the experience
Of our judicial syscms both in regard to Slate and Federal
tribunals. would much prefer letting the rule stand and ex
tend two years. than to strike it out and put it
rey on the ground Of appeal Why yon may pray ap
peal and according to the practice time is fixed within
which the appeal bond Is to be executed If is executed
within the time limited appeal is gone It cannot be
executed Afterwards In this you subject the party ask
ing appeal after il is granted to the contingencies Of
death and Of all the accidents to which LIABLE
very strict rule and il any little thing prevents the execution
the appeal bond in te the appeal granted falls and the
party without remedy II something like the amendment
which have had the honor offer is not adopted why
will be proper modify according the suggestion made
the Senator from Georgia. and If the Senate should think
proper vote out the amendment which PROPOSE hope the
gentleman will prepare such modification he has sug-
gesed. If my amendment cannot be obtained, think what
he has proposed would be reasonable amendment the bill
as it now stands. 4 81
have no particular interest in the BILL but have thrown
these suggestions and offered this amendment in
quence of believing that remedy, than pre-
scribed in the BILL ought 10 be made. If the time too
long, would be perfectly willing to sanction offer the
part the gentleman from Georgia reduce it from three
two years. That length Of time, TO allow the party
anime the case consult about it review and reconsider
the judgment made against him. and to determine, upon due
delberao, whether he ought to bring the the Su
preme Court think is not unreasonable, but disposed
to give him at least that woud prefer have the Of
The Senate taken the amenmen which have offered II
is rejected hope the Sen from Georgia will propose the
the modification he has sug| ID.
g Mr.. BERRIEN. IcanI (ubmit the amendment which
suggested, because that sed by the Senator from Ken
lucky is an amendment to mendment. But will read
to the Senate that which submit in the event Of this
amendment being rejected in order that the Senate may
think they will, that the suggested by the Senator
from Kentucky will be amply provided for by such
amendment than by what he proposes which would only have
the effect Of carrying up to the Supreme Court Of the United
States Of law, leaving points Of facts untouched
II the Senator'S amendment shall be rejected, shall pro-
pose to amend the section by adding this:
I the shall be satisfied that the party desiring
appeal unable to give such secur the appeal may be al
lowed without security. sissA2 yARe Il AA2
Now in regard to the which has been suggested by
the Senator from Kentucky, Of accidents happening which
prevent the execution Of the appeal bond within the time
prescribed by the court the Senator s perfectly that If
any accident beyond the control party prevented the
execution Of the bond within the ime upon application to the
court that time will be extended and after its expira
ion order will be made for leave sign appeal bond.
So that in fact. the difficulty does not exist.
trust, for the which have suggested the amend
ment OF the Senator will not prevail If it does not will
submit this amendment. 6f &sa
only am disposed deny the authority Of the Judge. after
he hoca