Weekly national intelligencer., 1851-01-25

this chamber and amended by striking that art
ce What was the declaration Of the First Consul Of Francs
when this treaty was returned to him Why, he says tha
these claims the side and on the other were equ
pondan claims and that by striking out that article Of
treaty the Government of the United States has expressed
intention abolish the prosecution of the claims and theI
he ratified the treaty thus amended but ratified on The
press condition that these claims should never be revived
against France Who 10 competent % bear testimony
than this gentleman who mixed with all these ransac
ions There is the account full and complete Of this sub
jec 10 his memoirs of the history Of the times But
will not dwell that am vote in favor of these
claims from the evidence we have before us.
But wish to say word in regard to these transfers.
reply to the honorable gentleman from Texas. If under
stand him. he proposes to cut of the underwriters from oil
the advantages Of this BILL Now wish to put il to the
Senator from Texas lawyer whether when policy is
entered into by which underwater takes upon himself
marine risk is not part and parcel of that contract that he
shall have all the rights accrung from the loss Of the vessel
the vessel is LOST and he makes good the loss he NOT
entitled to all the equitable considerations by virtue of the
contract se Is not part and parcel Of the policy (and
if is not of the policy the law gives to hm) that be shall
have the benefit Of the equitable considerations He is Just
much original party here by the implication Of the law
and by the terms of the policy, the original claimant him
self and much entitled, upon every consideration re-
cover Will the Senator from Texas go far to abrogae
the original contract between the parties that the underwater
shall stand good ground the original claimant
He has made good the loss Of the original claimant and if
any thing remains of the ships avais proceeds it
comes in equably to him, and the law gives it to him.
UOQOfdDc
Senator from Kentucky insist that every thing in the shape
Of damages property, and claim legitimate matter of
transfer That principle would be very inconvenent if
carried in the ordinary intercourse between and
We should have suits brought in the courts where nv
dual transferred damages arising from the nAicon of an
assault and battery would be extremely nconvenient il
seems to me, to this principle into practice and i. is
liable to very many objections
The amendment which have offered il seems to me- is
not liable to the objection, far the assignee properly
speaking concerned and would be much better to pursue
the safe with regard TO the insurer With regard
to the INSURER he has already received his pay for the risk that
he Insurance companies charge rate Of premium
corng to the risk which they have heard Of very few
Of them breaking, because what they lose they
make up another. That is about the rule which they
pursue but in this instance, if the insurer received the
money, would you not deprive the original claimant from
coming forward with this claim If the insurer receive the
money the original claimant ought to in equaby for
division Of andf the insurer receives part the money be
ought to refund the premium which he has received.
Under these circumstances seems to me that if we are
going relieve the parties who have actually suffered and
those who have taken advantage of that very suffering and
poverty to buy up these claims for little or nothing, we should
adopt this amendment .."
Mr.. BERRIEN. Mr.. President, wish to say word in
reply the honorable Senator from Texas upon the amend
which he offers. That amendment proposes to exclude
assgnees and insurers Now, agree that the provision in
the bill to which the Senator from Texas has adverte which
provides that assgnees shall only be entitled to receive the
which they have paid for the claims with interest
is objection It is exercise Of power, not the fulfil
Of obligation. But presume those who have had
the conduct Of this bill deemed necessary to make that
vision, in order to secure its acceptance Without IT, the
bill would be much acceptable to me- because it would
have been perfect ument of what believe be the
obligation Of the United States. ..s
But the Senator from Texas proposes go further and
proposes totally to exclude all asgnees and insurers There
few of those in which the assignments from nd
vidua individual will within the contemplation and
scope Of the remark Of the Senator from Texas The
sgnees in most cases, the creditors of the original
holders and they have to their possession assgnees
virtue of pre- existing debt due by the holder to the
sgnee In many the holders have become bankrupt
and by the force and operation of the bankrupt law all the
rights and interests of the original holder have been transfer
red to the assignee appointed under that law for the benefit of
the creditor Msat@ *.t@ ..m a"Ir
These assignees are not them spectators who going
about to profit by the necessities Of the original holders They
class Of persons who were the creditor: OF these
holders anterior the Of this adventure and they
in other the assguees by the operation OF the
law in relation to bankruptcy Do these people stand in
situation which renders them obnoxious the remark Of the
Senator from Texas If these debts shall not be paid to as
sgnee in the which have stated and particularly in
the Of bankruptcy claim could be presented for the
original claimants for the moment it presented there
would remain the record Of bankruptcy which had dlvested
the original holder Of all interest in the transaction We will
suppose then, that these two classes of assgnee with
drawn om the objection made by the Senator from Texas
And now, with respect to insurers | PROFOUND 10 my
honorable friend from Texas lawyer th question Does
he not admit that upon the ment of the policy, the
tract of insurance between the insurer and the insured ny
the operation of the law entitled all the rights Of the in
sured Ia the of the abandonment of the property
and portion Of the property recovered is not the right and
title to that portion of the property recovered absolutely
vested in the insurer These people, hen not compen
sated by the receipt of their premium for they have rights
which 60 beyond that-rghts which the law gives them
rights which cannot impair in the ul6ment of our obl
gaions and which only do in the exercise OF un
censed power r."..
Sir, should depore than the loss Of the bill ITSELF
its passage with such provision that which the honorable
Senator from Texas proposes insert We should, said
BEFORE by the passage of the bill acknowledge the justice OF
the claim, and by the insertion Of this clause would have
eved ourselves by the exercise of sovereign power
from the payment Of portion Of that obligation which we
would have acknowledged to be just.
The question being taken by yeas and nays on the amend
ment of Mr.. RUsK, resulted as follows: .r.
YEAS-Messrs Atchison, Benton, Borland Butler, Cass,
Chase Davis of Mississippi Dickinson Dodge OF Wisconsin,
JONES' King Norris Rhe Rusk, soule, Turney, Walker,
Whitcomb, and Ynlee-25. .
NAYS-Messrs Badger. Baldwin, Bell, Berren, Bradbu-
ry Clarke Clay Davis of Massachusetts, Dawson, Dayton,
Downs, Ewing, Foote Green Hale Hamn, Mangum, Mil
ler Morton Pearce Phelps Pratt Seward Smith, Spruance,
Sturgeon, Underwood, Upham, Wales, and Wnthrop-so
So the amendment was not agreed to.
Nourher amendment being proposed, the bill was report
ed 10 the Senate. Y.
The question was on concurring with the amendments
made in Committee of the Whole
Mr.. BORLAND. / move that the Senate do now
adjourn. ...s.'.
The motion was rejected division Yeas "a, nays 25
Mr.. FOOTE. beg leave to make single remark.
trust the friends Of this bill will urge its passage to day
My mind made up upon the subject The discussion
which has occurred has certainly excited much doubt in my