The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1852-02-07

me what answer you make TO him Ii seems TO
me una. you would have 10 TO Ballinger, you must
put upon tne same oong all the others BEEN
Now, this Erwin, without paying acent 10 Ballinger,
asks The government TO do do Tor him what by its exs
auon would be obliged TO do for Balnger ii he were
here. can no obligation TO do that except upon
ms ground he says he has occupied this ground until
by the laws OF Louisiana he could set up tIe bv nre
scrpon against Balnger; and he asks you 10 put
Balnge out entirely and let him occupy the same rela
non TO Bastrop as Balinger would occupy if he were
here Now II does not seem TO me to be exactly Just to
lei man come IN and make out title to this land when
he himself acknowledges that he never paid single cent
to anybody for IT. but merely intended to do and set
up a tiile by prescription against man whom be
knowledges he would be willing to buy from. Under
this view OF the case, would be willing to say 10 this
gentleman, Take your head right" as we call il in
Kentucky-your preemption right you say here-take
your 100 of land and pay for IT, your neighbors
have done. therefore think we ought reject this
Mr., HALE was upon the committee who reported
this bill and think explain satisfactorily to the
simple one The Senate understands that this Bastrop
claim was in dispute, but has been decided 10 be in
valid This Balnger purchased under the Bastrop title.
and this Erwin went the land under Banger intend
ing TO purchase his title. He has been upon the land
more than twenty. three years and Ballinger has gone
Bose here he would BE- ensd 10
but he is not here. Now, the difficulty which the senator
from Kentucky [Mr; UMpERwooDl suggests does not
in this al ALL We do not interfere with Bal
ingers title at all it will stand just exactly the
after the bill has passed does All that the bill
does is TO say that the United States will not in
third party beween this old settler who has been upon the
land than twenty three years, and Balnger We
would not interfere with Baingers title The old man
has good title, If do not disturb it and all say
this bill s If you have good title, keep il; will keep
hands off. That is all the bill says; and it seems TO
that in this view OF the the Senate must pass this
Mr. DAWSON / would inquire if BaIlinger pur-
chased GAO acres from Bastrop'
Mr. DOWNS. think he did. 1t SO stated stated in
Mr.. HALE. Ballinger purchased more than that
The bill was then reported TO the Senate without
amendment, and, upon advison, ordered TO be en-
crossed for the third readng-ayes 90, counted
IRWIN.
Mr. JAMES. | will throw myself upon the indul-
gence of the Senate and ask that they will take up bill
case u and fr trust there will BE- no objection % 10 it.
Several SENATORS. Agreed; agreed.
The question being then taken, the prior orders were
then proceeded to consider Senate bill 17l-beng bill
for the relief Of Jane Irwin" ]" which was read
Mr. PEARGE aAS called for the reading of the report
will state the facts of the
Mr. BUTLER, Tin his seat) Were the committee
unanimous in their report
Mr.. COOPER. They were last year.
Mr.. BUTLER. Let the bill go on; there will be no
objection to it
the Georgia line OF our army who performed very Rerito
rious services during the revolutionary war. He was in
After the close OF the he removed to the frontiers,
and there engaged in the Indian not only per-
forming service soldier but was also eminently
full procuring subsistence for the troops in that out-of
the way country He lost very large amount OF property
and has received dollar from the government by
way of compensation for his services or losses The
present applicant the only surviving child of General
John lrwn--the person | have referred to-who was
afterwards for several successive terms the governor of
the State. II there mertorious claim before
the Senate, this is
The report was then read.
The bill then ordered TO be engrossed for third
reading.
EXECUTORS WARRINGTON.
The Senate then proceeded, in committee OF the
whole, 10 the consideration OF the bill Is 3s) for the
lief OF M. X. Warrington and c. St. j. Chubb, execu
tors OF Captain Lewis Warrington.
Mr.. BRADBURY asked for the reading of the report
The report was accordingly read
Mr.. BRADBURY. believe that very considerable
before the Senate three years ago, OF having
ined the question The facts not very fresh in my
recollection at this ,me but believe the application for
relief upon the part Of Commodore Warrington and his
associates has been OF somewhat recent date
Mr.. BADGER. Tin his seat) 1t has, sir.
M m bs n Ihhk IS remarkable that hs
cargo and very considerable amount of specie
Mr.. BADGER. Mr.. President, if the gentleman
the which he will find upon examination TO be sim
ply this: In April 1914, Commodore Warrington, then
IN command Of the American ship Peacock sloop.ot-
war OF Is guns, attacked and captured the British sloopof
war Epevier also OF IS guns. She was sent into the
port OF Savannah, in Georgia, capture for
demnaton. She was condemned in that court and the
decree OF the directed the whole amount OF the
capture TO be paid TO the capors Of the prize The hon
orable senator shakes his head IL is very easy to do
that But if he will read the papers, he will find that is
soas have stated The decree of the court required the
money be paid 10 the captors, and cent of
to be paid to the United States Commodore War
rngon did not quit his cruise to come home and attend
his pecunary interests, but continued prosecute his
cruise against the enemies OF his country, and
quently was not here at the time the decree was
made and the time the payment was due under the de-
of the marshal OF the district OF Georgia. whose
duty II to pay the money to those TO whom il was
awarded by the courtto the captors But instead oil
doing that, he paid one-ha OF the money to the prize
agent and the other half he paid into the treasury OF the
United States. That the state OF the facts with re-
gard TO IT, The ships were OF equal forces This 10
proved in the first place, by the Decree directing the
money be paid the captors because, the captured
vessel had been inferior in force would have been the
duy of the decree award the moety to the United
States Ii is proved by the fact that the vessels
is proved by the fact that the Secretary Of the Interior
at that time negotiated with Com. Warrington for the
purchase OF the captured soop for the navy OF the United
States being the sole property OF the captors II
proved by the fact that in the Naval Register, after the
ship became ours, she is rated sloopof- OF IS
guns is the Peacock which captured her These sir,
are the facts OF the case.
Under the law il perfectly clear that the captos
entitled TO all the money. But have said that would
give the honorable senator Mr. BRADBuRY explana-
ton OF how happened that this claim was not pre-
sented for great many years Mr. Presidenl lake
pleasure in doing this because the gallant ofhcer and
made at The last session of Congress- and who il
no more, exhibited in relation TO that whole trans
action an honorable decacy and proprety OF deport-
ment which added an additional value to the character