National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1873-01-24

Tue Court said, In sharnnan VI. Bell and others,
M unS se1T Sy & wers y. tns msI ~ aa m
petent knowledge, as We must presume gentle
man At the bar 70 be, and there Is n0t auy ques-
tlon reserved by him, the Court WIN uot open the
award, unless something can be alleged, aniOnnt
ing to q peryerse mlsconstruction OF the law, Or
misconduct on the part Of the arbltrators.n
A Judge OF the Supreme Court Of the United
states raid, in Klene VI. Catara, 2 GalllsOn, 81,
that referees are not bound by dry principles Of
law, hut may awatl according TO equity and con
scicnce' and that general award Is conclusive,
both as to the law and facts, unless there be
In Burcheli VS.. Marsh, II Toward, 3II, four
supreme Court said, that " an award be within
the submission, and contain the honest decision
OF the arbitrators, after full and fair hearing
court Of equity will not set Il aside, for errur IN
law or fact What does the solicitor now alleke,
but error in fact The award here was pSe-
cisey within the submission Was not tne IeSl, -,
Senate was dishonest7 There was full aud &
fair hearing. The United States asked for no
longer tiuie, nor for further, or fuller hearing
or In equity, TO disclose tie grounds on which
they made their award. Kingston Isl Kincald,
Wash, c. {, Rep, 4ls.l Nor Will courts enter
referee.-tHurst VS.. Hurst, ID, 90.
And, as to treaties, II Is said by vattel, that
Treaties are no better than empty words II
nations S DO not consider them as snSasGmsnts to
observed throughout the whole earth 'fIf we
might reccdc," he says, "frCm q treaty because
we mud ourselves injured by u, there would be
no stability In the contracts Of nations. --book
H., On. XVI, u 9io, 1853.
treaties with tribes Of our people are as much
part OF the supreme law Of the United states as
treaties with foreign nations are. They are
equally as binding, also, on the conscience Of the
nation. Indeed, they are more so, for you are
strong AMI We are weak; we are under your pro-
Dictated wi what S we S should % sIsn a Your ronstituo %
ton forbids your States to enact laws lmpairing
the obligation Of contracts, because such ldw1
are immoral dlshonest and wicked. VIII YOU
take the advice Of the Solicitor Of the Treasury,
and do what your Constitution brands as dlsrep-
utable and Indecent, In the CommOnwealthS that
compose tho nation7 God fOrbll
No one can help knowing that II the ChOctaw
people could sue upon this award In q court Of
Justice II could not be lnpeached. In the face Of
the treaty stpulatlons that II should be nnal, and
an adjudication, no court would permit the mat
ters raised by the solicitor tobe discussed at all.
II would not be allowed even between indlyld-
uas. II Is still less permissible between states,
even eve y one be feeble an and dependent When
functions OF arbitrator. II was not, sup
posed TO be necessary to guard against cor
ruptlOn or injustice. The body was too
less, for the possibility OF either TO he admitted
Therefore II was declared that the award should
be nnal, without any reservation, and the Sen.
ate, party TO that agreement tOuk upon itsell
the duty.
The idea that when a man obtains judgment
against another, before tribunal whose dcci.
siOns the supreme law declares shall be final and
all the facts arc before u, or the losing party
could have had them before H., the winner can
be again made to discuss them, when the court
was compelled to pass upon them In adiudicatins
the case, Is simply preposterous.
ThS Choctaw peopie could suppress none a
these matters. They were all Of public record
not In their custody. i must be presumed that
they were known to the committee, and that
where they do not sustain the award there wa,
| other evidence. That presumption obtains Ia
favor. OF the pitlfullpst court, and one cannot
evidence H Il IfT Il i % merely &c T gooSorsi"c SSr TefS
there is no new evidence. II a1l existed before
and was all In youv possession.
It would have been final. We should never hav,
hcCn permitted TO impeaCh II on any ground
The ChOctAw people would not have attemptC'
II. Having agreed that II should be 1nal thoJ
would have abided by II. The United Btatei
would hnyO listened with silent Indifference Il
! any attempt On our part 10 open the matte
again; and Il Is not permitted among honest met
| that one shall be bound by bargain hetWeei
two and the other be loose. A nation would no
/ relish the imputAtlOn that II resOTted 10 mentA
reservation, and played game at which II nigh
win aud meant not to lose.
| When the Solicitor Of the Treasury advise
you to regard the "release" OF which he speaks
made before the treaty, and Of course rellqnishet
by Il and tho award, as still binding, he seek
| to put the United States In the OdOus atti
! tude OF one seeking to have, by new fraud, thl
unconscientious advantage obtained by harl
! bargain with those at It's mercy, and which To-
| very shame II had not consented to rely on o.
| proft by.
The advice Is idle. II the settlement OF an ac
count Is the consideration for q release, and IN,
| settlement can he successfully impeaChed, tlfl
release has no operation In equity. KELSEY VS.
| Hobby, 10 Peters, 2Gg. And no release or receip
| Is worth farthing, when II Is eNaCted In full
| upon payment OF part. II II good only for thu
/ amount actually paid.
| This II especially the case In transactions lie
| tween guardians or tutors and cuTatOrs ant
! their wards, and In regard to receipts and re
| leases by heirs. Such transactions are declare,
| 10 be against conscience aud hard bargains,
and In the case OF seamen a release under sea
will have no eject In court of admiralty be
yond the actual consideration fairly paid.
an act not nt TO be done. Those In whose charg,
| the honor OF great nation Is should be exceed
| l lgly careful not to permit such eNactlons frOn
those who are the dependents and under tn
| protection vi the nation. They are wrong upOi
| their face.
They are alwavs wrong In fact, and, ~ one o
! your conrt1 SAID gn whitney vs. Eager, CraDbe
4EED ~ feAaru 10 release efhcied from sailor
"huch condition should be regarde1 as an NJ
tempt - impose upon, anu as betrayina con
sclOusheSs o. wrong ana uesite 10 get fid OF !
| IN that way
Inc solicitor ci tue treasury more than Ohci
| spchks OF lhc large amount o. tho clam OF tht
Shoctaw people, AMI IN alludlng to what passct
seems inclined 70 iIlpule 70 the chairman OF III
committee on lhllah Anairs Intentional nlisren
tesentallOn as 70 inc amount. Tue simple unll
! IL, that no one was aware how good specula
| ion the United states had made out OF the lands
or Ol lne amount per acre iOr Mhlch they ma