Newspaper Page Text
SATURDAY, April 4, 179.5.
THE AUGUSTA CHRONICLE
AND
GAZETTE of the STATE.
FREEDOM of the PRESS and TRIAL by JURY shall remain inviolate. Confitution of Georgia,
AUGUSTA: Printed by JOHN E. SMITH, Printer to the State,- Essays, Articles of Intelligence, Advcr
tifements, &c. will be gratefully received , and every kind of Printing performed. [Price 1 hree Dollars per annum. J
Mr. Smith,
By inferring the following you will very much
oblige MODERATOR.
To the FREEMEN of the STATE of GEORGIA.
IF the Citizen and his co-adjutors in conducing
the opposition to the late sales of weftern terri
tory, were themselves fully convinced of the ju
. ftice and propriety of an interference by the Con
vention,—or, rather, were they not absolutely
certain that such a measure would be improper, il
legal and unconstitutional, they would not have
deemed it necessary to rouse and inflame the minds
of the people by publications, remonstrances, m-
Bruftions, extrafls, votes, &c. &c.if the Con
vention are adequate to such an undertaking, they
ought at leaf! to be adequate to the difeovery,
without the aids of foreign information ; but the
chef d’ oeuvre of these publications, the grand re
monflrance, will be denied as conveying informa
tion, (which is of course, insult,) and be pronounc
ed to contain only the sentiments of those who
fubferibe it:—that so many people, as is reported
to have signed, or as is presumed, will sign, thole
printed remonstrances which are now very indu-
Brioufly circulating, should think so exaftly alike,
and that the very fame words {hould echo thro
every county in the state, we shall pass over as cir
cumstances of mere quibble; and after asserting as
a fcft, that they are not the sentiments even ot all
the fubferibers, in as much as some of them have
declared that they ‘ put their names to help the bu
siness along as it might tend to bring such of the
• members as were concerned to an account, which
■« was all they believed any body wanted’; —after
asserting this, I shall proceed to investigate the
principles held forth in the Citizen’s exordium, and
in the mechanical remonjlranee q? the fubjeft may
present itfelf.
The Citizen firft observes that “ among the ma
u ny public arts which a free people may do none
« are more important than that of correcting the
« aCts of their servants, ”~he has certainly forgot
himfelf, when he advanced this position: Tyrants
assumed the power of corretting the public or their
own fervants,—but in a free government, a judicial
tribunal only has this province afligned it; there
fore this right muji not be admitted by any of the
citizens of the fate , because it is essential that such
right ought not toexift, but where the people have
• already placed it. “ Afts” he continues “ done
u by the legislature for the private benefit of its
« members,” “ are unconstitutional.” Upon this
ground the legal inference, and that drawn by
common sense would be, that so much only of the
•territory as might be held in this predicament
could be considered as being affeCted. I have no
particular encomiums to pay the late Legislature, I
think they very much resemble all the former and
all the other legislatures in the univerfe,—and they
have all bargained and fold, and will, to the end
of the chapter: this much, however, is understood,
that if any member of either branch have any in
sert in any of the purchases, it is upon the fame
terms of payment as others in the refpeCtive com
panies,—one exception, is generally admitted in
the person of Roberds Thomas who, it is said,
would hold on no other tenure, but,/ree gratis for
nothing at all: and, now-my fellow citizen: ! can
you credit it, this very Roberds T homas is to be
offered a te-inftatement in his former residence in
this state, and a full oblivion of his infamy, on the
proviso, that he will become State’s evidence , and
confefs his own iniquity, and that of all others in
this said territorial business, —I do not fay the offe
rer is equal to his promise ! but how can men re
probate undue influence in any stage, who would
exercise it in this manner ? what is criminal on one
fide, mav, by the magic of party, become virtu
ous on the other! “The people” he proceeds
« jpoy declare a legislative act a violation of their
t* rights, and they will make void a grant of the
GEORGIA.
« legislature where they give and grant public
“ property or public money to themfelves;”—
could it be difeovered who they are who would
thus make void a grant, &c. one could hazard some
definite reply; if, the people are meant, their pre
vious declaration of violation would have been
quite unneceffary ;—if the legislature, it would ap
pear that no other, but that particular one which
made the felf-appropriations could invalidate them,
and this can hardly be counted upon; but, whoever
of them it may be, is not worthy of investigation;
for the people of the United States of America
have in their magna charta said, No flatt shall pass
any ex pojl fatto law, or law impairing the obliga
tion of contrails ; but to this is opposed the doCt
rine contained in the 7th SeCtion ot the remon
strance, that an all obtained by fraud, collusion and
corruption muji be in law and equity, null and void :
I flatly deny any modification of these premises,
where the operation is ex pojl fatto, not at all rett
ing on the incontrovertible authority of the Fede
ral Constitution immediately before quoted, but
on the policy, expediency, propriety and justice of
the principle;—the great end of all government
being the certainty of existing regulations, and the [
main objcCt of good government beirg the security
of person and property, how can the one or the
other exist whenever retrofpettive laws are enabl
ed ; and, this may perhaps be better illustrated by
anticipating the very measures in question than by
any pther supposed case which can present itfelf;
for, granting that all the abuse which disappoint
ment or intrigue can bestow on the sales of weftern
territory, were more than merited, would this be
I any fecuriry again!! the annihilation of a grant of
i land to any individual having incurred the displea
sure of a few demagogues who could procure a
majority in a legislature to change the property in
to any channel which their rancour or avarice
might fugged,--nor would reasons, as powerful as
fraud, collusion and corruption ever be a wanting to
; found the procedure upon, if once the precedent
was set; besides what line of conduct can any one
J adopt, by which he will be fafe, either in his per
! son or property, if ex pojl fatto laws were counte
nanced, for that which is a duty and obligation to
day, might be a hanging-matter to-morrow, and
property obtained upon the most legal tenures at
one period might be declared the rewards of pub
lic perfidy at another; and, with refpeft to Geor
gia, this system would be very unfortunate, for, it
is known, that those laws which are most essential
to the welfare of society have generally been pro
duced by th t quid pro quo powers of.negociation
and accommodation; reduced to this scale, we
should indeed be under the neceflity of recurring
to the exercise of those original powers which have
already had their proper operation in the United
States of America, but are too ponderous for the
petty reformation of Yazou speculations.
The Citizen has pronounced on general and na
tural systems with as much ease and certainty as it
he had grasped them by intuition, and had a regu
lar deputation from Puffendorf, Vattel and lom
Paine to consolidate their doCtrines and establish
an unerring standard of political right and wrong.
He has chalked out the exaft traft of declaratory
process, and played the State lay lor to a miracle
by exhibiting an appeal made up into a furtout to
clothe the Convention with the necessary powers:
notwithstanding all this, the people at»d even the
Convention may be so obstinate, as not perfeftl} to
coincide in all the measures marked our by the
Citizen, but deem it necessary to exercise their
own judgment and reflexion in some degree.
The firft cause of remonstrance is, “ that the re
(t tained sovereignty and jurifcliCtion ot the foil of
a the said state are attempted to be transferred
« and alienated-now, what are the sovereign
ty and jurifdi&on of the foil ? would every fub
feriber give his own idea of these, we may venture
ro affirm they weald net all perfectly correspond;
but it is not to avail of the inconsistency of these
kind of cut and dry remonstrances prepared by the
labours of a few for the lignatures of the many that
I make this observation, it is to investigate the na
ture of this said “ sovereignty and jurifdi&ion of
foilfovereignty being the chief power—in mo
narchies is exercised by a king, in republics by the
people, and how it can be connected with foil, I
cannot comprehend, or how it can exist with refpeft
to a territory which is not inhabited I think will
puzzle the casuists to explain ; as to “ jurisdiction
of foil” it were absurd to fay any thing on that
fcorebut with refpedt to the imaginary furred
der of these supposed rights, it may only be re
marked that the grants for the weftern territory
are ptecifely on the fame tenure as all other state
grants are, rejlrittions excepted, and therefore it
the fovexeignty and jurifdißion of the foil are not
surrendered in the latter, they have all theexiftence
they ever had in the former. * The condufion
drawn in the second article, from the reftriftive
clause is somewhat curious-—* that there would be
« no plea, upon any national principles for any
/ * declaration of infractions by any purchasing pow-
I < er’—whatever defeription of men might buy this
territory they could not dream of settlement under
any laws or regulations but these of the United
States and of the state of Georgia; and should any
other be attempted to be established within the li
mits of the said state, there would exist more than
a plea for a declaration of infractions , there would
be fufficient cause for coercion and an absolute re
verter. • The laying off of counties previous to a
* disposal of territory’ is a strange perversion of the
Constitution, in as much as the power of making
counties more rationally follows a pre-difpofition
of territory than to lay off counties and fell them
afterwards,—it is at best an objection in name and
not in substance. As to the reasoning in the 4th
article with refpeCl to the best mode of settlement,
I will not controvert the position refpefting adtual
settlers, altho’ there might be perhaps an equally
advantageous and different modification; but I
will add, that fctiUment being the principle upon
which the purchases can become the most valuable,
I can nevei suppose that objeCl would be left out
of view by the persons interested. The very im
portant objection refpefting the mortgage is easily
answered “the foreclofure of a mortgage” and
* litigated decisions concerning real property’ be
ing widely different.
And now, with refpeft to the boasted preference
which it is said the largest nominal offer ought to
ha-e had; let us confider it difpaflionately fora
moment; estimating the bills of exchange as spe
cie, and considering the vast disproportion of de
pofic and conditional forfeiture, in that very point
of view, which the enemies to the present i urchafe
with it to be placed in, viz. as a very trifling dif
ference, nay, let it be supposed—none at all j
what were the motives of these men who offered
the largest furn to make their period of payment,
not at, or previous to the meeting of the next
General Assembly, but, in the month of December,
full thirty days after the convening of the legifla
ture?—or, let us divest them of all motive (a very
falfe compliment!) and contemplate the simple pre
dicament in which they would have flood:—had
they failed in their resources, or had they not
been able to effect a good market; would they
have fat down contended with their disappoint
ment, made no representation for the recovery of
their forfeiture—a&ed no better terms of payment
propofed no convenient liquidation of the deb»,
or would the members have been told, to give them
proper ideas of patriotiftn and disinterestedness,
that no one in either branch could participate, di«
reftly or indirectly, of the benefits which might
result from new arrangements ? No, my fellow
citizens, fueh conclusions were infuiting the un
dei(landings, the feelings and that knowledge of
the world which the conductors of the oppofiticn
[Vcl. IX. No. 443 • j