Part 267

FISK, JAMES, Representative from Vermont, 377, 493, 612; on laying a duty on imported slaves, 387; on a plurality of offices in the same person, 466; on the appropriation to build gunboats, 517; on excluding settlers from the public lands, 545; on fortifications and gunboats, 631; on suspension of the embargo act, 687; on inquiry into the conduct of Judge Innes, 708.

Flag of the United States.--See Index, vol. 1.

Florida, purchase of, motion to refer to a select committee, 353; confidential message from the House, 353; bill relative to, amendment of, 353; third reading of bill in Senate, 354; motion to postpone, 354; amendments offered, 354; passage of the bill in the Senate, 355; note, 355.

Foreign Ministers, in Senate, bill to prevent the abuse of the privileges and immunities of, considered, 364; two points of view to be considered, 364; one, as the provisions of the bill relate to the law of nations--the other, as they regard the Constitution of the United States, 364; privileges under the law of nations, 364; no citizen of a republic enjoys such a privilege, 364; writers have assigned various reasons for this phenomenon in politics and morals, 364; this arises from the nature of their office and duties, 365; experience shows the necessity of erecting some barrier against the abuse of these privileges, 365; the provisions of the bill considered in detail, 366; treatment in case of heinous offences, 366; do. of offences against the Government, 366; relations which the bill bears to the Constitution of the United States, 366; circumstances in which the bill originated described, 367; by the passage of the bill we may prevent the spread of an evil which threatens the dearest interests of the nation, 368; bill ordered to third reading, 369; various amendments proposed and carried, 369; bill lost, 369.

FOWLER, JOHN, Representative from Kentucky, 50, 383, 497. See Index, vol. 2.

France, relations with, during John Adams’ Administration. See Index, vol. 2.

Franking Privilege.--See Index, vols. 1 and 2, Post Office bill.

FRANKLIN, JESSE, Senator from North Carolina, 3, 163, 547; elected President pro tem. of Senate, 44. See Index, vols. 1 and 2.

FRANKLIN, MESHACK, Representative from North Carolina, 613.

Freedom of conscience.--See Index, vol. 1.

French Refugees.--See Index, vol. 1.

French Spoliations bill, relative to, 380.

French Spoliations.--See Index, vol. 2.

Frontiers, protection of.--See Index, vol. 1.

Fugitives from Justice.--See Index, vol 1.

GAILLARD, JOHN, Senator from South Carolina, 167; note, 167, 345, 485, 550.

Galliopolis, petition of the inhabitants of, 353.

GAMBLE, ROBERT, his testimony for the defence on the trial of Judge Chase, 224.

GANNT, Rev. Dr., Chaplain of Senate, 4, 348. See Index, vol. 2.

GARDENIER, BARENT, Representative from New York, 612; on building gunboats, 627; on fortifications and gunboats, 629; on inquiry into the conduct of General Wilkinson, 645.

GARDNER, FRANCIS, Representative from New Hampshire, 612.

GARNETT, JAMES M., Representative from Virginia, 377, 493, 613.

General welfare clause examined.--See Index, vol. 1.

Georgia, vote for President, 168.

Georgia Land Claim.--Resolutions in the House relative thereto offered, 142; referred, 142; bill relative to considered, 148; desirable to take the sense of the committee in the first instance on the resolutions, 148; not our duty to give an opinion, whether the Legislature of Georgia acted wickedly or uprightly, 149; no opinion required from us, 149; the committee should have stated whether the facts in the resolutions are erroneous or not, 149; certain of the claims are not recognized, either by the State or the United States--let gentlemen prove it if they can, 149; no pledge has been given, or it can be proved, 149; the recognition of these claims is equally a violation of the rights of the State of Georgia, with a rejection of them, 150; the resolutions examined in detail, 150; further statement of facts, 151; moved to postpone the resolutions to the next session, 153; the principles of the resolutions are not abstract, 153; when we are called to compromise claims, can we not determine whether they are founded in justice or not? 153; it is necessary to determine the validity of the act of 1795, in order to decide the justice of compromising claims under it, 152; point upon which the decision must turn, 153; comparison of the facts with the resolutions, 153; evident the claims under the acts of Georgia have no validity, 154; a stain on our character to grant compensation for their pretended losses to any of those adventurers who made the spurious contract with Georgia in the year 1795, for the purchase of her western territory, 154; sources of information that led to this conclusion, 155; the Yazoo contract, how obtained, 155; reception of the law of 1795 by the people of Georgia, 155; vote on the postponement of the resolutions taken separately, 156; carried on final vote, 157; note, 157; report of committee for appointment of commissioners considered, 315; report confined to statement of facts, 316; is a summary of all, 316; report considered in the House, 316; amendment proposed limiting the resolution to a particular class of claims, 316; claim of the New England Mississippi Land Company, whom it is proposed to debar from any benefit of the five million acres, reserved in the compact with Georgia to satisfy any claims not specially provided for in that contract, 317; case of the Connecticut Reserve, 318; further objections to the measure, 319; note, 319; various questions proposed and examined, 320; did the State of Georgia in 1795 possess a title to the territory in question? 320; were the Legislature of Georgia in 1795 invested with power to sell the territory, &c.? 320; can a legislature rescind a contract made by its predecessors? 321; can the judicial power declare a legislative act void, as having been passed by means of corruption? 321; were the claims of the present claimants recognized by the act of cession, &c.? 321; the equity of the claims, and the policy of compromise, 322; the acts of fraud, 323; the four land companies, 323; wrong sufficient to invalidate the contract, 323; present applicants innocent holders, 323; the question is, whether we are to do a good or an injury to a class of men denounced as a band of speculators, 324; effects of the amendment proposed, 324; had the claimants, at the time of their purchase, or not, a knowledge of the fraud? 326; the arguments urged are not intended to influence the judgment of the House, but to control the public mind by an avowed appeal to the people, 326; silence and concert of unprincipled men, 326; Message of the President in February, 1795, considered, 327; title of Georgia doubtful, 327; lands sold by Georgians to citizens of Massachusetts, at Boston, 327; the bargain and sale fair and legal, 328; amount of land sold, 328; the law of Congress taking possession of the government of the territory, 328; conditions on which Georgia surrendered her right of soil, 329; question of title given up, question turns on expediency, 329; equitable considerations urged, 329; observations on the various objections urged, 330; manner of selling the land in the Eastern States, 331; story of the distressed female applying to the Magdalen Hospital, 332.

Present claimants no right in law or equity to the lands in question, and policy does not demand the interference of the national Legislature, 336; Matthew Lyon explains his share in the contracts, 336; note, 337; how could Georgia have a pre-emption title to the lands while the Indian title still existed? 337; notoriety of the fraud is evidence that the present claimants are not innocent purchasers, 337; resolution agreed to, 337; note, 338.

Georgia Limits, in House, report on memorial of the Legislature of Georgia, 403; report deferred, 404.

Militia Claims.--Report of the committee, in the House, on claims against a petition for pay as militiamen, called out in the State of Georgia for protection of that State against the Indians, considered, 125; they were called out under the authority of the Government of the United States, which is bound to compensate them, 125; petitioners must look for compensation to the State of Georgia, which has agreed to receive a certain sum in full of all demands for military service, 125; note, 125; interpretation of the articles of cession, 125; statement of facts, 126; committee assume the principle that the State was bound in the first instance to pay the soldiery, notwithstanding the ulterior responsibility of the General Government, 126; reasoning to sustain this principle examined, 126; the troops were called out in all cases by the State Executives, on instructions from the General Government, 126; two modes marked out in the constitution in which the militia may be called into service, 127; when a service is performed, the party for whom it is performed is the only one responsible for the compensation, 127; a distinction taken between the situation of troops called into the field by order of General Government, and those called by State Executives on the authority of the former, 127; this proves nothing in the present case, 127; has the right of peace and war been yielded to the General Government, and yet the States bound to compensate for war services, 128; the simple question considered by the committee was, whether compensation had or had not been rendered for those services, 128; this depended upon the decision of another question, whether the State of Georgia was in the first instance liable for these claims, 128; two ways by which the militia of a State may be called out by the Executive of the United States, 128; what are the facts in this case? 128; what is the nature of the compromise made in the case, 128.