REPORT

Upon the claims of Thomas Carr, Andrew Jackson, and others, accom panied with a "Bill for the benefit of Thomas Carr, and others."

DECEMBER, 14, 1819.

Read, and, with the Bill, committed to a Committee of the whole House to-morrow.

The Committee, to whom was referred the Petitions of Thomas Carr and John A. Heard, of the state of Georgia, Andrew Jackson, in behalf of himself and others, of the state of Tennessee, and a Memorial of the General Assembly of the state of Georgia; REPORT:

That, it appears, from the documents accompanying the petitions, that, on the 20th February, 1784, the General Assembly of the state of Georgia, for the purpose of settling the country called the Bend of the Tennessee, (at that time within the chartered limits of that state,) by a Resolution, determined that seven commissioners should be appointed, who should be vested with the powers necessary to ascertain the quantity, quality, and circumstances of the lands, in that tract of country; who should report their proceedings to the legislature, for their consideration, and which commissioners should have made to them "such compensation as should be deemed adequate and satisfactory." That, by the same Resolution, the said commissioners, or a majority of them, were empowered "to grant warrants of survey,” which should, when executed, be transmitted, with the plats, to the surveyor general's office, in order that the same might be passed into grants, as the law directs; limiting each survey and grant to one thousand acres, and requiring bond and security to be given for the purchasemoney, by those in whose names such surveys should be made.

That, on the day following, the General Assembly of Georgia proceeded to the appointment of commissioners, pursuant to said Resolution, and actually did appoint Lachlin McIntosh, William Downes, Stephen Heard, John Morell, John Donaldson, Joseph Martin, and John Sevier, esquires.

It further appears, from the documents, that John Morell refused to act, or resigned, and Thomas Napier was appointed by the executive of Georgia, in his stead; who, also, not accepting, or resign

ing, Thomas Carr was appointed, to fill his vacancy, on the first of March, 1786. It does not appear that Lachlin McIntosh, another of the commissioners, ever acted.

It also appears that, pursuant to the provisions of the constitution of Georgia, then in force, the General Assembly, on the 22d February, 1785, acting upon information contained in a letter, of that date, from Stephen Heard, one of the said commissioners, did appoint the following persons, as justices of the peace, "for the said District of Tennessee;" viz: William Blount, John Donaldson, William Downes, John Sevier, Joseph Martin, Charles Robertson, Valentine Sevier, junior, and Stephen Heard, esquires.

It further appears, that, on the 10th February, 1785, the commissioners for the district of Tennessee, exhibited an account of their proceedings to the General Assembly, which was referred to a committee, and, on the 14th day of the same month, a report was made by them, which cannot now be found.

That, on the 1st day of August following, pursuant to the recommendation of a committee, appointed for that purpose, leave was given, by the General Assembly, for the introduction of a bill, to be entitled, an "act for the laying out a district in the bend of the Tennessee;" which was introduced, and read for the first time, on the 7th of that month, and finally rejected, on its third reading, on the 12th of the same month. But, on the day of its rejection, the General Assembly adopted a Resolution, declaring, "That the title of any person, or persons, whatsoever, to any lands in the District of Tennessee, so far as the same is sanctioned, or authorised, by former Resolutions of Assembly, shall not, in any respect, be weakened, or injured, by the rejection, of this day, of the bill for laying out a district, nor shall the powers, or duty, of the commissioners who have acted on that business, be at all revoked, or impaired; but, every thing in respect to the said Tennessee district, shall stand, precisely, upon the same footing, as if the said bill, so rejected, as aforesaid, had not been brought in; and, it is further resolved, that John Linsey, esquire, stand appointed surveyor for said district of Tennessee."

Two days afterwards, (14th August, 1786,) the General Assembly adopted the following resolution: "That each of the Commissioners appointed on the Tennessee business, who have actually attended to their duty, shall be entitled to five thousand acres of land in the district, as a gratuity and full compensation for their trouble therein, and shall and may have a warrant and survey for them respectively; that John Call shall also be entitled to three thousand acres, as a compensation for his trouble, and may have a warrant of survey for the same. And it is further Resolved, That the district surveyor shall not proceed to make, or suffer to be made, any surveys in the Bend of the Tennessee until the further order of the Legislature."

Thus far the proceedings of the General Assembly of Georgia were of a date anterior to the adoption of the federal constitution, and while that state had sovereign power to act upon the subject. It appears, that, under the powers given to the commissioners under the several

resolutions of the General Assembly, they did proceed to issue, or cause to be issued and located, various warrants of survey for land, in the names of a variety of persons, from whom bonds were taken for the purchase money: the names of some of those persons are known to your committee, but of the claims of a large majority of them they know nothing. It does not appear that these "warrants of survey, when executed, with the plats," were ever "transmitted to the Surveyor General's Office," of the State of Georgia, "in order that the same might pass into grants, as the law directs," or that any grants were ever issued upon any of them, pursuant to the resolution of the 20th February, 1784, or that the purchase money was ever paid, or the bonds taken to secure its payment, ever placed in the Treasury of Georgia. Your committee, therefore, are of opinion that these warrants and surveys were all set aside, on account of some informality, or other cause; and for any claim, founded upon them, they can recommend no relief.

In relation to the claim of the petitioners, on account of the "five thousand acres," stipulated by the General Assembly of Georgia, to be given to "each of the commissioners who had actually attended to their duty as a gratuity and full compensation for their trouble,” the committee are of opinion that they are entitled to relief. They were appointed to the arduous and dangerous duty of exploring the country, and examining the quantity, quality, and circumstances of the lands therein, by the sovereign authority of the State. This they performed at the risk of their lives; and, indeed, it appears that one of them (John Donaldson) was killed by the Indians, while in the actual discharge of his duty. It was not until their return, and after they had made a report of their proceedings, that the compensation was promised them: that it was binding upon the State of Georgia, both in justice and equity, there can be no doubt. Whether this obligation has been transferred to the United States, remains to be seen.

Your committee think proper to observé, that, by the act of the General Assembly of Georgia, called the Yazoo act, this claim of the commissioners was expressly recognized, and the amount encreased to fity thousand acres, (as will appear by the 15th section of that act, an extract from which accompanies the petitions,) and a reserve for that quantity was made in the grant to the Tennessee Company in their favor. The claim does not appear to be otherwise connected with that nefarious transaction; on the contrary, the services were performed, and the justice of the claim admitted, eight or nine years before that speculation was originated. Believing in the propriety of the repeal of that act, your committee cannot recommend relief for the fifty thousand acres therein reserved for them-more especially as the claim is founded on an entire different, and infinitely more just consideration, unattended, so far as your committee can discover, with any fraudulent circumstances.

By the articles of agreement and cession, between the United States and the state of Georgia, made on the 24th of April, 1802, the very territory or tract of country, ("the District of Tennessee,") in which

was to be situate the five thousand acres, promised to each of the commissioners, was ceded to the United States. This "gratuity or compensation," had never been passed into a grant, so far as your committee can discover, by the state of Georgia, and are not among those grants expressly recognized, by the said articles. The question then is, can this claim fall within the provisions of the third condition of the first of those articles? The proviso is as follows: "that the United States, for the period, and until the end of one year, after the assent of Georgia to the boundary established by this agreement shall have been declared, may, in such manner, as not to interfere with the above mentioned payment to the state of Georgia, nor with the grants herein before recognized, dispose of or appropriate a portion of said lands, not exceeding five millions of acres, or the proceeds of said five millions of acres, or of any part thereof, for the purpose of satisfying, quieting, or compensating for, any claims, other than those herein before recognized, which may be made to the said lands, or to any part thereof. It being fully understood, that, if an act of Congress making such disposition or appropriation, shall not be passed into a law, within the above mentioned period of one year, the United States shall not be at liberty thereafter to cede any part of the said lands on account of claims, which may be laid to the same, other than those recognized by the preceding condition, nor to compensate for the same: and in case of any such cession or compensation, the present cession of Georgia to the right of soil over the lands thus ceded, or compensated for, shall be considered as null and void; and the lands thus ceded or compensated for, shall revert to the state of Georgia."

Within the year after the execution of these articles of agreement and cession, an act of Congress was passed, (3d of March, 1803) declaring, that, "so much of the residue of the said five millions of acres, or of the net proceeds thereof, as may be necessary for that purpose, shall be, and is hereby, appropriated for the purpose of satisfying, quieting, or compensating for, such other claims to the lands. of the United States south of the state of Tennessee, not recognized in the abové mentioned articles of agreement, and which are derived from any act, or pretended act, of the state of Georgia, which Congress may hereafter think fit to provide for, &c. To this section there is a proviso, that no other claims shall be embraced by the appropriation, but those the evidence of which shall have been exhibited to the Secretary of State, and recorded, on or before the 1st January,

1804.

Your committee are of opinion that the claims of the petitioners are, and in justice ought to be, embraced within the provisions of the above quoted parts of the articles of cession, and the act of Congress consequent thereon. Although these provisions may have been intended for a particular class of claimants, yet the case of the petitioners clearly falls within them. Their claims are derived from a bona fide and unsuspected act or resolution of the legislature of Georgia, made in their favor, for services rendered under the authority of the

State; and for which, at the time of their appointment, an "adequate and satisfactory compensation" was promised. The five thousand acres, allowed to each, as a gratuity, or compensation for their services, was to be located in the district of Tennessee. The whole or a part of the lands so promised, were actually those measured and surveyed for the commissioners, as appears from the documents. This district of country was, by the articles of cession before referred to, ceded to the United States, and it was agreed, in one of the conditions of these articles, that the United States might appropriate a portion of the lands ceded, not exceeding five millions of acres, "for the purpose of satisfying, quieting, or compensating for, any other claims" than those therein before recognized, (among which the claims of the petitioners are not embraced,) which might be made to the said lands or any part thereof. And that, pursuant to the proviso contained in this condition, the Congress of the United States, by an act passed within the time limited, did appropriate the five millions of acres, for the purpose of satisfying, quieting, or compensating for, such other claims, as might be derived from "any act or pretended act of the State of Georgia," and which Congress might think fit thereafter to provide for.

It is true, that the evidence of all, or some part of these claims, (consisting in the resolutions of the General Assembly of Georgia) were not exhibited and recorded in the office of the Secretary of State, pursuant to the proviso of the 8th section of the act of Congress, before recited, (of 3d of March, 1804,) and within the time therein prescribed. For such of them as claimed under the resolutions of the General Assembly of Georgia, and not under the Yazoo act, it was scarcely necessary, as they could exhibit little else than a transcript of the resolutions, and perhaps a warrant and survey, founded thereon, in some of the cases. Your committee are of opinion, that this omission does not, and ought not to affect the justice of these claims, more especially when it is considered, that the strictness of the proviso was waived, and the time extended, in favor of claims of an infinitely more doubtful character, as will be seen by an act of Congress of the 23d of January, 1815. (4 vol. L. U. S. p. 776.)

That the claims are viewed as just, and coming within the provisions of the articles of cession, by the state of Georgia, is amply testified by the memorial of the legislature of that state, referred to your committee, requesting that the claims of the petitioners may be satisfied and paid, by the United States, (see No. 31, of the reports of last session of Congress.)

It also appears, from the evidence exhibited before the committee, that the commissioners who acted, expended large sums of their own private funds, in bearing their expences while thus employed, and in quieting the Indians, resident in that neighborhood.

It also appears, that six only of the commissioners ever "actually attended to their duty," viz. John Donaldson, Thomas Carr, Stephen Heard, John Sevier, William Downes, and Joseph Martin; all of whom are now dead, except Thomas Carr.