Charles Sumner: his complete works, volume 11 (of 20)Sumner, Charles
History
Charles Sumner: his complete works, volume 11 (of 20)
Sumner, Charles
Slavery -- United States; Speeches, addresses, etc., American
Before proceeding to consider the nature of existing obligations on
the part of the United States, the Committee ask attention to three
objections which they encounter on the threshold: the first, founded
on the alleged antiquity of the original claims; the second, on the
alleged character of the actual possessors; and the third, on the
present condition of the country.
I.--CLAIMS ANCIENT, BUT NOT STALE.
It is said that the claims are ancient and stale, and therefore not
to be entertained. It is true that the claims are the most ancient
of any now pending, and that they date from the very origin of our
existence as a nation. But in this respect they do not differ from
a Revolutionary pension or a Revolutionary claim. Down to this day
there is a standing committee of the Senate, entitled “Committee on
Revolutionary Claims”; but if a claim traced to the Revolution must be
rejected for staleness, there can be little use for this committee. If
these claims, after uninterrupted sleep throughout the long intervening
period, were now for the first time revived, they might be obnoxious to
this imputation. But, as from the beginning of the century they have
occupied the attention of Congress, and been sustained by speeches,
reports, and votes, it is impossible to say that they have been allowed
to sleep.
The whole case was stated with admirable succinctness, as long ago as
1807, by Mr. Marion, of South Carolina, in the report of a committee of
the House of Representatives.
“From a mature consideration of the subject, and from the
best judgment your Committee have been able to form on the
case, _they are of opinion that this Government_, by expunging
the second article of our Convention with France of the 30th
September, 1800, _became bound to indemnify the memorialists
for those just claims_ which they otherwise would rightfully
have had on the Government of France, for the spoliations
committed on their commerce by the illegal captures made
by the cruisers and other armed vessels of that power, in
violation of the Law of Nations, and in breach of treaties
then existing between the two nations; which claims they
were, by the rejection of the said article of the Convention,
forever barred from preferring to the Government of France for
compensation.”[111]
Claims thus authoritatively stated at that early day cannot be overcome
by any sleep.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account