{"newspaper_name": "Holly Springs gazette.", "edition": "01", "page": "p1", "byline": ""}
{"character_count": 5008, "word_count": 917, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9337000250816345], "ccnet_perplexity": [2254.199951171875], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
Aga'n. IN MIR thompsons speech on
The Chickasaw bill. he saws:


This oir, then. Mr. speaker, instead of
being f~ the benefit Of the Indians. holds
out inducement. offers rewards. TO white !
man for hunting up cases asaiHs. the Uni. /
ted States among ths Indians"


LIZ all the evidence Of the cases IL on re- I
cord in Washington, why "hun. up cases


among the Ipdians? and what white man
could De found so demented as to lsave all 1
"lhe evid nee on record al Washington
aud travel some 1000 miles 10 the cherries


haunis of the Chicka,aws, TO hunt up cases


with no evidence TO sustain them! But II


fraud and viIlainy can be Proc!ised IN The


circuit court Of the United States, where


all is scraiiny and purify. what nd not


bs done before Congressional co"H''ii:tee'
where such judges ms Sir. Thompson can
be greased nth a chsap bIrgata IA nail
section Of ChickasGw orphan land located


near the torOa of O rford, MississippL The
history Of tho United States bunk. VIII


show Iha. when moaey could be borrowed


or speculatIons made, men enough could
| bs found in congres. to whi.ewash The
! mist co.. rupt transactions. The man oo>
| i-ct of the Chickasaws. IN rtterrng
/ their claims TO a ju1Icial tribunal, was to


avoid the charge of corruption and specu'


lati,n, which has ALWAYS attended congIes


sonal action upon Indian claims Ills
. third ',normity" was fully answered IN my
6st card, wherein the Reesides case IS q1o-


ted as a precedent In reply to this' ne


says


..Whsre is-the law which authorised


Rsrsid TO sue the United States, ana


which declared the decree of the court


shoild be final and conclusive, ana that


The money decresd should be accounted tori


Ii docs not exisl"


This iuterrogatory shows Mr.. THohP
: sons ignorance of this case, which has
been before congress for four years. while
{ he was a member; and is remarkable for
T the hardship inflicted on this individual by
J the government precipitating tim from
/. wealth aud af1 Ience 10 penlry and wan -
! So great anl pressing were his necessliles.
I that o was forced 20 apply to his old frIend
e gen. KsoN, fora loan OF money sufhcIen'


10 def.ay ntl expenses ftom Louisville, n.y.,
10 his arne a II ulair phia, in Is IL. where
:. he soon after did. In this case. after a
J. labofious m;aaton Of six weeks 10 the
, Uuited States court on an agreed case o :


rween the royernmcni and Resides, the
), latter obtained Judgment against the
;. former for "SI SS,426 o6-under a charg'
!, from the cour, that directed them the jury
!. 10 exnmns with the siTlctness OF accoun
rants every item In controversy. SEE
!. House lluraal, l84l-2, PIP. lllo-ll.l 1e


noGwithslan this decision, congress ha


f,r wears refused 10 make an APPROPRIATED
10 to paw the claim. What is the ditterenc


in the Justice OF the case, whether the gov
At erument in plaintiff or defendant, whe
to after foil hearing judgment is declared :
~ l.. a DOul
IL to provide for the payment of such Judg
IT. msnt. in the one case as in the otherf NJ
nd Tholnpson's fourth "tn0rmlty" was $40"
n IN nv card 10 be based upon "a lsehoo
er throughout; and yet in his last address :
III attempts to cover his disgrace by suppress
nd ing the facts, and quoting that part OF u


Chick asav bill which permitted the malta
~. 10 act forth all their claims arising und
he either Of their treaties with the Onnt
lSe States, He then ssserts In substance, IN
we The misnpplicstioD by the United States
he th, Indian fund in the purchase of stoc
nd having more .haA twenty yesrs 10 Iu
his oave IIscto a claim against the COVER
md ment, of which this bill, had II 2asst
ssd would have had jurisdiction. when W
lsr Thompson penncd this declaraiion'
on. knew that this particular claim had oe
s.s provided for by congress IN ano'ner
ID and Gn appropriated made ior tie p"y"h'
ed. of the interest on the same. Ii was IN
res ter no longer 10 dispute. and conscquen
ick- n, litigation in relation TO 1t could M
aus been commenced under the provisions
I'd" the Chickasaw bill As Mr.. IhomPt
tied has grea, aversion to the payment OF
The ,orneys fees l will here ak. how mt
the money could an attorney make oy NJ
rous n. in the United Safes Court for the
ring covery of money which has already b
he'd paid by congress!
pur- In reference to this same enormity.
j in Thompson admits that he had falslhs'
om> public document in order TO make ou
v ers case OF speculation against me; but pie
ins. ignorance as his excuse: hence his fol
SUES. tnormily is christiancd "Igno,amns.
CO to way Of peculiar distinction His last
fioa2 greatest enormity is a mere vaeary OF a
1.-THE Did mind. He charges that under
cords Chickasaw bill "innocert lahd'hold
nj 10 mig ht be disturbed and defIauded OF
Mr.. rieh.s" 1t is certainly new era IN
q OBJ. history ofjudiclsI tribunals. that a eoar
asaw equity, which is peculiarly eoar6pt
n his science. ca be made The instrument oi 'c
q The and fraud Ijustlce cannot De done
petra The chancellor, with the right oI appe'