Page 1 of 2 Jun 1830 Issue of Indianapolis Indiana Journal in Indianapolis, Indiana

See the full image with a free trial.

Start for Free

Read an issue on 2 Jun 1830 in Indianapolis, Indiana and find what was happening, who was there, and other important and exciting news from the times. You can also check out other issues in The Indianapolis Indiana Journal.

Browse Indianapolis Indiana Journal
  • indianapolis-indiana-journal page 1 Press tab to continue slide or press d key to skip
    Page 1
  • indianapolis-indiana-journal page 2 Press tab to continue slide or press d key to skip
    Page 2
  • indianapolis-indiana-journal page 3 Press tab to continue slide or press d key to skip
    Page 3
  • indianapolis-indiana-journal page 4 Press tab to continue slide or press d key to skip
    Page 4

How to Find What You Are Looking for on This Page

We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) technology to make the text on a newspaper image searchable. Below is the OCR data for 2 Jun 1830 Indianapolis Indiana Journal in Indianapolis, Indiana. Because of the nature of the OCR technology, sometimes the language can appear to be nonsensical. The best way to see what’s on the page is to view the newspaper page.

Indianapolis Indiana Journal (Newspaper) - June 2, 1830, Indianapolis, Indiana Indiana journal. V of. , wednesday june 2, 1830. No. 371. In published by Douglass amp Maguire. Terms. Two dollars per annul if paid in Advance. Three dollars at Ali Send of the year. Advertisements inserted on the usual terms. From the Indiana Republican. Sni la is. Cone. This cause has been brought before the court upon an agreed Case. The a material facts Are these. The collector for the county of Franklin on a Sale of lands for taxes in the year 1825, sold a tract of land belonging to the defendant and which was Purl listed by the plaintiff. The defendant holds the receipt of the collector for the state and county taxes for the land in question for that year. The plaintiff relies on he collector s deed which was executed in 1827, after the tinae for Redeen inc lands sold for taxes in 1825, had elapsed. The defendant rests his defence on his Patent and the receipt for the Pannent of the a mount due from him for taxes for the year 1825. The cause has been argued and from the course of the argument it would seem that the decision of the Case depends upon the character of the collector s deed. For the plaintiff it has been earnestly contended that the deed of the collector is conclusive evidence that the Sale was regular according to the provisions of the Law and is therefore decisive of the question a on the part of the defendant it has been urged with equal Confidence the it the regularity of the Sale by the collector May be enquired into and should it appear that he had not conformed to the provisions of the Law that the deed will not Avail the plaintiff. Before the passage of the act of 1824, the Law required of the collector on a Sale of land for taxes to give a certificate to the purchaser which vested in him and his heirs All the Legal right and title of the owner who was allowed two years to redeem his land. We have no published decisions of our courts during the argument no cases were mentioned and i am not aware that the construction of the Law has been made a question in any of the courts of the state. Several cases How ver had occurred in the supreme court of the United states touching the Validity of titles to land which had been sold for taxes. It was ruled that no individual or Public officer could sell and convey a Good title to the land of another unless authorised to do so by express Law and a person invested with such a Power must pursue with precision the course prescribed by Law or his act would be invalid that the authority of a tax collector was a naked Power not coupled with an interest and in All such cases the Law required that every pre requisite to the exercise of that Power must precede its exercise that the a Gett must pursue the Power or Bis act would not be sustained by it and that the deed of the collector would not be Eva Prima Facie evidence that the prerequisites of the Law had been complied with but that the party claiming under it must Shew positively that they had been complied 4 whealonld�?q�?\2� in Point of fact there is an obvious difference Between acting will out authority and performing an Auti ionised act in an irregular manner Between Selling lands on account of taxes that have been duly discharged and collecting a tax due the g be Bijj nent by a Sale of land without conforming to the provisions of the Law authorising it. In the one Case the government has no claim against the person whose property has been sol i i it a the other a just claim is enforcedf#ii1jd irregular manner. In Point of a flux however according to the decisions l have referred to there would be no difference because every pre requisite to the exercise of the Power of collecting a tax must precede its exercise. The legislature seem to have thought it necessary to change the Law on this subject and to increase the Security of purchasers on sales of lands for taxes by declaring that every conveyance of a collector shall be conclusive evidence that the Sale was regular according to the provisions of the Law. For the purposes of the decision of this Case a Brief View of the act of 1824 will w sufi client. After the correction and completion of the assessment Roll and the acceptance thereof by the Board of justices the clerk is required to make a transcript of the same and deliver it to the collector Vith a Precept commanding him amongst other things to collect the taxes Chiji ged in the transcripts is. By demand of the persons charge red. 2d. By distress and Sale of goods and chattels or 3d. By seizure and Sale of the lots and lands mentioned in he transcript. It is made the duty of the collector to Call once at the most usual and Best known places of residence of each person charged with either state or county taxes to demand and receive the a ame. Taxes that remain unpaid on the first of september he May collect by distress and Sale of the personal property found upon the land charged with such unpaid taxes but no Sale of a distress can be made without Public notice in the manner directed. If no goods and chattels can be found out of which the taxes can be maed the collector is authorized to seize the land so charged and to give notice in a prescribed Mode of his intention to sell the land for the taxes due thereon and which shall remain unpaid on the second monday of november. When land shall be sold for the non payment of taxes the collector shall give the purchaser a certificate in writing particularly describing he land the sum paid therefor and the time and manner in which the owner May redeem the same and should it not be redeemed within the time limited the collector or his successor a Hall execute to he purchaser his heirs or assigns a conveyance of the land so sold As a Foresaid and which shall Vest in the person to whom it May be Given an estate in fee simple. It May Here be observed that taxes Are made a Lien on the land on which they May be due in whose Soever hands such land May come. As the Lien depends upon the contingency of taxes being due whenever they Are paid the Lien must of course be discharged and the purpose for which the Precept was Given being accomplished the authority of the collector must cease also. The origin of the Lien depends upon taxes being due,&it8 continuance on their remaining unpaid the Precept to the collector authorises him to collect the taxes charged in the transcript but when they Are paid he is discharged of duty the government has no claim he has nothing to collect and the existence of the Lien and the official Power of the collector Are both determined by the payment of the tax. It May be further observed that the authority for the seizure and Sale of goods depends opon the non payment of taxes on the first of september that the seizure of lands is authorised unless goods and chattels Are not to be found upon such land sufficient to defray the taxes charged thereon that the land seized cannot be sold unless the taxes levied thereon remain unpaid on the second monday in november that neither goods and chattels nor lands can be legally sold unless advertised in the manner prescribed that no can be lawfully Given to any other than a purchaser of land on a Sale for the nonpayment of taxes and that it is Only a conveyance of land so so of that will Vest an estate in fee simple. So far there would seem to be no difficulty. The plaintiff s deed not furnishing even Prima Facie evidence of title proof of the payment of tax charged against him would be sufficient defence for the defendant. Does the clause in the Law upon which the plaintiff mainly relies alter the Case it is that such conveyance shall be conclusive evidence that the Sale was regular according to the provisions of the act. What Sale for taxes due the stale not on account of taxes that had been various enactments 1 have noted relate to an enforcement of the collection of taxes that remain unpaid these Are the provisions alluded to and conforming to which shall be presumed from the collectors conveyance not to the seizure and Sale of goods and chattels or seizure and Sale of lands and lots for taxes no longer due and owing the state. Without questioning the authority the legislature might have thought that when the land had been sold for taxes really due proof that payment of the tax had been demanded that there were no goods and chattels out of which the tax could be made and that Public notice of the time and place of Sale had been Given in the manner required might be dispensed with and that it Behoved every person to see that the demands of the government against him were duly discharged that if he neglected his duty in this respect and permitted his property to be seized and sold it was unnecessary to set aside the Sale although the collector in exercising the Trust confided to him had omitted some of the required agents of the Law and therefore that any inquiry touching the regularity of the Sale should be excluded. This May All be concede of though whether it would be Safe or just or Wise to detail the pre requisites to the exercise of the Power conferred on the collector and on the same Page Sanction a departure from every limitation imposed on him in the exercise of that Power and by rendering his deed conclusive evidence of the regularity of his conduct really permit him to act at discretion is another question but when the taxes have been paid it consists with neither the letter nor the spirit of the Law that the party should be concluded by the collector s conveyance of his land. An argument drawn from the 14th and 28ih sections of the Revenue Law of 1824 is still to be noted. Each collector is required to make a return to his Precept and to stale fully and perfectly the payment of taxes made he payment enforced by distress and Sale of goods and chattels and the Sale of lots and tracts of lands a and if any person shall be injured or sustain damage by a false return of any collector made to any Precept or other illegal and fraudulent act of such collector such person upon suit brought against the collector and Liis securities shall recover treble damages and full costs and charges. The plaintiff contends that admitting the payment of the defendant s tax and the consequent impropriety in the Sale of his land his sole remedy is against the collector and his securities. As the collector s Bond is Only for the sum of 5,000, it must be conceded if the plaintiff be Corr it that it might furnish no Security or at Alle vents a very inadequate one for wrongs that might be done. Incurring the penalty of the Law in relation to an unlawful Sale of to or three tracts of land would exhaust the Bond and even in this Case from what has been stated of the value of the land it might be insufficient to enable the defendant to recover his treble damages with full costs and charges. Uniform Fidelity in the discharge of official duty is not expected or Security would not be required and every reasonable in perpetration of this provision of the Law ought to be made to exempt the legislature from the imputation of requiring a Security that in Many instances would prove entirely useless. Omit the Section and the defendant would not be Remedi less a in Possession of the land Bis receipt would be a defence to an ejectment founded upon the collector s deed and out of Possession the deed would not bar his recovery. The terms of the Section Are comprehensive but not exr Lusje. It May be considered As affording an additional Rennedy to persons Olio May suffer from Alse returns or other illegal or acts of the collectors and wit Boul being i suggested its application to the defendant in this Case will be readily perceived. It May be added that from the general aspect of the Revenue act of 1824, it would seem that the interests of the state and of the purchasers of land on sales for taxes Are consulted quite As much As the interests of those who May be charged with the land is to pay the tax at Alle vents and As an invitation to purchasers there is an offer to guaranty their titles by a deed which shall be conclusive evidence of the regularity of the official conduct of the collector in making the Sale leaving the person and whether he has paid his tax or not according to the a Gomel of the plaintiff who May be injured by a false return or other illegal or fraudulent act of the collector to resort to a Security that May in Many instances prove unavailing. It was desirable with the legislature to insure the prompt collection of the Revenue but to accomplish that object it was unnecessary to confound the negligent with those who punctually discharged the claims against them. Why place them on the same footing what useful purpose could be answered by it the provision might be necessary and just in regard to the former but altogether unnecessary and iniquitous in relation to the latter. From the nature of the thing there is an obvious distinction Between them and whatever May be the meaning of the clause As to the irregular Sale for taxes really due upon which it is unnecessary now to express an opinion 1 am in dined to believe that it cannot fairly be construed to extend to a Case where the taxes have been duly discharged. Judgment must therefore be entered for the defendant manner the nature of the Reform executed by the administration and the Absurdity of the comparison instituted Between the Jefferson and Jackson dynasties. From the 4th March 1789, when the government went into operation 0 the 4lh March 1829, when general Jackson was inaugurated the whole number of removals made by All the presidents amounted to 73. Of these with the exception of a limited number caused by or. Jefferson in the first year of his administration when the violence of party spirit extorted sacrifices from him against Bis judgment and inclination far the greater part were for cause. It was and must continue to be a reproach to Jeffer son s administration that he permitted a single victim to fall for opinion Sake a measure abhorrent to his nature and that spirit of tolerance which distinguished him in religion and politics and which indeed is of the essence of civil Liberty. Evidence is not wanting to show that he himself revolted from the severity that he was teased and import Ned into yielding in a few cases and that he absolutely and indignantly rejected All propositions for a general proscription. Or. Davis was ejected from the Post office in this City and or. Grammer in Petersburg excellent and in impeach a officers those cases constitute exceptions and do not prove the Rule. Let us now look at the Iron Sway of the Quot second Quot Jefferson. The whole number of removals caused b him since the 4th of March 1829, is not actually known his partisans having voted Down the motion to obtain official information from the departments. As however or. Barry Stales the num Bir of removed postmasters alone at 491, As he ii Matt of publishers to publish a statement True in fact and founded on the records of the Treasury department. Or. Chilton unable to prove any error of fact or of inference in what was stated by me to the aggregate expenditures for each of these years Coa Side red in reference to the fiscal periods and also in reference to the respective times or. Adams retired from and Gen. Jackson came into office mortified that his own indiscretion or that of his new associates had plan ced h m in a position unpleasant to occupy and from which it was difficult to escape has manifested in the Stylo and manner of his communication of the 7ih inst. A disposition unfriendly to that decorum which should characterize the writings of every gentleman. The respect which i entertain for the constituents of or c., my own self respect forbid that in reply to so much of his communication As relates to myself i should indulge in just recrimination. However obnoxious Hia conduct in this and other respects be to just censure this i will leave to be performed by Public opinion Here and else there. My purpose now is to place myself in the right and him in the wrong As to the facts upon which we seem to be at Issue. In the publication first made by or Chilton he stated the aggregate of expenditures of 1828, at $25,485,-313, and those of 1829, at 26,164,-595�?theriby making the expenditures of 1829, greater than those of 1828, by $679,282. This statement i knew to be incorrect and it would reflect upon the intelligence of or. Chilton s constituents too much to say that thir representative in Congress did not know the Between i he estimate for the expenditure and the moved by or. Van Buren exceeds 80,1 qty aft expenditure a Teria ined at the and As the removals from the it venue and land departments Are known to have been yet More Indis ruminate or. Holmes is no doubt borne out in his statement that president Jackson had removed More incumbents in one month than All Bis predecessors had removed during a period oif Orty years. Close of the year. Or. Chilton before he made his expose of the Public expenditures was Presentici the House of representatives and heard or a Polk of Tenn. Read from a statement obtained from the records of the Treasury the amount of the expenditures for the year 1829, and stated them to this is bad enough. That men the h use to he $25.071,017 59. Should be hunted out and hunted Down for the free exercise of opinion and Choice accords with the practice of despotism but militates against the first principles of there Are circumstances however which add a Darker and More nefarious Shade to the history of proscription. They Are the attempts made to cast suspicion upon the private characters of All the removed the obstinate refusal of All who have it in their Power to explain the reasons which have led to the motion. To the postmaster general to the Secretary of state and of the Treasury to the president himself petitions have been addressed in vain by Many of the dismissed for the causes for their dismissal that they might have it in their Power to satisfy their friends that their Fame was unsullied. All such petitions have be a evaded or met by a dogged and obstinate silence. Private injury was added to political intolerance and the removed have been compelled to sit Down under imputations which Power and its minions in extenuation of its injustice saw fit to cast upon them. This is tyranny of the most odious and detestable character. The body is not imm ured in dungeons or loaded with shackles but reputation is assassinated to excuse the excesses of Power and left at the mercy of a mercenary Crew who interested in sustaining the administration through All its depravity find their profit in slander and their safety in detraction. It is the necessary consequence of proscription which feeling its own in defensibility on principle must have recourse to Demerit real or feigned in its victims for its own vindication. From the Richmond whig. Reform. The facts collected by or. Holmes from a laborious search of the Public archives and stated to the Senate on tuesday last illustrate in a striking from the National intelligencer. Or. A Wickliffe s letter. Messes. Gales amp Seaton gentlemen influenced by a desire not to be considered As i was not in fact he assailant of or. Chilton in the publication which was made by me in the Telegraph on the subject of the Public expenditures for 1823 and 1829, i avoided the use of his name and refrained from any criticism or exposure of the Many errors into which he had been seduced As manifested by his publication some weeks since in your paper. Upon that state ment having affixed to it the name of a member of Congress had been predicated a charge against the present administration and its friends in Congress of a wasteful and extravagant expenditure of the Public Money. A1 charge to which 1 did not believe them justly obnoxious and Felt it my duty this statement was by any one because i presume it was known to be Correct. It the statement required any evidence of its correctness that evidence was at hand in he i office of the Treasury department accessible to All who might desire to see it. After what bad been stated in or Chilton s presence As above 1 did with some Surprise read his publication in the National intelligencer in which he substituted expenditure for Estima and slated the expenditures of 1829 to be 26.164,595�?just precisely one million ninety three thousand file Hundred and seventy seven dollars too much a Man who had been in ci�ngres3 two years ought to have known the fact that in the annual report made by the Secretary of the Treasury both the receipts and expenditures for the last Quarter Are slated As an estimate. In making up this estimate the disbursing officers usually have reference to the amount of actual expenditure for the cont spending Quarter of the previous year. It never happens thai at the end of the Quarter the amount expended corresponds with the amount estimated in the reports. By reference to the report of or. Rush to the last Congress it will be seen that his estimate for the expend lures of the 4lh Quarter of the year was 7,392,603 72. The disbursing officers when called upon to say what amounts would be required for the service of the last Quarter of the year i829,estimated that $7,245,481 would he needed but when the amount in tact expended came to be ascertained at the close of the Quarter it was Only $6,238,914 43. These were fact known Here and evidenced by the books of the Treasury Long previous to the first pub cation of or. Chilton and if they had been stated by him the Public mind would not have been abused. The following transcript Froni the Treasury will exhibit the True state of facts comparative state rant Between the estimate de it tit Iuli Tures Nind the actual expenditures for the 41 h Quarter 1829.est. . Act. Expend. Civil miscellaneous und foreign Intercourse military Estali Ament Nav Tel establishment Public debt 4th or. 1829. 4th or 1829. 614,756 83 1,746,000 88 1,196,180 41 3689,54� 93 47,24�.48l 05 6,238,914 43 619,268 37 1,135,666 60 815,641 56 3,668,337 �0 6, ��8,�i4 43 to difference $1,006,566,62

Search All Newspapers in Indianapolis, Indiana

Advanced Search

Search Courier

Search the Indianapolis Indiana Journal Today with a Free Trial

We want people to find what they are looking for at NewspaperArchive. We are confident that we have the newspapers that will increase the value of your family history or other historical research. With our 7-day free trial, you can view the documents you find for free.

Not Finding What You Were Looking for on This Page of The Indianapolis Indiana Journal?

People find the most success using advanced search. Try plugging in keywords, names, dates, and locations, and get matched with results from the entire collection of newspapers at NewspaperArchive!

Looking Courier

Browse Newspapers

You can also successfully find newspapers by these browse options. Explore our archives on your own!

By Location

By Location

Browse by location and discover newspapers from all across the world.

Browse by Location
By Date

By Date

Browse by date and find publications for a specific day or era.

Browse by Date
By Publication

By Publication

Browse old newspaper publications to find specific newspapers.

Browse by Publication
By Collection

By Collection

Browse our newspaper collections to learn about historical topics.

Browse by Collection