OpenJurist

124 US 301 United States v. Bond

124 U.S. 301

8 S.Ct. 501

31 L.Ed. 473

UNITED STATES
v.
BOND.

January 23, 1888.

Atty. Gen. Garland, for appellant.

James E. Padgett, for appellee.

MILLER, J.

1

This is an appeal from a judgment of the court of claims awarding to John Bond, the appellee, the sum of $72.27. The following facts were found by that court, upon which this judgment was rendered in favor of the claimant, and from which the present appeal is taken: 'Claimant enlisted in the United States marine corps at the marine barracks, Washington, D. C., October 29, 1879, as a private, was assigned to duty with the marine band at the time of his enlistment, and remained and performed duty with the band as a private from that time until May 1, 1881, when he was rated as a musician. Prior to this last-mentioned date he was at no time rated as a musician, although playing in the band. Between the date of enlistment and May 1, 1881, the organization known as the 'Marine Band' performed, under proper order, on the capitol grounds and on the president's grounds. Prior to May 1, 1881, claimant received no additional compensation for such service.'

2

Section 1613, Rev. St., reads as follows: 'The marines who compose the corps of musicians known as the 'Marine Band' shall be entitled to receive at the rate of four dollars a month each in addition to thei pay as non-commissioned officers, musicians, or privates of the marine corps, so long as they shall perform, by order of the secretary of the navy or other superior officer, on the capitol grounds or the president's grounds.' In the opinion of the court of claims it is said that 'the claimant was a 'private of the marine corps.' He was one of 'the marines who composed the organization known as the 'Marine Band.' He performed on the capitol grounds and on the president's grounds, under proper order, and, thus falling within the phraseology of the statute, he should have received the additional pay.'

3

In this statement we entirely concur, and see no reason to disturb the judgment of the court, which is accordingly affirmed.