Volume 15 — Court of Claims Reports

On the defendants'1 Motion. The Reporters’ statement of the case: The facts upon which these motions were considered sufficiently appear in the opinion of the court.

On the Proofs. The Reporters'1 statement of the case: The provision of the contract on which the defendants relied as the ground of their counter-claim is as folio ws: u The envelopes and wrappers must be ready for delivery on the 1st day of October, 1874, and thereafter must be promptly furnished and delivered, complete in all respects, in such quantities as may be required to fill the daily orders of postmasters; the deliveries to be made either at the Post Office…

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of tbe case: This is tlie same case which was heard upon demurrer (14 0. 01s. It., 508) at the last term. Held: and under which he served, until honorably mustered out January 1,1871, in accordance with the provisions of the act of July 15, 1870, cli. 294, § 12 (10 Stat.

On the Rroofs. The Reporters' statement of tlio case: The following are the facts of this case as found by tlio court: 1.

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of tbe ease: Tbe following are tbe facts of tbe ease as found by tbe court: I. That on tbe 31st day of July, 3873, tire Commissioner of Internal Kevenne, with tbe approval of tbe Secretary of f Ik; Treas ury, caused to be published a certain official circular, known and designated as “ Circular No. 99 revised,” containing the following offer: “ Under and by virtue of the provisions of the thirty-ninth section of an act entitled ‘ An…

On the claimants Motion. The Reporter’s statement of the case: The grounds of the motion are set forth in the opinion of the-court.

<p>Davis, J., delivered the opinion of the court:</p> <p>“DECEMBER TERM, A. D. 187S.</p> <p>“ Abraham Rhine, surviving- partner of ) “The United States.</p> <p>“L. Abraham,</p> <p>“W. Penn Clarice,</p> <p>^ ÑñlÁPA Solicitors.</p>

On the claimant’s Motion. The Reporters’ statement of the case : The facts are sufficiently set forth in the opinion of the court.

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of the case; The following are the facts of this case as found by the court: I. The claimant is a native of Pera, near Constantinople, and was domiciled there as an Austrian subject during the several occurrences hereinafter referred to. At and prior to September 25,1849, George A. Porter was the consul of the United States at Constantinople, and before that date had occasionally employed the claimant in tlie consular office. II.

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of tbe case: Tbe following are tbe facts of tbis case as found by tbe court: I. Tbe claimant was tbe proprieter and publisher of tbe Lynch-burg’ Press, a newspaper printed and published at Lynchburg, in tbe State of Yirginia, from tbe year 1869 to tbe timé of bringing tbis action. II.

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of tbe case: Tbe following are tbe facts as found by tbe court: I. In April, 1849, under tbe Act June 30, 1834, cb. 102, § 5 (4 Stat. Held: Belt & Co.’s interest in those claims became vested in Stuart by virtue of their assignments. Public policy is strongly opposed to the upsetting of vested rights by a subsequent judicial decision overturning the law as it had been supposed to exist.

On the defendants’ Motion. . The Reporters’ statement of the case: The facts upon which this motion was presented fully appear in the opinion of the court.

On the defendants’ Demurrer. The Reporters’ statement of the case: The facts set up in the claimant’s petition are sufficiently set forth in the opinion of the court.

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts as found by the court: I. The claimant and the defendants entered into the contract on the 27th June, 1877, set forth in the petition, and the defendants’ officers gave to .the claimant the notices 21st August, 1877, and 26th November, 1877, annexed to and forming part of the-petition, as follows: ; “Big- Horn Post, M. T., Augxist 21, 1877. “Mr. F. D. Yates, Contractor, “(Thro’ W. H. Brown,…

On the Proofs. The Reporters'1 statement of the case: The following are the facts as found by the court: I. From about the 15th August, 1861, to about the 1st March, 1867, the War Department employed, to carry military freig'ht and passengers, numerous railroad companies, for the construction of whose railroads grants of the public lands had been made upon the statutory condition that such roads should be and remain public highways for the use of the Government of the United…

On the Proofs. The Reporters'1 statement of the case: Tbe following are tbe facts as found by tbe court: I. Tbe claimant was graduated from tbe United States Military Academy and appointed a brevet second lieutenant in tbe Corps of Topographical Engineers July 1,1845; transferred to tbe Second Dragoons October 19,1846; promoted second lieutenant Second Dragoons December 2,1846 (brevetted first lieutenant February 23, 1847); 'first lieutenant June 30, 1851; appointed captain…

On the claimants7 Motions. The Reporters1 statement of tbe case: The facts and circumstances upon which, these motions were determined fully appear in the opinion of the court:

On the claimant’s Motion. The Reporters’ statement of the case: The facts upon which this motion was determined are fully-set forth in the opinion of the court.

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of the case: The contract in suit, dated May 22, 186.6, contained, among others, the following provisions: “And it is further mutually agreed by the parties to this contract, that all the materials furnished, and work performed, shall be of the best quality, and subject to tbe inspection, approval, or rejection of tbe superintendent, to be appointed on tbe part of tbe United States, wbo shall have full power to reject any materials or…

On the claimant?8 Motion. The Reporters’ statement of the case: The difference between the facts of this case and those of th leading case, Carver’s (7 O. Cls. R., 499),' sufficiently appears i the opinion of the court.

On the Proofs. The Reporters' statement of the case: This case turned more upon the facts to be deduced from the voluminous, intricate, and involved mass of evidence upon which it was presented than upon the legal questions presented when the facts were ascertained.

On the claimant's Motion. The Reporters’ statement of the case: The facts of this motion appear fully iu the opinion of the court.

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of tbe case: Tbe following are tbe facts of this case as found by the court: I.On tbe 7th of August, 1879, tbe Commissioner of Internal Eevenue allowed tbe refund of a tax erroneously assessed to, and paid by, tbe claimant, amounting to tbe sum of $136.55, and certified tbe same in writing to tbe accounting officers for payment by warrant on tbe Treasury in tbe usual manner.

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of tbe case: The contract in this case was in the usual form, and involved no question of construction. The following are the facts as found by the court: I. The contracts annexed to and forming part of the petition, were executed by the parties for the transportation of the United States mails, as set forth in the petition. II.

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of tbe case: Tbe facts of this case sufficiently appear in tbe opinion of tbe court.

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of tbe case: Tbe following are tbe facts as found by tbe court: I. Tbe claimant was appointed paymaster in the Navy September 13,1860, and pay-inspector June 1,1871, from March 3, 1871; which office be bas held continuously since March 3,1871. II. On tbe 5th day of December, 1874, claimant was ordered to report to Oapt.

On the Proofs. Tbe Reporters'1 statement of tbé case: The contract in tliis case provided that “ the said Abraham Cohen agrees to deliver at the government forage yards and such other points about Fort Scott as may be designated by the party of the first part, one thousand five hundred and fifty (1,550) tons of prairie or timothy hay, in ricks of one hundred tons (100) each.

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of tbe case: The following are the facts as found by the court: I. The claimant was' appointed major of the Seventeenth Infantry on the 14th May, 1861; lieutenant-colonel of the Thirteenth Infantry October 4, 1864; colonel January 1,1871; and had served more than fifteen years continuously at the time the claim here made was advanced in 1876. II.

On the Proofs. The Reporters' statement of tbe ease: Tbe only clause of tbe original contract between tbe parties wbicb was involved in this case is fully set forth in tbe opinion of tbe court.

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of tbe case: Tbe following are tbe facts as found by tbe court: I. In October, 1861, Edward H. Castle bad charge of tbe railroads and military transportation in tbe Western Department, under Major-General Frémont, and acted as military supervisor of railroads, and was in charge of everything relating to tbe railroad transportation of troops and military supplies in that department.

0% the Proofs. The Reporters' statement of tbe case: The following are the facts of this case as found by the court: I. In the year 1858 the claimants were married, in the State of Alabama, and thereafter lived in Noxubee County, Missisippi, where they still reside. II.

On the Proofs. The Reporten? statement of tlie case: Tlie following are tlie facts of tliis case as found by the court: I. In December, 1864, the claimant had in his possession in Savannah, G-a., 30 bales of sea-island cotton and 252 bales of upland cotton. Ten bales of the upland cotton, marked “P,” were his own property; the residue, both upland and sea-island, was owned by other parties, and was held for their account by the claimant as a warehouseman. II.

On the-Proofs. The Reporters1 statement of the case: 'The following are tlie facts of this case as found by the court: I. In the winter of 18G7-’68, the claimant had the hauling contract on Route 4 in the Quartermaster’s Department, and a contract to carry the mail from Fort Totten to-, Montana.

On the Proofs. The Reporters' statement of the case: The contract between the parties on which the suit was brought contained the following provisions: First. That the said John T. Baldwin shall furnish the Quartermaster’s Department IT.

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement- of tbe ease : Tbe contract in this case was in the ordinary form, and no question involving its construction arose on tbe trial. Tbe whole controversy turned on the special instructions of tbe snrveyor-general, and tbe riglit of the claimant to recover for work done pursuant to those instructions, or in pursuance of an order of the Commissioner of the Land Office requiring the first survey to be obliterated.

On the Proofs. The Reporters1 statement of tbe case: Tbe private act upon which tbis action is founded will be found quoted in tbe opinion delivered.

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of tke case: The following are the facts of this case as found by the court: ■ I. The claimant was chief justice of Wyoming Territory from February 14, 1876,… Held: it was determined that he was entitled to the full amount of the established salary, and he recovered judgment therefor.

On the claimant's Motion. The Reporters’ statement of tbe case: Tbe former decisions of tbe court in this case will be found in 11 O. Gis. K-, 722j 12 ib. 273.

On the motion of an assignee in Bankruptcy. The Reporters’ statement of the case: The facts relating to this motion sufficiently appear in the opinion of the court. The assignee in bankruptcy of the claimant should be substituted as the plaintiff in this case, he being the owner of the claim, and the proper party to prosecute the suit. (Herndon v. Howard, 9 Wall., 664; Knox v. Exchange Banlo, 12 Wall., 379; Person’s Case, 8 C. Gis.

On the Proofs. The Reporters1 statement of the case: This case was argued at considerable length, to show that the Secretary of the Treasury had awarded the portion of the fines and forfeitures that formed the foundation of the suit to certain persons who were legally incompetent to receive them, and Fence, that the claimant as collector of the port of New Orleans should have received a much larger proportion of the fund distributed than the Secretary awarded to him.

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of the case: As the claimant in this case could not appeal to the Supreme Court, tbe amount claimed being less than $3,,000, no findings of fact were filed by the court. The facts, however, are set forth in the opinion of the Chief Justice.

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of tbe case: Tbe following are tbe facts of tbis case as found by tbe court: I. On September 21,1868, tbe following written agreement was entered into between Abrabam Gold, of Santa Fé, N. Mex., and Capt. Charles McClure, United States Army, and was approved by the officer commanding the district: “Articles of agreement, made this twenty-first day of September, eighteen hundred and sixty-eight, between Bvt. Major Chas.

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of tbe case: • Tbe. following are tbe facts of tbis case as found by tbe court: I. In tbe month of March, 1856, tbe schooner Major Donaldson sailed from Baltimore with a cargo of government stores consigned to tbe United States quartermaster at Corpus Obristi, Tex. Nothing eventful occurred on tbe voyage until about tbe middle of April, 1856, tbe vessel-arrived off tbe bar of Corpus Cbristi and took a pilot on board. II.

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of tbe case: The following are the facts of this case as found by the court: I. 0.n or about the 26th day of August, 1873, the claimant and Capt. A. J. McGonnigle, assistant quartermaster of the United States Army, on bebalf of the defendants, entered into the following contract: “Article of agreement made and entered into this twenty-sixth day of August, A. D. 1873, between Capt. A. J. McG-on-nigle, assistant quartermaster, United…

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of tbe case: The following are the facts of this case as found by the court: I. On the 3d March, 1861, Thomas K. Jackson was, and for some time had been, a first lieutenant of infantry in the Army of the United States, and acting assistant commissary of subsistence and acting quartermaster at Fort Bliss, in Texas.

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of tbe case: The following are the facts of this case as found by the court : I. The claimant is a railroad corporation created, organized, and doing business under and by virtue of an act of the Congress of the United States entitled “An act granting lands to aid in the construction of a railroad and a telegraph line from Lake Superior to Puget Sound, on the Pacific coast, by the northern route,” approved July 4, 1864; and at and…

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts of this case as found'by the court: I. The claimant was one of the deputies of W. J. Landrum, collector of internal revenue for the eighth district of Kentucky,. from August 1,1873, to March 31,1875, duly appointed by said collector as provided by law, at a salary of $1,200 a year. II.

On the Proofs. The Reporters1 statement of tbe case: The following are the facts of this case as found by the court: I. On or about the 4th day of December, 1875, the Commissary-General of Subsistence made the following report to the Third Auditor of the Treasury: . “War Department, “Opei'ce Commissary-General op Subsistence, “ Washington, December 4,1875. “ Sir : The enclosed claim in favor of Samuel C. Ludington, of Greenbrier Co., West Ya., having been examined under…

On the Proofs. The Reporters1 statement of tbe case: Tbe contract in tbis case was in tbe usual form of tbe Quartermaster’s Department. See Yates’s Case (ante, p. 119). Tbe facts of tbe breach were as follows: I. On tbe 20tb day of June, A. D. 1874, Benjamin O. Card was a quartermaster in tbe United States Army and chief quartermaster Department of Dakota, and on duty at Saint Paul, Minn., and held tbe rank of major. II.

On the claimants Motion. The Reporters’ statement of the case : The facts relating to this motion sufficiently appear in the opinion of the court.

On the Proofs. The lieporters’ statement of tlie case: The following are the facts of the case as found by the court: I. In the months of January, February, March, and April, 1864, one Balph S. Hart was the assistant special agent of the Treasury Department for the district of Natchez, in the State of Mississippi. II.

On the Proofs. The Reporters1 statement of the case The following aretbe facts of this case as found by the court: I. The Congress of the United States, by an act approved July 7,1870, entitled “An act to carry into effect the decree of the district court of tlic United States for the southern district New York in tbe case of tbe British steamer Labuan,” ended tliat there be paid, out of any money in tbe Treasury not bherwise appropriated, to William Bailey, William Leetham,…

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts of this case as found by the court: I. Francis Taylor was commissioned captain in the Second State Begiment of the Virginia forces on Continental establishment, May 8,1776; he continued in active service and was promoted and commissioned major in said regiment with rank from July 12, 1778, and be became supernumerary major by tbe arrangement of tbe Continental Army at White Plains in September,…

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of tbe case: Tbe following- are tbe facts of tliis case as found by tbe court: I. On tbe 27th day of July, 1872, tbe claimant was appointed econd lieutenant in… Held: “If any one of the magistrates hearing a case at sessions be interested in the result, the court is improperly constituted.”; Br. L. M., 4th ed., 119-122; Stockioell v. White-Lake, 22 Mich., 341; 3 Chit. G-.

On the Proofs. The Reporters'1 statement of tbe case: The following are tire facts of this case as found by the court On the 10th day of May, 1878, the claimant, a citizen of tin State of Pennsylvania, under the statute in such case made anc provided, made the following application to the Oommissione] of Patents: “ To the Comissioner of Patents : “ Your petitioner respectfully represents that ho is ongaget’ in the sale of flour at Philadelphia, in the State of Pennsylvania…

On the Proofs. The Reporters' statement of the case: These cases were heard together and argued at great length.

On the defendants’ Appeal. The Reporters’ statement of the case: The facts of this case will be found fully set forth in 12 0. Cls. R., 192, and likewise the opinion of the court below.

<p> The schooner Flight collides with the steamer Tallapoosa in Chesapeake Bay and is lost. Congress refer the claim. </p> <p>The court helorv decides that though a sailing vessel hound down Chesapeake Bay in tho night-time has no lookout and her carelessness therein conduces to a collision with a steam vessel, yet if the steamer he much more in fault in not keeping out of the way, the loss will ho apportioned. Judgment for the claimants. The defendants appeal.</p> <p>The judgment of tho court helow is affirmed hy the equal division of the Supreme Court.</p>