Volume 20 — Court of Claims Reports

The Reporters' statement of tbe ease: Tbe following are tbe facts found by tbe court, so far as they relate to tbe questions of law determined : I. Tbe United States made with claimant the following contract, dated July 13, 1869: “This indenture of lease andcontract, made and entered into this thirteenth day of July, one thousand eight hundred and sixty-nine, by and between Gridley J. F. Bryant, superintending architectof the Treasury Department at Boston, Massachusetts,…

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts found by the court: I. The Board of Field Officers of the Fourth Brigade of South Carolina Militia was a perpetual corporation created by the State of South Carolina in 1809.

The Reporters statement of the case: The following are the facts of the case as found by the court: I. For some years immediately before June 30, 1877, the ■claimant had carried the mails of the United States on each of the routes named in the petition, under several written contracts, which expired on that day and were in the following form: “ This article of contract, made the 31st day of March, in the year one thousand eight hundred and seventy-four, between the United…

The Reporters' statement of the case: The facts on which the case was presented will be found set forth fully in the opinion of the court.

The Reporters’ statement of tbe case: The court, after finding an unpaid balance due the claimant for mail-transportation service up to… Held: in this very case, that “ June 1, 1861, the United States were indebted to the Virginia Central Eailroad for carrying the mail in the State of Virginia from January 1, 1861, to May 31, 1861, over and above all credits, in the sum of 17,239.54,” the claimant is entitled to recover that entire amount independently of and without any…

The Reporters’ statement of the case : The following are the, facts of the case as found by the court: I. The Union Pacific Railroad Company was a corporation duly organized under the act of Congress approved July 1, 1862, entitled “An act to aid in the construction of a railroad and telegraph line from the Missouri River to the Pacific Ocean, and to secure to the government the use of the same for postal, military, and other purposes,” and the act amendatory thereof,…

<p>The Reporters’ statement of the case:</p> <p>The facts of this case will be found set forth in the opinion of the court.</p>

The Reporters’ statement of the ease: The facts of these oases will be found in the opinion of the court. The following is the opinion delivered in Adams’s Case.

The Reporters’ statement of the ease: The nature of the motion and the facts on which it was based . appear in the opinion of the court.

The Reporters' statement of the case: The facts of this case, so far as they are involved in the decision, will be found stated in the opinion of the court. 1. The mere reading of section 4739 and of the act of February 14,1871 (16 Stat. L., 411), from which it was taken, shows that its provisions were intended to be entirely confined to cases of the war of 1812. 2.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts of the case as found by the court: I. That on the 26th day of October, 1872, John Bardsley entered into a contract, duly signed, with the Board- of Public Works of the District of Columbia, for the improvement of Eleventh street southwest, the parts of which material in these cases are as follows : “This contract, made and concluded this twenty-sixth day of October, in the year one thousand eight hundred and…

The Reporters' statement of the case: The following are the facts of the case so far as they are involved in the decision: III.The voucher issued upon final measurement in payment of work under said contract is as follows : “ WASHING-TON, D. 0., Sept. 27th, 1873. “Board of Public Worhs D. C. to G. W. G. Eslin, Dr. 1,562 square yards new trick pavement laid, at 100 cents per yard. . $1,562 00 1,588 square feet of flagging for crossings laid, at 60 cents per foot. 952 80 2,177…

The Reporters’ statement of the case : The following are the facts of the case as found by the court: I. The claimant, a licensed trader at the Lac Court d’Oreilles Reservation, in the State of Wisconsin, in the year 1881, purchased, in the month of February, 1881, with the approval of S. B. Mahan, then acting agent at the La Pointe Agency, from the Indians Bi-da-na-kwad 187,000 feet of pine logs and from Chiz-ai-aw 15,000 feet of pine logs. II.

The Reporters' statement of the case: The claimants, a partnership consisting of three members, brought this action for a debt due to the firm. The defendants set up by way of counter-claim a judgment recovered against two of the claimants, with allegations as to their individual interests in the cause of action. To this the claimants demurred.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts as found by the court, so far as they are involved in the decision of the case: II.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts as found by the court: I. Prior to July 24, 1873, the Board of Public Works had awarded to Alfred Hill a contract for the improvement of W street between Fourteenth and Fifteenth streets. E street between Nineteenth and Twentieth, and N street between Seventeenth and Twenty-first.

The Reporters' statement of the case: The following are the facts as found by the court: I. The following correspondence toolr place between the claimant and the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, at the dates thereof: “Department of the Interior, “ Office of Indian Affairs, “ Washington, June 28, 1880. “ D. B. Dyer, “ Quapaw Ageney, Indian Territory : “ Sir : You have been appointed by the President to be agent for the Indians of the Quapaw Agency, in Indian Territory. “ If…

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The single fact presented by the evidence in this case will be found stated in the opinion of the cojirt.

<p> On the Proofs. </p> <p>The only difference between this case and Sioift Co. (Ill U. S. R., 22) is that here each purchase of stamps was a simple cash transaction, while there they were furnished by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue from time to time upon a running account.</p> <p>I. It is a fundamental principle of the law of payment that the party who pays may control the appropriation of the money.</p> <p>II.It was decided in the ’case of Savage (92 U. S. R., 382), where the government paid its debt in what passed current as money, that no protest or reservation by the creditor, if he accepted the money, could prevent the extinguishment of the debt.</p> <p>III.It was decided in the case of Swift 4' Co. (Ill U. S. R., 22) that if a manufacturer purchasing internal-revenue stamps had no other alternative than to submit to an illegal exaction or discontinue his business, the money so exacted was not a voluntary payment, and may be recovered back in an action for money had and received.</p> <p>IY. If a purchaser of revenue stamps he compelled to submit to an illegal exaction, it is immaterial whether the transaction be by simple cash purchases or by running account.</p>

The Reporters statement of tbe case: The facts here were identical with those in the case of Simons (19 C. Cls. R., 601). A summary of them will be found in the opinion of the court.

The Reporters' statement of the case: The decision of this court in the former action brought by General Meigs will be found in 19 0. 01s. R., 497.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts as found by the court: I. The claimant was appointed acting master’s mate August 20> 1864, and served as such six years seven months and eight days. Prior to this time he had served in some inferior position in the Navy about two years.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The question of statutory construction, which was the only question in the case, was presented by the claimant's petition and will be found stated in the opinion of the court.

The Reporters statement of the ease: The following are the facts, so far as they are involved in the decision of the case: I. The settlements of these claimants were on a part of the public domain north of the line of the United States military reservation of Huaclmea, which was located and proclaimed by executive order of October 29, 1881, in pursuance of the act of June 14, 1809 (2 Stat. L., 547).

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts as found bv the court, so far-as they are involved in the decision of the case: I. In October, .1864, thirteen bridges upon the main line and southwestern branch of the claimant’s railroads had been burnt or destroyed during the then recent invasion of the State by the Confederate forces under General Sterling Price.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the parts of the contracts in suit upon which the claimants relied; the .facts as established by the evidence will be found stated in the opinion of the court: “ That the parties of the second part covenant and agree to and with the party of the first part to furnish from their quarry, at Hurricane Island, State of Main #####** “And the parties of the second part hereby agree to furnish all the labor, tools, and…

The Reporters’ statement of tbe ease: The grounds of the respective motions will be found stated in the opinion of the court.

<p> On the Proofs. </p> <p>A cadet-engineer graduated at the Naval Academy in 1881 receives a certificate of graduation and is honorably discharged June 30, 1883. The question presented is as to the pay to which he was entitled.</p> <p>The court adheres to a former decision (1) that cadet-engineers who had finished their four years’ course, passed their academic examination, and received their diplomas prior to the Aot 5th August, 1882 (22 Stat. L., p. 285), were not made naval cadets by that act, and were entitled to the pay given by the Rev. Stat., § 1556; (2) that the provision in the act 1882 authorizing the discharge of surplus graduates does not apply to the classes 1881, 1882.</p>

The Reporters’ statement of the case: Before the trial the parties entered into the following stipulation : “ It is hereby stipulated and agreed that it appears by the records of the late Board of Audit and of the sinking-fund commissioner that the following sewer certificates were presented and delivered to the Board of Audit, by the respective parties in the claims and at the dates hereinafter set forth, for audit, and conversion, under the act of June 20, 1874, and that…

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following is so much of the contract as received construction ; the remaining facts will be found in the opinion of the court: I. September 18, 1871, the claimants entered into a contract with the Board of Public Works of the District of Columbia for the improvement of Thirteenth street, known as contract No. 23. The following extracts cover all matters of dispute: “ First.

The Bejportet s’ statement of the case: It was found by the court that one O. A. Sanborn, in the city of New York, withdrew from a warehouse in the thirty-second district 500 barrels of whisky for redistillation, after giving the usual bond, and the court then further found as follows: II. Two of said Sanborn’s sureties became insolvent, and the collector of the thirty-second district demanded .further security.

The Reporters’ statement of the case : The grounds upon which the defendants’ motion to dismiss the petition rested will be found in the opinion of the court.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The grounds of the defendants’ motion will be found stated in the opinion of the court.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts found by the court: I. Robert H. Ryan entered into a contract with the Board of Public Works, July 23, 1872, for the improvement sey avenue southeast, in Washington; the parts material in this case are as follows: “First.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The single question involved in this case is clearly stated in the opinion of the court.

<p> On the Proofs. </p> <p>A circuit court, at the request of the Attorney-General, orders each commissioner to keep a prescribed docket of criminal proceedings. The court allows a docket fee of .$3 in each case where issue was joined and testimony taken, and $1 in cases where the defendant was discharged.</p> <p>I.An order' of a circuit court requiring each commissioner to keep a prescribed docket in criminal proceedings before him is a legal requirement entitling the commissioner to compensation.</p> <p>II.A commissioner legally bound to keep a docket of cases coming before him is entitled, under the Rev. Sfcat., § 847, to the fees prescribed for clerks by § 828.</p> <p>III.When a statute (Rev. Stat., § 828) allows a commissioner the compensation allowed to clerks for, “ like service,” it means similar, not identical service.</p>

The Reporters’ statement of tbe case: The following are the facts as found by the court: I. Henry Adams died in Philadelphia on November 20,1867, and letters of administration upon his estate were duly granted by the register of wills of Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania, to the claimant, Charles B. Thompson, upon his entering security in the sum of $600. II.

The Reporters’ statement of the case : This case was brought to a hearing upon the defendants’ demurrer to tiie claimants’petition. The facts set forth in the petition will be found stated in the opinion of the court.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts as found by the court: I. On August 9,1804, the claimant, while serving as sergeant in Company E, Third Regiment Missouri State… Held: in camp and in the held, drilled, disciplined, and governed, according to the Eegnlations of the United States-Army and subject to the Articles of War.

The Reporters’ statement of tbe ease: The following are the facts as found by the court: 1.

The Reporters’ statement of tbe case: The following are the facts found by the court, so far as they relate to the questions determined:… Held: after the law imposing said tax had been repealed in respect of said bank, and after the said tax had been abated. “Witness my hand and official seal this 16th day of September, A. D. 1882. “ [seal.] “ John Jav Knox, “ Comptroller of the Currency.” VIL The Comptroller of the Currency directed the claimant,, as receiver as aforesaid,…

■The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts as found by the court: I. On the day of the date thereof the Third Auditor of the Treasury Department made the following: “ Treasury Department, “Third Auditor’s Opeice, “May 10, 1861. “ In pursuance of an act of Congress approved 3d of March, 1849, entitled “An act to provide for the payment of horses and other property lost or destroyed in the military service of the United States,” and of an opinion of the…

The Reporters’ statement of the case: • The following are the facts as found by the court: I. The defendants advertised for carrying the mails in New York City as follows : - ' “ Mail-station service, New Yorlc City. “ Post-Ofeice Department, “ Washington, March 1,1877. “ Proposals will be received at the contract office of this department until 3 p. m. of April 7, 1877 (to be decided on or before the 10th of April following), for carrying the mails of the United States from…

The Reporters’ statement of tlie case : The following are the facts as found by the court: I. William Elliott, father of the claimants, was, August 5, 1861, and up to February 3, 1863, the day of his death, the owner in fee-simple of three tracts of land in Saint Helena Parish, Beaufort County, South Carolina, to wit: “ Cedar Grove,” consisting of 350 acres 5 “ Shell Point,” consisting of 330 acres; and “ Ellis Place,” consisting of 66 acres.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: Three contracts were entered into by the Secretary of War and the claimants, which were made a part of the petition to which the defendants demurred. They will be found described and quoted in the opinion of the court.

The Reporters’ statement of the ease: The single fact upon which this case turned will be found stated in the opinion of the court.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts as found by the court: I. The claimant was the owner in fee-simple of the tract of land described in the complaint at the time of the sale for direct taxes. II. It was bid in by the United States for $190 $ all charges •against it amounted to $12.50, and the surplus proceeds of the •sale are $177.50. III.

The Reporters' statement of tbe ease: Tbe following are tbe facts as found by tbe court: I. That after tbe passage of tbe act of September 28, 1850' (9 Stat. L., 519), tbe government of tbe United States continued to dispose of, and in fact did dispose of to individuals, large quantities of the swamp and overflowed lands in tbe State of Illinois.

<p> On the defendants’ Motion. </p> <p>A surveyor-general makes out a certificate of location in favor of one Vac®, or his legal representative. One H. purchases, at an administrator’s sale-of Yaca’s estate, the right, produces proof to the satisfaction of the surveyor-general, and procures the certificate of location. It is conceded that the proceedings under which H. purchased, though regular on their face, were void for lack of jurisdiction. A claim being made by the true representative of Vaca, it is transmitted by the Secretary of the-Interior under the Bowman Act.</p> <p>Under the Aet June 2, 1858 (11 Stat. L., p. 294), which provides in certain cases that a surveyor-general shall “ issue to a claimant or Ms legal representatives” a certificate of location, the issuing of the certificate to one apparently a legal representati ve leaves the Interior Department/imciws,-offieio, and without power to transmit the claim to this court under the Bowman Aet (22 Stat. L., p. 485, § 2).</p>

The Reporters’ statement of tbe case: The following are the facts as found by the court: I. April 13,1805, the claimant filed in the caveat archives of the Patent Office of the United States a specification and drawings alleged by him to describe “ a gun to load and fire with great rapidity and effect.” This caveat was prepared the 8th day of February, 1842. The gun described in the caveat was a breech-loading revolving gun, requiring the use of cartridges.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The single question now for the third time presented by this case is clearly stated in the opinion of the court.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts as found by the court: I. The firm of Hoffheimer Bros., of Cincinnati, Ohio, made application to the Secretary of the Treasury to refund to them $288 paid by them as taxes on 320 gallons of distilled spirits, the said taxes having been assessed against them by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue. II.

The Reporters’ statement of tbe case: The following are tbe facts in this case as found by tbe court: I. Tbe claimant, an officer of tbe United States Army, was stationed at Fort Brown, Texas, in November, 1883 ; on Novem-4,1883, be received a leave of absence for thirty days, and proceeded to Tecumseh, Mich., where bis leave was extended for thirty days. II.

The Reporter s’ statement of the case: The following are the facts of this case as found the by court: I. On the 9th day of June, 1875, the defendant entered into a contract with the claimants, which was known and designated as extension of contract No. 762, in which, amongst other things, it was stipulated and agreed: “ First.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts of this case as found by the ■court: * I. The claimant was the owner of the premises described in the petition, and on the 10th day of October, 1867, he leased |) the levy court of the District of Columbia said premises for a term of three years, by a written lease, which has been lost. The rent was paid monthly, as a usual thing. Said premises were used as a police station. II.

The Reporters’ statement of tbe case: The facts set forth in the petition will ,be found in the opinion of the court. The resolution of December 23,1863, contains no words of ratification, and the most that can be said only by implication ratifies the non-statutory bounties, and it is a liberal construction of the resolution to give it this effect.

The Reporters' statement of the case: The following are the facts as found by the court: I. The claimant in 1878 was, and for many years prior to that time had been, an officer in the United States Army. II.

The Reporters’ statement of tbe case: Tbe following are tbe facts as found by tbe court: I. On December 10, 1872, one Isaac Taylor, then collector of internal revenue for tbe sixth district of Tennessee, was suspended as a defaulter, and tbe claimant, wbo bad up to that date been a' deputy under Taylor, was designated as acting'collector. He held this position until May 24, 1873.

The Reporters' statement of the (aso: These cases, by stipulation, were presented upon substantially the same facts that were found in the cases of Morgan v. The United States and Von Hoffman v. The Same (113 U. S. B., 476; 18 C. Cls. B., 386).

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The case involved two distinct causes of action: 1. On the 20th July, 1870, the President, in virtue of the power vested in him by the Act 18th April, 1814 (3 Stat. L., p. 136 j Eev.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: . This ease was submitted upon a mass of unauthenticated printed documents transmitted with the claim by the House ■Committee on Military Affairs.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The case was argued and submitted at the last term of the court, but there being no proof of the defendauts having used the manufactured articles, it was remanded for further evidence on that point. (See 19 O. Ols. B., 669.) The following are the facts now found by the court, so far as they are involved in the decision of the case: II.

The Reporters’ statement of the ease: The following are the facts of this case as found by the court: I. In 1877 claimant entered the Naval Academy as a cadet-engineer, and on June 10,1881, having successfully passed the final academic examination, received the following certificate, signed by the .officers of the Academy: “UNITED STATES NAVAL ACADEMY. “This certifies that Cadet-Engineer Lyman B. Perkins has completed the prescribed course of study at the United States Naval…

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts of this case as found by the court: I. The claimant performed certain work in the District of Columbia, in the improvement of its streets, under the direction of the Commissioners of said District, for all of which work he has been paid in full, excepting the following retains: $356.27, $43.72, $6.86, $44.03, $7.30, $322.31, $51.20, $29.50, $101.76, aggregating $962.95, which sum became due January 1, 1876. II.

The Reporters statement of the case: The following- are the facts as found by the court: I. The claimant’s .organization and constitution… Held: and resulted in the election of Flying Squirrel or Callee-high as principal chief, and John Jackson Oo-wah-tun-tee as second chief. “ The following form of government was referred to the committee and report favorable. “ It was then moved and seconded that the constitution be adopted by the council, which was unanimously adopted as…

The Reporters' statement of the case: The action of the Senate concerning the claim, and the motion of the defendant to dismiss for want of jurisdiction, will be found in the opinion of the court.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts of the case as found by the court: I. The claimant is an ordnance storekeeper of the Commissary Department of the Army, and has been so since 1867. He was on duty as acting assistant commissary ,of subsistence from December 1, 1867, to August 9,1876, and from May 15, 1876, to March 31, 1884. He has not been paid for such service tbe $100 per annum provided by the act of July 15,1870, ch. 294, sec. 24 (16 Stat.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: In this case the defendants’ motion to dismiss for want of / jurisdiction presented the question whether one of the houses of Congress, by virtue of the Rev. Stat., § 1059, could confer jurisdiction of captured property cases $ and their demurrer to the petition presented the question whether a claim so referred could be deemed a valid cause of action. 1.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following is the motion made by the claimants, and the order thereupon entered by the court: The claimant, the Union Pacific JRailroad Company and the Union Pacific Railway Company, now comes and states to the court that it deems it essential to the right determination of the matters in issue in the above-entitled cases that the court should pass upon and find what is established by the evidence, embodied in the record in such cases…

The court below decides— (1.) When a government seeks reparation from a foreign power for injuries done to its citizens, its authority is not derived from them nor subject to their instruction or revocation. (2.) The government cannot be held liable on an implied assumpsit for money had and received in its sovereign capacity from another sovereign.

The court below decides— (1.) Though an officer may not be authorized in terms to submit a matter to arbitration, yet if he be specially authorized by Congress to act in regard to the subject-matter of the submission, so that he will have power to carry into effect the decree which the award may direct, he has power to submit the matter to arbitration.

The court below decides— (1.) The common-law rule that j:>rior understandings of contracting parties are merged in the final contract cannot he strictly applied to government contracts required hy law to he made by advertisements, bids, and acceptances.

The court below decides— (I.) When a decree is properly an adjudication, it is a settled rule that it must conform to the allegations in the pleadings. (2.) When a decree entered by consent is properly a settlement of a controversy, its terms will not he restrained to matters alleged in the pleadings, hut will he construed to iuclude all matters which the parties intended should he a subject of settlement and compromise.

• The court below decides— (1.) A contractor who received certificates of indebtedness in payment of his demand, and sold them for less than the nominal value thereof, cannot recover the difference. (2.) The power of this court to render judgment against a claimant upon a counter-claim, under Revised Statutes, 5 1059, is well settled.

The court below decides— ■XI.) The claimants, having been notified at the outset that the defendants expected them to construct the coffer-dams, and having on their part notified the defendants that they should construct them and hold the defendants liable for the cost and expense thereof, cannot prove the cost and expense by the evidence of experts as to its probable amount, the same being specific facts within their knowledge and control and not within the knowledge and…

The court below decides— (1.) Though an agreement made in 1864 by au assistant special agent of tlie Treasury for the bringing out of cotton was utterly void, yet the Secretary of theTreasury had power subsequently to ratify the transaction. (2.) Transactions under the Abandoned or captured property Act (12 Sfcat.

The court below decides— (1.) Congress, by the Aet 29th July, 1882 (22 Stat. L., p. 723, ch. 359), determined not only what particular citizens of Tennessee should have relief for income taxes assessed and paid during the war, but also the exact amount which should be paid to each one of them.

Tbe court below decides— (I.) Bonds of tlie United States made redeemable at the pleasure of the United States after five years, and payable twenty years after date, which, after five and before twenty years, are called in for payment in three months after the date of the call, under authority of the Act of July 14, 1870 (oh. 77, 10 Stat.

The court below decides— (1.) Under the JPrize Act ldfi-1 (13 Slat. L , p. 305, $ 10, oh. 174) the commander of a single ship making a capture is entitled to one-tenth of the prize-money, and cannot take, like the others, in proportion to his “ rate of pay in the service,” oven though his one-tenth be less than the shares of his subordinate officers.

The court below decides— (1.) Where a person indebted to the government fraudulently obtains a negotiable draft from a third person, without consideration, and the government, through its officers, exchanges the draft for the negotiable paper of a bank, which it sells, and obtains the value thereof in cash, no cause of action arises in favor of the third person, and the government cannot be deemed t.o hold moneys which he should recover cr. mino et tono.

The courfc below decides— (1.) When construing an assignment given under and required by an act of Congress, the court will go behind the instrument and iuquire into the intent of the act and the circumstances attending its passage.

The court below decides— (1.) The power to revoke an order dismissing an officer from the Army has been frequently exercised by different Presidents. (2.) If an order dismissing an officer be revoked before the rights of other parties have intervened, the revocation presents only a question of executive authority.