Volume 23 — Court of Claims Reports

The Reporters’ statement of the case : The facts and circumstances by which the claimant sought to obtain an allowance of his appeal wane pro tune are stated in the opinion of the court.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: This case was appealed and submitted at the same term,, and was affirmed by the Supreme Court. The following' are the facts as found by the court below, and upon which the case-was considered by the Supreme Court: I. An election was held November 4,1SS4, for the purpose of electing, by the people, a Representative to the Forty-ninth Congress for the Second Congressional district of Rhode Island. II.

The 'Reporters' statement of tlie case: This case was appealed and submitted at the same term, and was affirmed by the Supreme Court. The following are the facts as found by the court below, and upon which the case was considered by the court above: I. The claimant was a lieutenant-commander iu the United States Navy, of less than five years’ standing, during all the period covered by this claim. II.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The facts upon which the jurisdictional question involved rested are stated in the opinion of the court. The question of jurisdiction being determined in favor of the claimant, the court found and reported to Congress the facts relating to the demand as in other Congressional cases.

The Reporters' statement of the case: The following are the facts as found by the court: I. Claimant was a lieutenant on the active list of the Navy of more than five years’ service in that grade during the time covered by this claim. II. July 28,1882, the claimant was ordered by the Secretary of the Navy to report to Commodore Pattison, then commandant of the Washington navy-yard, for command of the United States steamer Speedwell.

The Reporters’ statement of the ease: This was a motion made under Rule 70 to dismiss the petition because it appeared upon the face thereof that the claim was barred by the statute of limitations. The facts stated, iu the petition are set forth in the opinion of the court. It is contended that the statue of limitations was running from the time the drafts were issued. This may' be true as against the drafts or any action on them.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The claim in this case was transmitted to the court by the Committee on War Claims of the House of Represen tatives in July, 1886, and was brought to a hearing during the present term. On the hearing, the counsel for the Government raised the question of jurisdiction. The court went no further than the petition of the claimant, the principal allegations of which are quoted in its opinion. .

The Reporters’ statement-of the case: The following are the facts of the case as found by the court: I. February 8,1875, the claimant was commissioned a commander in the United States Navy, and served therein until July 6,1883. II. February 18, 1875, he was in command of the United States steamer Ashuelot, attached to the Asiatic squadron, under the command of Rear-Admiral Glitz. On the morning of that day the steamer ran upon a rock and was lost with eleven of the crew. III.

The Reporters* statement of the-case: The facts upon which the claimant grounded his objections to the allowance upon appeal appear sufficiently 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 was, on the 2d day of March, 1885,… Held: with express reference to consular officers, that compensation begins to run from the date of commission. (Dainese v. United States, 15 C. Cls. B., 64, 78.) By section 1740 of the Revised Statutes it is clear that he became entitled to the salary for the thirty days occupied by him in receiving instructions.

Hie Reporters7 statement of the case: The case was appealed and submitted at the sáme term, and so far as relates to the counter-claim of the Government was reversed by the Supreme Court (vide post).

The Reporters’ statement of the case: In the present case the claimant was enlisted in the Marine Corps in 187G for eight years eleven months and twenty-six days; he then being under thirteen years of age, and that being the period of his minority. The authority for such enlistments is found in the Naval Appropriation Act 12th June, 1858 (11 Stat.

The Reporters'1 statement of the case: The provisions of the contract involving construction will be found in the opinion. The following are the facts found ¿>y the court: I. On the 15th of June, 1881, the claimants and defendants entered into the contract annexed to and forming part of the petition, and the same was duly approved by the Chief of Ordnance.

The Reporters’ statement of tbe case: This case, appealed and submitted at tbe same term, was affirmed by tbe Supreme Court. The following are tbe facts upon which tbe case was considered in both courts: I. On tbe 22d December, 1882, tbe Quartermaster-General, •acting under and pursuant to tbe Act for the relief of Julia, A. Nutt, widow and executrix of Haller Nutt, deceased, 7th August, 18S2 (22 Stat.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts as found by the court: I. The claimant was á passed assistant engineer from April 28, 1879, to March 3, 1881, and from the latter date he was chief engineer until September 1,1882. II.

The Reporters1 statement of the case: The following are the facts of this case as found by the court: I. The claimants and defendants entered into the following contract in writing, after advertisements for proposals and proposals made by the claimants, who were the lowest bidders: “This agreement, entered into this sixth day of December, 1882, between General M. O. Meigs, supervising engineer and architect of the fire-proof building for Pension Office, of the first part,…

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The facts of this case will be found in the previous report (22 C. Cls. R., 269); and the grounds of the present motion are quoted in the opinion of the court. The liability incurred for the payment of the claimant’s salary, both as member and secretary, was strictly within the appropriation made for the fiscal year, and, upon the court’s own theory, ought to be allowed for that reason.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts of this case as found by the court: I. Prior to November 28, 1861, claimant served in the Navy six years and forty days as an enlisted man. II. He was appointed gunner in the regular Navy November 28, 1861, and served as such until April 14, 1S68, when his resignation was accepted. His service as gunner was six years and one hundred and forty-five days under this appointment. III.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: This case not being appealable, no findings of fact were filed. It turned entirely upon the construction to be given to the terms employed by tbe Commissioner of Internal Eevenue in bis recommendation of an award to tbe claimant for information as informer. Tbe language of tbe recommendation will be found quoted in tbe opinion of tbe court.

<p> On the defendants’ Motion.- </p> <p>On the trial it appears that the whole claim was presented to the Quartermaster-General under the Act 4th July, 1864, and that it was supported by evidence. He reported it with a recommendation of certain specified items. An appropriation was made therefor, and paid by Treasury draft, payable to order. The claimant gave no receipt, and protested that the payment was not accepted in satisfaction of the whole claim.</p> <p>I. The action of the Quartermaster-General under the Act ith July, 1864 (13 Stat. L., 381), is not conclusive upon a claimant’s rights; but a provision by Congress that the payment of his awards shall be “ taken and accepted in each ease as a full and final discharge” (Act March 11,1878, 20 Stat. L., 503) is conclusive, and’ extends to every item of the claim presented to the Quartermaster-General.</p> <p>II. The fact that money is received under protest will not enable the rer cipient to evade a statute which declares payment to be conclusive.</p> <p>III. Where a claim, was paid with a condition that the payment should he “a full and final discharge,” the whole of it is “tarred” within the meaning of the Bowman Act, and the court is without jurisdiction as to items which were not allowed.</p>

The Reporters1 statement of the ease: The claimant was a witness for the Government in a trial at New Orleans in February, 1886. He seeks to recover mileage from Las Cruces, in New Mexico, a distance, going and returning, of 2,586 miles. The accounting officers allowed him mileage for the distance between San Antonio and New Orleans,, a distance, going and returning, of 1,154 miles.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts as found by the court: I. The claimant, a boatswain in the Navy, on the 21st June, 1876, was ordered by Rear-Admiral Worden, commanding at Callao, Peru,' “ to proceed to your home in the United States, and, upon your arrival, report to the honorable the Secretary of the Navy.” II. The claimant, pursuant to the foregoing order, traveled from Callao to Washington and reported as directed.

The liqporters’’ statement of the case: The claim in this case was transmitted to the court under the Bowman Act by the Secretary of the Interior in June, 1881. It was not brought to a bearing until January, 1888. The following are the facts, which, with the opinion of the court, were transmitted to the Secretary of the Interior for his guidance and action.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts of this case as found by the court: I. October 24,1883, the claimants recovered judgment in the Court of Commissioners of Alabama Claims for $229,637,63, together with interest, aggregating the snm of $346,982.40, such judgment being one of the second class named in the act- of Congress entitled “An act re-establishing the Court of Commissioners of Alabama Claims, and for the distribution of the unappropriated…

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts of this case as found by the court: I. The petitioner entered the Naval Academy in September, 1877, pursued a course of four years, passed a successful examination, and received a certificate from the Academic Board in the following words, to wit: “ This certifies that Cadet-Midshipman Eugene M. Harmon has completed the, prescribed course of study at the United States Naval Academy, and has ’ successfully…

The Reporters'* statement of the case: The following are the facts of this case as found by the court: I. The claimant, Charles H. Bill, was clerk of the District Court of the United States for the northern district of Ohio from June 19,1885, to June 15, 1886. II. Said District Court was in session on one hundred and thirty-seven days, from January 2, 1886, to June 14,1886, and the judge of said court was present, and the said Bill as clerk in attendance on all of said days.

The Reporter's statement of the case: The following is the private act upon which the case rested: “ Be it enacted, etc., That the claim of the legal representatives of John Wightman, deceased, for and on account of the mail service rendered, by said John Wightman, deceased, in carrying the United States mails on route No. 3413, from Pittsburgh to Erie, Pennsylvania, a distance of one hundred and thirty-three miles, three times a week each way, from August 1, 1859, to and…

The Reporters' statement of the case: The following are the facts in Irwin’s case as found by the court. The act by which the claims were referred to this court is set forth in the opinion : I. The firm of J. O. Irwin & Co., at the time of the occurrences hereinafter set forth, was composed of Joseph O. Irwin, James T. Thornton, and Ulysses Turner. Ulysses Turner died May 20, 1879. The said firm was for many years engaged in freighting across the plains. II.

The Reporters'1 statement of the case: This case was submitted upon the proofs without objection being taken to the insufficiency of the petition by the counsel for the United States. The averment deemed by the court insufficient to confer jurisdiction and the irregularity of the verification are set forth in the opinion of the court.

The Reporters’’ statement of the ease. The following are the facts of this case so far as they relate to the only question of law presented and determined : For services rendered to the United States in the District Court during said year 1885 the fees and emoluments of the clerk amounted to the sum of $2,062.65. For services .rendered in the Circuit Court during said year the fees and emoluments were $117.70, aggregating the sum of $2,180.35 for both courts.

The Reporters' statement of the case. The matter of the stoppage of the pay of Major Billings was transmitted to the court by the Secretary of War May 25, 1887.

The Reporters’ statement of this case: The following are the facts of this case as found by the court: I. September 30,1867, the claimant was appointed a midshipman in the Navy.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: This case was submitted upon the proofs, but, as will be seen in the opinion of the court, was adversely determined upon a question of jurisdiction. The claim was transmitted by the Committee on'War Claims of the House of Representatives on March 2, 1885.

The Reporter’s statement of the case: The case was submitted on the proofs, but not appearing to be within the jurisdiction of the court, no findings were filed.

The Reporters’’ statement of the case: The following are. the facts, as found by the court: I. Coffin Point plantation, on St. Helena’s Island, Beaufort County, S. 0., was sold under the direct-tax act, on the 10th of March, 1863, to E. S. Philbrick. At the time of the sale Mary C. De Saussure, Susan H. Peronneau, William H. Peronneau, and Ann B. Du Bose were owners, as tenants in common, in fee-simple in remainder of one undivided fifth of the said plantation.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts as found by the court: I. The brig William, a duly registered vessel of the United States, built at Pownalborough, Mass., in 1785, of 152tons burden, whereof James Gilmore was master and David Greene owner, both of Boston, Mass., and citizens of tbe United States, sailed from Boston August 2,1798, bound for Jamaica, with a cargo of merchandise owned by and consigned to Robert Thompson, a citizen of Jamaica,…

The Reporters' statement of the case: The facts were not a matter of controversy, the only question in the case being whether the Postmaster-General had power to reduce the claimant’s salary below the maximum rate named in the statute. ' , By Article II, section 2, of the Constitution of the United States, it is provided that, while the President may nominate, and by and with the ad¡vice and consent of the Senate, appoint all officers of the Government, yet “ the Congress…

The Reporters’ statement of the case : The following are the facts as found by the court: I. The claimant was a commissioner of the circuit court of the United States for the northern district of New… Held: the amount of bail, or, if no bail, where committed. For these reports the claimant charged in his accounts for 1,867 folios, at 15 cents a folio, amounting in all to $280.

The Reporters1 statement of the case : This case came before the court upon the claimant’s motion for a new trial, founded upon alleged errors of law, but was considered and decided upon the facts previously found, which are as follows: I. The schooner Jane, a duly registered vessel of the United States, whereof Israel Snow was master and Eppiram Snow owner, both citizens of the United States, sailed December 7, 1800, on a commercial voyage from Boston to Martinique, laden…

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The case went off on tlie point of jurisdiction, viz, that the claim not having been presented to the Department of State until after it was barred by the statute of limitations, the Secretary was without power to refer it and the court acquired no jurisdiction by the reference. The facts relating to this point will be found in Findings I and III.

The Reporters' statement of the case: The defendant’s motion to dismiss was made under Rule 70, and founded upon the petition of the claimant. The court, however, while granting the-motion and dismissing the petition under the rule, filed the following findings of fact: I. The claimant was an officer of the Navy from March 19, 1872, to May 6, 1872, of the rank of lieutenant. II.

The Reporters1 statement of the case: This case was brought before the court by the defendant’s demurrer to the claimant’s petition ; but the legal question involved did not depend upon the terms of the petition, and could only be inferred from the facts stated, as will be seen in the opinion of the court. Claimant, a United States commissioner, claims double fees by virtue of the provisions of Act of 2Qth February, 1853 (10 Stat.

The Reporters’ statement of the case. The following are the facts as found by the court: General findings relating to the ship and cargo. I. The ship Betsey, of Salem, cleared from that port for -Canton, China, some time in the year 1799, but with orders from the owners for Batavia, Manilla, or Canton.

The Reporters' statement of the case: This case was referred to the court by the Secretary of the ‘Treasury after more than six years had expired since the claim first accrued. The defendants maintained that the Secretary had no power to're-open the,case and make the reference, and .that the claim was barred by the statute of limitations. ■The court found a number of facts which the claimant deemed material, but which were not involved in the decision.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The case presented by the petition and the point raised by the demurrer involved only the interpretation ofthe Act 1868, which will be found quoted in the opinion of the court.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The matter' above designated was transmitted to the court under the Bowman Act by the Secretary of War on the 5th April, 1888. The following are the facts as found by the court: I. First Lieut.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts as found by the court: I. The claimant, Paul Ravesies, has been a commissioner of the circuit court of the United States for the southern district of Alabama from 1873 to the present time.

The Reporters' statement of tbe- case: The following are the facts as found by the court : I. The claimant, in June, 1864, was owner in fee-simple of lot No. 16, in block or square… Held: and that he or they paid the taxes thereon for a period covered by the State statute of limitations. {Wilson's Case, 21 C. Cls. B.., 135.) Hone of these requirements have been established by competent proof. In fact, no proof whatever has been adduced upon either of these material points.

The Reporter’s statement of the case: The following are the facts as found by the court: I. The claimant enlisted in the regular Army of the United States November 21, 1851. September 25,1885, after thirty years’ service, he was retired under the provisions of the Act of February 14, 1885 (23 Stat. L., 305). At the date of his retirement he held the rank of first sergeant and was retired with that rank. He is now a resident of 'the State of New York. II.

The Reporter's statement of the case: The claim for supplies, or stores, alleged to have been taken by or furnished to the military forces of the United States for their use during the late war for the suppression of the rebellion, was transmitted to the court by the Committee on War Claims of the House of Representatives on the 4th day of June, 1886. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts as found by the court: I. August 21,1886, the claimant was duly appointed supervisor of elections for division 9, ward 15, of Philadelphia, Pa., by the circuit court of the United States, in pursuance of sections 2011, 2012, and 2016 of the Revised Statutes.

<p>The Reporters’ statement of the case:</p> <p>The facts appear in the opinion of the court.</p>

The Reporter’s statement of the case: This case first carne before tbe court upon a motion of tbe defendants to dismiss for want of jurisdiction, the ground being that the claim was barred by the statute of limitations. The court overruled the motion, holding that the accounting officers might still adjust the claim, and hence that it was not barred as a Congressional case within the intent of the Bowman Act. (See 20 O. Cls.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The claim for supplies or stores, alleged to, have been taken by or furnished to the military forces of the United States for tbeir use, was transmitted to the court by the Committee on War Claims of the House of Representatives.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts as found by the court: I. The claimant, James B. Davis, was foreman of the machine and foundry division of the Ordnance Department of the Navy at the Washington navy-yard from 1865 to 1880, and Capt. H. L. Howison, inspector of ordnance, was his immediate superior-officer.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts as found by the court: I. The letters patent /for improvement in hook attachments No. 137786, referred to in first paragraph of petition, were issued by the United States on the 15th day of April, 1873, to Ira Merrill, and were re-issued on the 18th of August, 1874, numbered 6021. II.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts as found by the court: I. Plaintiff entered into the following contract: ‘‘Articles of agreement entered into this 27 th day of December, eighteen hundred and eighty-two (1882), between Oapt.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts as found by the court: I. The claimant is administratrix of Young Burge, deceased. IT.

The Reporters'1 statement of the case: • The allegations of the petition are quoted in extenso in the-opinion of the court.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts as found by the court: I. The claimants, Joseph S. Kennedy and William R. Moon, ■doing business in the city and State of New York under the firm name of Kennedy & Moon, shipped on board certain steam vessels hereinafter named, sailing from that port to foreign ports, certain quantities of bituminous coal, to be used as fuel on board said steam vessels.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts as found by the court: I. The claimant was a commissioner of the Circuit Court of the United States for the northern district of Texas from June 17,1879, to December, 1883. II.

The Reporters’ statement of tbe ease: The following are the facts of this case as found by the court: I.The claimant was a commissioner of the Circuit Court of the United States for the district of Kentucky from January 12, 1886, to June 30,1887. II.

The Reporters' statement of the case. The following are the facts of this case as found by the court :• I. The claimant was appointed acting assistant paymaster in the volunteer Navy of the United States, January 30,1864; assistant paymaster, March 2, 1867; passed assistant paymaster, February 10, 1870; and paymaster in the regular Navy, May 29, 1882. He has been continuously in the Navy from his first appointment to the present time. , II.

The Reporters' statement; of the case: fhe following are the'facts as found by the court: I. On or about the 26th day of July, 1884, the claimants shipped from Canada to the United States several lots of vegetable buttons, consigned to different parties in the United States, and the same were entered at the United State's through tne United States custom-house at Detroit, in the State of Michigan.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts of this case as found by the court: I. The claimant, Edward H. McL.ean, is, and has been since April 15, 1881, one of the persons appointed by the marshal of the United States for the northern district of Ohio, under the second clause of section 715 of the Revised Statutes of the United States, to attend upon the grand and other juries, and for other necessary purposes. II.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The facts upon which the present motion was grounded weré undisputed, and the only question discussed upon the arg’ument was whether the discharge of a… Held: and the uniform they wore. 2. What is the meaning of the provision in the act of Au.gust5, 1882, which declares that the act shall not deprive any graduate of his appointment; who may complete his six years’ course during the year 1882? It must be given some meaning if possible.

The Reporters'1 statement of the case: The following are the facts of this case as stated by the court: This action was brought by an internal-revenue store-keeper to recover bis per diem compensation for periods when be was not assigned to duty.

<p>The Reporters’ statement of the ease:</p> <p>The ground of the motion appears in the opinion of the court:</p>

The Reporters’ statement of the case. The following are the facts of this case as found by the court: I. The claimant was a cadet-midshipman, at the Naval Academy, when, on the 9th of June, 1882, he received a certificate in the usual form, and duly signed, that he had 11 completed the prescribed course of study at the United States Naval Academy, and successfully passed the required examination before the Academic Board, preparatory to the two years’ course afloat.” II.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts of this case as found by the court: General findings relative to the ship and cargo. I. The brig Hiram sailed from Antigua for New Haven on the 4-th of May, 1798, under the convoy of a British ship of war. On the 9th of May being separated from her convoy, she was captured by the French privateer Les Deux Amis and taken to the island of St. Martin.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts as found by the court: was, on the 27th day of February, 1883, appointed envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary of the United States to Vlorea, and at once entered upon the duties of that office. II.

The Reporters1 statement of the case: This matter was transmitted to .the court by the Secretary of War by the following communication : “War DEPARTMENT, “ Washington City, October 25, 1887. “ To the honorable the Chief Justice and Judges of the Court of Claims : “The undersigned, Secretary of the Department of War, respectfully represents that a matter is now pending in said Department involving a controverted question of law, to wit: Whether paragraph 1006 of the Army…

<p>The Reporters’ statement of the case:</p> <p>The grounds of the motion appear in the opinion of the court.</p>

The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts as found by the court: I. The claimant, Daniel D. Davies, was a commissioner of the circuit court of the United States for the western district of North Carolina from the 1st day of July, 1880, to the 31st day of December, 1886. II.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: This claim was transmitted to the court by the Committee on Claims of the Senate on the 10th day of January, 1884, under the Bowman Act. A motion to dismiss for want of jurisdiction was argued and submitted with the case upon the merits. The facts relating to jurisdiction are stated in the opinion of the court.