Volume 47 — Court of Claims Reports

On the Proofs. The Reporter’s statement of the case: The following are the facts of the case as found by the court: I. Claimant, The… Held: “A mere bid in answer to an advertisement for proposals for building does not constitute a contract. “A conditional acceptance, such as requiring a bond, delays the completion of the contract until the condition is complied with.” (78 Maine, 230-232.) (Jenness v. Moumt Hope Iron Go., 53 Maine, 20; Maryland v. Tabor, 53 Maine, 511;…

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of the case: The facts of the case appear sufficiently 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. Thomas Mason, the claimant’s decedent, was a citizen of the United States, and always bore true allegiance to the Government thereof. He served with a creditable record as an officer in the United States service during the Civil War. Some time — the date unknown — after the Civil War he was appointed an officer in the Revenue-Cutter Service. II.

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts of this case as found by the court: I. Timothy J. Butler is a citizen of the United States and was such citizen on October 15, 1904, on which date he was duly appointed a copyist, at the compensation of $75 per month, on the engineering staff of the Isthmian Canal Commission, and was assigned to duty on the Isthmus of Panama, and he accepted the said appointment and reported for duty thereunder…

On the Proofs. The Beforters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts of the case as found by the court: I. The claimant, Albert B. Bristow, served in the Fourth Artillery, United States Army, from December 19, 1890, to March 18, 1894. He enlisted in the Marine Corps April 11, 1894; was appointed corporal July 5, 1894; appointed sergeant January 1, 1896; honorably discharged April 10, 1899.

On the Proofs. The Reporters'1 statement of the case: The following are.the facts of the case as found by the court: I. During the period for which this claim has been made the claimant was a captain in the Fifteenth Regiment of United States Cavalry, with a record of over 15 years’ service. II.

On the Proofs. The Reporters' statement of the case: The following are the facts of the case as found by the court: I. During the period covered by this claim Henry Williams was an assistant naval constructor in the Navy, having been appointed as such April 4,1900, after serving as a naval cadet from September 6,1894, to April 3,1900, inclusive.

On the defendants’ Demurrer. The Reporters1 statement of the case: The allegations of the' petitions demurred to are sufficiently disclosed in the opinion of the court. This court has jurisdiction of this suit. A judgment and decree for the money value of the land is all that is sued for.

On the defendants' Motion. The Reporters' statement of the case: The grounds of the defendants’ motion will be found stated in the opinion of the court. Mr. P. M. Cox (with whom was Mr. Assistant Attorney General Thompson) for the defendants.

On the claimants Motion. The Reporters’ statement of tlie case: The grounds of the claimant’s motion will be found stated in the opinion of the court.

On the defendants' Demurrer. The Reporters' statement of the case: The allegations of tbe petition involved in the hearing upon the demurrer are stated in the opinion of the court.

On the defendants’ Demurrer. The Reporters’ statement of the case: The principal allegations of the petition demurred to will be found in the opinion of the court.

On the defendants'1 Herrmrrer. The Reporters' statement of the case: The allegations of the petition demurred to will be found stated 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 brig Philanthropist, whereof Forrest Richardson was then master, sailed on a commercial voyage from Alexandria, Va., May 2, 1799, bound for Laguira.

On the defendants’ Derrmrrer. The Reporters’ statement of the case. The allegations of the petition demurred to will be found stated in the opinion of the court.

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of the case: (Note that on a motion for a new trial (post) it is held that no valid contract existed in this case and that an action can not be maintained against the Government.) The following are the facts of the case as found by the court: I. The claimant herein is a citizen and resident of the State of Louisiana, town of Vidalia, and parish of Concordia. II.

<p>Manufacturers are unable to furnish certain chambray shirts as rapidly as required by their contract. The defendants therefore advertise for bids to supply the deficiency. The adver-lisement calls for the quality of shirts specified in the original advertisement. A third party submits a- bid at a higher price than the first, and it being the lowest bid, is accepted. The claimants contend that the higher price was paid for a better shirt than they had undertaken to furnish; but the sample submitted was a substantial compliance with the specifications, and was accepted as such, it being inferior in some particulars and superior in others.</p> <p>I. Where a contractor fails to deliver according to the terms of his contract and the defendants, in pursuance of a provision in the contract, advertise for bids, and the advertisement is identical in terms with the first advertisement to which the claimants made their bid, and the articles so furnished, while higher priced, are a substantial compliance with the specifications, the contractor can not maintain that the defendants obtained a better article than he was bound to furnish.</p> <p>II. Where a contract expressly provides that if the contractor does not deliver in the agreed time, the defendants may procure from other parties the required articles, which shall “ he the hind as herein specified, as near as practicable,” an article somewhat different may be accepted as a substantial compliance with the contract if the advertisement calls for no better or different article.</p>

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts of the case as found by the court: I. On May 19,1899, the claimant, a corporation organized under the laws of the State of Nebraska and the United States, acting by W. L. Marshall, major, Corps of Engineers, United States Army, entered into a contract, approved by the Chief of Engineers on June 28, 1889, for the construction of certain earthwork on the feeder of the Illinois and Mississippi…

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of the case: This case not being appealable, no finding of facts was filed. They will be found, however, in the opinion of the court.

On the claimants' Motion. The Reporters’ statement of the case: I. The ship Asia, Edward Yard, master, sailed on a commercial voyage from Calcutta on February 16, 1797, bound for Philadelphia, duly provided with a register, invoices, and letters (but whether a sea letter was included does not appear to the satisfaction of the court). It does not appear that this vessel was provided with a passport as required by the treaty of 1778.

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts as found by the court: I. Plaintiff, George T. Davis, was, on the 26th day of May, 1904, appointed a paymaster’s clerk in the Navy and assigned to duty with Paymaster A. Hovey-King on duty at Cavite, P. I., as pay officer of the naval station and prison at Cavite, the naval station at Olongapo, and six vessels, paying in all 480 persons in the naval service.

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of tbe case: Tbe following aré tbe facts as found by tbe court: I. Tbe original claimant herein, a partnership composed of James E. Simpson, James E. Simpson, jr., Alfred H. Simpson, and William E. Simpson, was doing business under tbe firm name of J. E. Simpson & Co. at the time of tbe contract and work thereunder hereinafter referred to.

On the Proofs. The Reporters' statement of the case: The following are the findings of fact as found by the court: I. On March 17, 1896, the claimant in this case, Frank G. Farnham, a citizen of the United States, filed an application in the United States Patent Office for letters patent for improvements in stamp holders, upon which application there were granted and issued to him Letters Patent No.. 596656, dated January 4, 1898, which letters patent are made a part of the…

On the Proofs. The Reporters' statement of the case: The following are the facts of the case as found by the court: I. On the 8th day of May, 1899, a contract was entered into by and between the claimant and the United States, the latter acting by Maj. W. L. Marshall, Corps of Engineers, United States Army, for certain construction work in connection with the construction of the Illinois & Missis-sipi Canal, in the State of Illinois, which contract was approved by the Chief…

On the Proofs. The Reporters' statement of the case: The following are the facts of the case as found by the court: I. The claimants, Archibald Hollerbach and Samuel L. May, partners doing business as Hollerbach & May, of Evansville, Ind., on July 23, 1902, entered into a contract with the United States for repairs on Dam No. 1, Green River, Ky., in accordance with certain specifications annexed to said contract.

On the Proofs. The Reporters' statement of the case. The following are the facts as found by the court: I. The claimants herein, George F. Archer and Kate C. Archer, were in the year 1903, have been since, and are now, the owners in fee of those lands lying and being situated in Chicot County, Arli., and described as “ Point Chicot plantation,” being that tract of land opposite the town of Greenville, Miss., bounded on the north, east, and west by the waters of the…

On the Proofs. The Reporters’’ statement of the case: The following are the facts of the case as found by the court: I. The claimant, together with the Baltimore & Ohio and the Baltimore & Ohio Southwestern Railroad Companies, entered into a contract on the 14th day of May, 1903, to transport 16 boxes of books from Washington, D. C., to Fort Leavenworth, Kans., in accordance with a written contract, whose material provisions are as follows: Received, Washington, D. C., Majr…

On the Proofs. The Reporters' statement of the case: On a previous trial of the case, which has not been reported, claimant’s petition was dismissed. The following are the facts of the case as found by the court: I. Prior to the date of the transactions hereinafter referred to the claimant was and still is a corporation organized under the laws of the State of Ohio, with an office in Cincinnati. II.

On the defendants' Demurrer. The Reporters' statement of the case: This case was first heard upon the defendants’ demurrer to the original petition. (46 C. Cls. R., 68.) The material allegations of the amended petition will be found 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. During the periods hereinafter mentioned the claimant was a sergeant in Troop H, Eleventh Cavalry, United States Army. II.

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts as found by the court: I. Claimant is a citizen of the United States, and on October 19,1903, enlisted in the United States Marine Corps as a private, and has continued in such service until the present time. II.

On the Proofs. The Reporters' statement of the case: The following are the facts of this case as found by the court: I. October 12, 1908, the claimant and the United States, through Capt. C. S. Riche, Corps of Engineers, United States Army, pursuant to an advertisement by the defendants and the bid of the claimant in response thereto, entered into a contract whereby, in conformity with the advertisement and specifications attached thereto and made a part of the petition…

On the defendants'’ Motion. The Re-porters’ statement of the case: The grounds of the defendants’ motion will be found in the opinion of the court.

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts of the case as found by the court: I. The claimant, Walter F. Smith, was on the 3d day of March, 1899, appointed to the position created by section 24 of the Navy personnel act, approved March 8, 1899 (30 Stat. L., 1009), of second leader of the band of the Marine Corps, and has ever since, by subsequent reenlistments, so continued. II.

On the Proofs. The Reporters’’ statement of the case: The following are the facts of the case as found bya the court: I. The claimant,… Held: February 19, 1908. that by reason of its silence on the subject the matter was necessarily left for the exercise of discretion by the Executive; and although prior thereto the Executive had ap “It is directed that hereafter assistant paymasters shall be considered as due for promotion to be passed assistant paymasters as soon as they…

On the defendants1 Motion. The Ref otters' statement of the ease: The contents of the bill referred will be found 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, Nelson P. Vulte, was appointed a second lieutenant in the United States Marine Corps from June 30, 1903; accepted the appointment and executed the required oath of office July 13, 1903. He was promoted to first lieutenant from March 3, 1904.

On the Proofs. The Reporters' statement of the case: The following are.the facts as found by the court: I. Claimant is a corporation organized under the laws of the Kingdom of Belgium, duly registered and lawfully entitled to transact business in the Philippine Islands* and having such corporate existence, rights, and powers during the period covered by the transactions described in the petition.

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of the case: This is a claim for the refund of $300 to each of the claimants named in Finding XV, being the amount paid by each of them or their decedents in order to secure exemption from personal service under the draft made by the military authorities of the United States in the State of Kentucky in the year 1864.

On the Proofs. The Reporters’’ statement of the case: The following are the facts of the case as found by the court: I. On October 23, 1901, claimant entered into a contract with the United States to assume and exercise command as master of the naval collier Sterling for the sum of $200 per month until such time as his contract should be terminated by the Secretary of the Navy. II.

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts of this, case as found by the court: I. James H. Doyle, after serving for more than 25 years as an enlisted man in the Navy, was, on April 15,1898, rated a mate in the Navy.

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the essential facts as found in the case by the court, except as stated in the opinion: VI.

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of the case: This case not being appealable, no findings of fact were filed by the court.

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of the case. The following are the facts as found by the court: I. Claimant is a body corporate, duly incorporated under the laws of the States of Missouri, Kansas, and Nebraska, and from a time long prior to July 1, 1906, it has owned and operated, among other railway properties, a line of railway between Kansas City and St. Louis, in the State of Missouri; a line between Kansas City and Atchison, in the State of Kansas; and a line…

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts as found by the court: I. The claimant, the Sanford & Brooks Co. (Inc.), of Baltimore, Md., under date of June 27, 1905, entered into a contract with the United States, a copy of which and the advertisement and specifications thereto belonging and being made a part thereof are attached to the petition herein and made a part of the same. II.

On the Proofs. The Reporter’s statement of the case: The following are the facts of the case as found by the court: I. The claimant, George A. Curry, was on and prior to March 23, 1909, a clerk in the Quartermaster’s Department of the Army, serving in the office of the chief quartermaster, Army of Cuban Pacification, Maj. Chauncey B. Baker, at Habana, Cuba, at $1,600 a year. II.

The Reporters’ statement of the case: On May 29, 1911, the court, on defendants’ motion, dismissed claimant’s petition with an opinion by Chief Justice Peelle, Judge Howry dissenting, which opinions are reported in 46 Court of Claims, 559. On May 6, 1912, claimant’s motion for a new trial was overruled without an opinion. Howry, J., filed the following opinion dissenting from the court’s order dismissing petition.

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of tbe case: Tbe following are tbe facts of tbe case as found by tbe court: I. This claim was referred to tbe court by an act of Congress entitled “An act for tbe relief of tbe Mille Lac Band of Chippewa Indians in tbe State of Minnesota, and for other purposes,” approved February 15, 1909- (35 Stat.

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts of the case as found by the court: I. On July 17, 1899, claimant entered into a contract with the United States, through Capt. Curtis McD.

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts of the case as found by the court: ' I. The claimant is a corporation organized under the laws of the State of New York for the purpose of carrying on a general construction and engineering business, with its principal office and place of business in New York City. II.

On the Proofs. The Reporters* statement of the case: The following are the facts of the case as found by the court: I. The claimant, Allan B. Jaynes, was clerk of the District Court of the United States for the First Judicial District of the Territory of Arizona from October 6, 1906, to December 31, 1910, duly qualified and acting. II.

On the defendants' Demurrer. The Reporters’ statement of the case: The material allegations set up in the petition and amended petition in this case may be found in the opinion of the court.

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of the case: No findings of fact were filed, the case not being appeal-able.

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts of the case as found by the court: I. Claimant is a citizen of the United States and the State of California. II. In an act of Congress approved March 3, 1899, making appropriations for the improvement of rivers and harbors (30 Stat.

On the Proofs. The Reporters' statement of the case: This case not being appealable, the conrt made no formal findings of fact. But the facts involved will be found stated in the opinion of the court.

On the defendants'1 Demurrer. The Reporters’ statement of the case: The allegations of the petition demurred to will be found stated in the opinion of the court.

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of the case: The facts of the case will be found in the opinion of the court.

On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the essential facts of the case as found by the court: I. The… Held: “ Damages to land by flooding as the result of revetments erected by the United States along the banks of the Mississippi Eiver to prevent erosion of the banks from natural causes are consequential and do not constitute a taking of the lands flooded within the meaning of the fifth amendment of the Federal Constitution.” The decision…

<p>In March, 1898, a testator bequeathes his personal x>roperty to the claimant in trust. The will provides that M. TV. S. shall en;joy during her natural life the income from this estate. Then comes the Spanish war revenue law, act 30th June, 1898, imposing a tax on “ legacies or distributive shares arising from personal property." The tax is assessed and collected on the income computed up to July, 1902, exactly as if the interest of M. TV. S. in the estate consisted of an absolute cash bequest payable immediately to her, the value of which interest was calculated by annuity tables based upon the expectation of life of said M. W. S. The suit is to recover back the money so paid, less the sum actually received by M. TV. S., as income upon the estate so bequeathed prior to July, 1902, under and by virtue of the act 27th June, 1902.</p> <p>The court below decides:</p> <p>1. The Spanish war revenue statute, Act IStli June, 1898 (30 Stat. L., p. 460, sec. 29), did not impose duties upon legacies which were vested merely within the technical meaning of that term, but only upon legacies which were vested in actual possession and enjoyment</p> <p>II. By the terms of the Spanish war revenue statute and its amendments the turning over of a legacy by a trustee to the beneficiary and the payment of the tax imposed were intended to be contemporaneous. The statutes examined and construed.</p> <p>HI. It is well settled that under the Act 27th Juno, 1902 (32 Stat. L., p. 506, sec. 3), the taxes to be refunded are those which have been collected on “ contingent 'beneficial interests not absolutely vested in possession or enjoyment.”</p> <p>IV. The jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Treasury under said act is not exclusive.</p>

<p> On the defendants' Appeal. </p>

<p> On the defendants’ Appeal. </p>

<p> On both parties' Appeals. </p>

<p> On the claimant’s Appeal. </p>

<p> On the claimant's Appeal. </p>

<p> On both parties'1 Appeals. </p>

<p>On the defendants’ Appeal.</p>