Case ID: us-ct-cl_24/html/0527-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Chief Justice Fullee", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

JONATHAN Q. BARTON v. THE UNITED STATES.
    [23 C. Cls. R., 376; 129 U. S. R., 249.]
    
      On the claimant’s Appeal.
    
    The claimant has been paid all of the graduated or longevity pay allowed by certain statutes, but claims the salary and allowances which he would have received had he entered the regular when he entered the volunteer Navy, and been promoted therein under the rules established by law.
    The court below decides:
    (1) The Act March 3,1883 (22 Stat. L., 473), relating to the longevity pay of naval officers, was plainly intended as a substitute for the Act August 5, 1882 (22 Stat. L., p. 287), and so far as it differs from the earlier act operates as* a repeal.
    (2) The Aot August 5, 1882, merely offered a gratuity. It neither contained the elements of a contract nor created a vested right. Congress, therefore, might change the conditions of the gratuity at any time before payment.
    (3) The^tci March 3,1883, does not confer upon naval officers a right to the salary apd allowances of positions which they did not hold. The effect of the act is to credit an officer with the actual time he previously served in the lowest grade having graduated pay when held by him.
    The decision of the court below is affirmed on the same grounds.
   Mr. Chief Justice Fullee

delivered the opinion of the Supreme Court, January 21, 1889.