Case ID: us-ct-cl_13/html/0525-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "The Chief Justice", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

PIPER & LAFLIN’S CASE.
    (12 C. Cls. R., 219;
    
    not reported in U. S. R.)
    James L. Piper et al., appellants, v. The United States, appellees.
    
      On the claimants'1 Appeal.
    
    
      The Commissioner of Indian Affairs advertises for transportationfrom Wichita for certain designated Indian supplies to he sent to certain agencies. One item is flour. The claimants’ hid for all the supplies is accepted. The contract specifies the supplies as those to he purchased hy the bureau for the public service, and transported over a certain railroad under a designated contract with, that road. Instead of purchasing all of the supplies and sending them over that road as contemplated hy the advertisement and supposed hy the contractors, the bureau purchases the flour from third persons, deliverable at the agencies by the vendors. The contractors being ready to transport the flour, and being bound to transport the other supplies, and being thus disappointed in receiving the flour, bring this action for the profits they might have made.
    
    The court "below holds that whore contractors are entitled to transport from the terminus of a railway to certain Indian agencies all the goods of the Indian Bureau which may come over that road under a designated contract with it, it is not a breach for the bureau to buy goods deliverable at the agencies by the vendors. Judgment for the defendants. The claimants’ appeal.
    The judgment of the court below is affirmed without an opinion by the Supreme Court.
    
      The Reporters' statement of the case:
    The action was founded on the alleged breach by the defendants of a transportation contract, and depended upon the construction to be given to tbe following clause thereof:
    “The said Piper and Laflin agree to transport from the depot or storehouse of the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fé Railroad, at Wichita, Kansas, or from such other point on the line of said railroad as may be designated by tbe said party of the first part, to the Upper Arkansas, Wichita, and Kiowa Indian Agencies in the Indian Territory, and to such other points in the Indian Territory as may be required by the said superintendent of Indian affairs, all the goods, subsistence stores, merchandise, and freights purchased by tbe Indian Department for tbe public sendee during tbe fiscal year commencing tbe first day of 7tb month (July), A. D. 1873, and ending tbe 30th day of Gtb month (June), 1874, and transported over said Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fé Bailroad, under contract with M. L. Sargent, general freight agent thereof, of even date herewith, and estimated at eight hundred tons, more or less.”
   The Chief Justice

announced the decision of the Supreme Court, January 29, 1878; but no opinion has since been filed.