The daily Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1841-1845, 1843-01-31

answer can be gnen.''
BOTTS' IMPEACHMENT OF THE
PRESIDENT.
We shall now, according TO the promise Civ
en- in our la,t article on the 2Sh instant, proceed
10 give copies of The opinions of Mr.. Critten
den, late Attorney General, in the case OF c. J..
Catett, together with one or two other papers
that will set the matter right and show not only
how rery fair the Committee were in their re-
port but also, what reason John M. Bolts had
for making this transaction a matter OF I'M
peachmenl against the President
The first opinion of Mr.. Crltenden is endors-
ed on the envelope containing the papers con-
necled with the case, and is as fellows:
81 am satisfied that Mr. Catlett is entitled to relief
under the special act passed for his benefit but have
not yet been able to bring my mind to satisfactory
conclusion, as TO the proper measure of compensa.
ton to be app led, namely whether it should be the
war price the peace price that ought to be allow
ed him.
("Sisned,'D J. J. CRITTENDEN."
| (No date
On the 2Sth September, 1871, Mr.. Crittenden,
in answer TO letter addressed to him by
Richard Smith, Attorney of Mr. Calleu, wrote
as follows:
4" In the very brief opinion expressed in an en-
dorsement on the papers of Mr. Catlctt, certainly
had reference TO the special act passed for his relief
and the several that therein referred 10,
furnishing the rule principle for the decision of
his supposed i course, that understood the
case, and had made all necessary examination of it,
before attempted to give any opinion about il. MIR.
Hagner's report before me, but imagining myself
capable Of forming opinion on The case for myself
do not know that | examined that report very
thoroughly, or that read it entirely through
+" This, presume, will be sufficient answer to
the inquiries on the preceding page.
e. signed,) J. J. CRITTENDEN
! "SrrrEMBER 2Sth, l64l.n
! The above was written on The back of Mr..
Smiths letter.
| We now give the letter Of Mr.. Albion X.
Paris Comptroller, TO Peter Hagner the Third
Auditor:
"TREAsURY DEPARTMENT,
SECOND CoMrrRoLLERs OFricE,
September 30 ls4l.
Sm: The Attorney General having, by direction Of
the President of the United States examined the
claim of c. J. Catett under the act for his relief
passed July ID 1886, and having given an opinion
that said Catlett is entitled relief under that act
and having also certified that in examining the case,
and giving the opinion, he had reference to the acts
of 1916 and Isl7 furnishing the rule or principle
for the decision oft case think account should
be reported agrecaby 10 the opinion of the Attorney
General, and the papers accordingly referred
back TO you, that account may be reported ac
cordingly
Respectfully, Sc,
('' Signed,) ALBION X. PARIS,
Comptroller
"PrrrR HAGNER, Esq, Third Auditor
Then comes the certificate of Peter Hagner,
Auditor, "that Il ere is due from the United
States TO Charles J. Catlelt, under a special act
of Congress, &c. &c. the sum
If SS,s6l so, to be carried to his credit" But,
lor fear that all the for, going might not satisfy
John M Bolts and his abcltors, and TO prove
that JoHN TYLER, JoHN J. CRIrTENpEN, A bion
X. Paris, and Peter Hagner had not leagued
together to defraud the Treasury Of the United
States, we will copy one more letter-a letter
from Daniel Webster TO Albion X. Paris, dated |
as far back as 1887, rather before The time that
Mr. Tyler came into Office. Mr.W ebsler was one
Of the Senate Committee who reported the bill |
for The relief of Mr.. Catletl:
WAsH,SoToS, Feb. %, 1887.
Hon ALpioN h. PARms
Mr. G. j. Catlett has spoken to me respecting a
bill passed last session for his relief can only say
that Committee who reported the bill was salts
icd that a case was proved by the evidence, which
entitled him To compensation; that the Till was in
tended TO be positive enoofmsni for the relief and
iot reference 10 the judy em Of the accounting
6cers--and that, when the bill was amended in the
Senate, it was not understood by me- nor do | sup.
,ose was 10y others Of the lmittee that the rcfe-
cnce to former other laws for any other pur
bose than to regulate the of proceeding in
king on amounts. II would tn. unless the act
so construed as 10 have established the existence
# fl and proper for relief 1t an useless and
ain exercise Of iegisiaiir, po,or
do not know how far these suggestions may be ft
o influence your consideration Of The matter but