The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1849-01-12

SCHOONER TICoNIE.

SCHOONER TIcoNIE.
The Senate, as in committee of the whole proceeded
ers OF the schooner Ticsne
MT WESlCOFT. / do not oppose the passage of this
bill consider il Just and right upon principles but
decisions If aiheres TO the principle laid down in ,he
G Ba case, the relief prayed in this case must be de-
med Both cases stand on the same principle In the
I'll Bias case, the principle on which the bill was defeat
ed by a vote OF % TO % was, that where United
States officer destroyed property without good reason for
ITS desrucuon where he acted unwisey ndscreety,
the United States was not responsible In that case the
property was destroyed to prevent its falling ino the
hands OF The enemy when there was in reality no danger
OF such result In this case, and several other claims of
IKE character amounting to large sum, private vessels
were employed TO carry troops, munians of war; mules
ordnance &c. to Vera Cruz When they arrived there
they were ordered by inferior and subordinate officers To
take certain positions the beach land their sagoes
the danger nohs All II: ssaas %.n hse
stated would cause the loss of the vessels The army
or because he did not care because he regarded the
loss OF the vessels matter of small consideration to
ordered the vessels TO go TO the places he The
captains submitted, and norher coming on, they
blown ashore and lost, as all the seaaring and
navy officers predicted The owners had insurance;
but they petition Tor themselves and the insurer to be
paid their value think it Just. But this is case
where the injury occurred by the ignorance needless
having the vessels lost for the benefit of the public ser
vice is proved, nor do regard il material All |
desire is, that the decision of the Senate should be
consistent and should like to have my friend from
Wisconsin, [Mr WALKER,] if he should be inclined to
vote Tor this bill, to distinguish in principle from the
Gil Bias case In both the property taken for pub
lie uses; and il both, by the act Of that officer, lost
the owners without necessity was, repeat, in favor
OF this bill before the committee, and in favor of il
now; hut have no idea of making fish of one claimant
from Name an! flesh OF another from Florida.
Mr.. WALKER. The senator from Florida calls upon
me to distinguish between the two All can say
u.s. that am content to rest upon the testimony of the
gentleman that there Is no difference in the two cases
and therefore opposed at present to this, until it is
shown to be different
Mr.. BRADBURY called for the reading of the report
The report having been read
Mr.. B. said Mr. President, apprehend that the prin-
cpe, TO all who are able to read the report of the facts
Will appear 80 conclusive in favor of allowing the claim
that do not expect that single senator will be disposed
to oppose It, In consequences however, of the remarks
OF the senator from Florida perhaps may be incumbent
on me to make brief explanation. This is where
The property OF individuals was taken from the control OF
the owner by officers of the United States army in time of
war-about tie lime that the attack upon Vera Cruz
was made. This ship had a cargo OF mules on board
They were needed for the use of the array, for the
purpose OF transporting cannon and The officers, deem
ing 1t OF the highest Importance that they should be
immediately landed, direcled the captain to bring his
ship into situation where they knew it must be lost, in
order that they might immediately landed and the pub
Inc necessities admitting OF no delay, the captain and quar-
ternaster shared the risk with the owner, and she
brought into that condition and the mules landed This
is case that comes within the principles clearly recog
nsed and acted upon by our government The vessel
was taken possession OF, and the mules used; and
an lust ods oubs that was
der proper TO be given and beneficial to the army; and
the quarermaser himself has certified that the claim
which ought to be paid 1t differs from the case we
had the other day. which the senator from Florida men
tons and which remains for the future action of the
Senate. 1t is where property passes under the
control of officers for the of our army; for
what greater use can you conceive OF property than that
should be thrown instantly upon the shore, in order
that these mules might be Immediately landed for the
more, for | understand it comes within the principle
recognised by the senator from Wisconsin the other day.
and is subject 10 no objection Indeed, am happy TO
know that it with the cordial support of the senator
from Florida IN the COMMITTEES, and he agrees to its JUS
tice now 1t is about which there is OF
doubt; and think, therefore, without further remark, it
Mr. WALKER. | would ask can the senator from
Florida discover no difference between this and that
Mr. WESTCOTT. stated before, was in favor of
this claim being allowed but am for consistent rules
being adhered to. Ii majority of the Senate adhere to
the rule avowed in the Gil Bias case, il must be rejected
The senator from Wisconsin asks me discover
difference between this and the Gil Bias case, Well
one occurred in Florida the other in Mexcoone vessel
was destroyed by naval officer, the other was lost by the
other or W wa owned in Mane and his M the s
can perceive. The same principle covers both. Both
are cases of loss occasoned by acts OF public
ed those acts. desired merely 70 call attention to the
fact. | am not opposing the bill have not said |
should vote against it; but have distinctly stated that
believe the principle on which it should be allowed is
Just and honest ~, IL -. rt-fIe5 t....r ..s =
The bill was then reported to the Senate without
amendment, was orderedto a third reading read a
third time, and passed. M a..4 .vss ~
JAMES p. SEXTON sf
The Senate as in committee of the whole proceeded to
the consideration of the bill for the relief of James p
Sexton. E W Hs p. 70 h ~
Several amendments reported from the Committee on
Private Land Claims having been agreed to, the bill
reported to the Senate when the amendments
Cured in the bill ordered to third reading read
a third time, and passed. '..
MARCUS r. JOHNSON.
The Senate as in committee of the whole proceeded to
the consideration of the bill for the relief of Marcus f.
johnson, which was reported to the Senate without
amendment was ordered to third reading, read third
time, and passed
LAND CLAIMS IN LOUISIANA. .f
The Senate in Committee of the Whole, proceeded
to the consideration of act supplemental to the ap
proved the 9th day of July. 1912, entitled An act con-
firming certain land claims in Louisiana"
No amendments being submitted, the bill reported
to the Senate, ordered third reading, read third
time, and passed t5I s.tI ya....a,."H I.'.
WILLIAM M. BLACKBOARD.
The Senate proceeded the consideration of the act
for the relief of William M Blackford late charge DAT
flares to the republic of New Grenada.
Mr. HUNTER said that this claim had been provided
for in the general appropriation bill OF last session. lie
moved therefore, that the bill be laid upon the table
which motion was agreed to. +
~ ANN CHASE. .r
The Senate proceeded TO the consideration OF the joint
resolution for the relief OF Ann Chase which, on motion
by MIR. HANNEGAN, was laid on the table.
.#r SARAH d. CALDWELL,
The Senate, as in committee OF the whole, proceeded
TO the consideration of the act for the relief OF Sarah d.
Caldwell, wife of James II. Brigham.
After some conversation between senators YULEE,
DOWNS and WALKER, the bill was amended and then