The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1849-01-05


which must soon terminate his life and hope he may
he has to live.
Mr.. NILES. If understand the principle in this case
II is that we are TO adopt the rule of regarding the entire
value OF the services of the citizen; and this, believe,
Is rule that has not been observed before The govern
nent makes provision for the support of her soldiers during
The war, but cannot be held that she shall make good
The loss sustained in
Why sir, would not the principle lead to the com
pensaon OF the wives and children for the value of the
lives OF the husbands and fathers lost in war; And the
provision IN these cases would be required to be greater
the loss OF services would be total in of the
loss OF lite Here IL may perhaps be total 1 think, sir
this is wrong principle we going upon remember
the case Of Capt Harrison very well l opposed the
amount IN that case, and also oppose this Government
can do no more than make fair and reasonable provision
for the officers ant soldiers who unfortunately suffer in
her service This she ought to do and she do
more than this
In concluding, Mr. ~ moved that the bill be amended
by substituting 'forty" dollars for "ffty," &c.
The question having been taken the amendment, ii
Mr.. BELL. | rise mainly to express my concurrence
IN regard to the merits of this case and particularly
express my conviction that is scarcely possible that this
can be drawn into precedent would inquire of the
honorable chairman OF the committee who reported this
BILL whether there is any precedent by which portion
of this compensation be secured to the family of this
Individual; and if it be So would prefer that it should
be done. do not know that there would be anything
improper IN such course and would prefer that il
move that an amendment made that one hall of the
compensation be paid to h .amiy; but if there is any
probability that the bill will be endangered by it, will not
press it,
The bill then reported to the Senate and no fnr-
her amendment having been offered, it ordered to
be engrossed for third reading, and subsequently,
by unanimous consent, read third time and passed.
| RESOLUTIONS.
| Mr.. DAYTON presented the following resolution
which was considered and agreed TO:
Resofred, That the Committee Printing be instructed
the Senate copies Of map Of the United States the Brit.
ISL PROVINCE Mexico, &c, showing the of the United
by a Cotton pao OF Ns We York; California; lately pub
I Mr.. BORLAND presented resolutions passed by the
legislature of the State of Arkansas in favor of the
establishment OF mail route from Antoine post office,
Arkansas, to Gainesville, Texas; mail-roue from
Arkaelphia to the county seat of Montgomery county,
Arkansas; mail route from Boonvlle to Ozark and
mail route from Carkesvile TO ST. Pauls Office, in said
State
| On notion
Ordered That they be referred the Committee the
Post Office and Post Roads
NOTICES OF BILLS
Mr.. ATCIIISO SON gave notice of his intention 10 ask
leave introduce bill grant the right OF way aud
donation OF public lands Tor the construction OF railroad
in Missouri
Mr. DIX gave notice Of his intention to ask leave to
introduce bill to provide for the removal of distractions
to the nav CATION OF the harbor OF New York. and Hur-
gate
RECEIPTS CUSTOMS.
| On motion OF Mr.. ArHERTON, House bill No. 29l,
requiring all moneys receivable from customs, and from
all other sources, to be paid immediately into the treas.
ury without abatement deduction and Tor other pur-
poses, taken up for considerations and Iecommiited
TO the Committee on Finance
JOHN p. BALDWIN.
! The Senate then proceeded to consider the motion
made by Mr. BELL the Sd inst, TO reconsider the vote
on engrossng the bill for the relief OF John p Baldwin
| MIR. KING | would mol rise to say word upon this
BILL which has been discussed at great length were it
not that the few remarks made in the course OF the
former debate were so reported not only to msstae
the facts OF the but TO make grossly inconsistent
and think proper this occasion to state what dd
say and what was my true position upon the subject.
Now, sir, what stated on that occasion was, that
did not intend to enter into discussion whatever with
regard to the obligation OF government to make good to
citizens the loss sustained in consequence Of the destruc
ton OF their property by the officers of the United States
provided that destruction takes place from honest
conviction, the part of that officer, that he subserv
ing the interest of the government and that was neces-
sary, subscribing that interest, that private property
should be sacrificed conteHded, however, that there
should first be judicial decision upon the facts In the
with Great Britain many cases OF this character arose. in
which the officers first subec to suit the
part OF individuals supposng themselves 10 be aggrieved
and that esass had been committed upon their property
and then the government of the United States took the
matter into considerations and if appeared that the prop
ey destroyedn good faith that The officer had seized
upon prevent its falling into the hands of the enemy,
then the government OF the United States paid the ndemn
ty Since then, we have on many occasions gone uber
and Unidentified the individual previous TO judicial nves-
tigation and decision This stated the other day.
sad that would not go into any discussion oil the bill,
but would simply give the which induced me to
vote against it; and the stated were these That
this property, purchased by the individual whose clam
Florida for many months: the vessel had been wrecked
in 1885 and destroyed until the of 1898;
the owners having had all that time to what they
could. did not state that the ship was carried into Key
West, made TO say in OF the papers, but that
they had saved much they could of the cargo, and
taken it to Key West and that the remainder OF it
destroyed together with the vessel, where she lay.
AS to the articles destroyed plainly stated to the Sen
ateand repeat ltthat the ballast was valued, and
the sails valued not that the hulk OF the vessel
valued Would any one believe that the sails would
be of any value after such length of tme' The hulk,
ton. Sir the ballast probably never could have been re-
treyed. What there, then? Some water casks !;
and the testimony has been entirely various in regard to
them. One witness states that there were certain num-
Der, and another greater number and the greatest
number is TAKEN and charged to the United States.
Then, sir with regard to the lead; even the quantity
OF lead is doubtful. One seaman swears he was sea-
man board the ship; but these were not Spanlards
they American citizens or Englishmen, for they
have English names. One seaman says he undersooj
or he had heard II said, that there were six tons of
lead on board the vessel portion had been carried
to Key West and this claimant purchased the lead
which remained in the vessel in that state, and il
destroyed with the vessel. Whether would ever
have been saved not. senators will determine for them
selves Ii had been there from 1885 to 1885, and had
not been saved while was becoming more difficult to
it every day and now asked to pay the full
amount OF its value.
That my objection TO the bill, and it is my obec-
ton now to the reconsideration.
Mr.. YULEE. I will not detain the Senate The prn.
cpe which the bill involves has been fully discussed
that presume the minds OF senators have been made up
with respect it The objection of the senator from
Alabama. as understand it, relates simply to the details
of the compensation provided for in this bill The prn-
cpe understand, the gentleman comedies to be correct
and the only question is, whether the compensation al
lowed by the bill is Just compensation to the claimant