The daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1848-1851, 1850-05-24

We have received the following summary Of the
proceedings Of the House on the 18th inst, tele.
graphed TO the ST. Louis papers, and ninety-six
hours ahead Of the mail
WAsHINaTox, May 1876 =. M
GaLphim Ckains.--In the House, Mr.. Brooks
gave history Of the claim in all its qualifications
he opposed it as unjust and said that the settles
nent Of the interest was left legacy Of mischief to
the coming Administration.
| The report was read. The FIRST part goes into a
minute history OF the claim, and concludes with the
following investigation of Crawford's relation with,
and conductin, this claim The Committee deemed
1t their duty TO require that Gov Crawford should
appear before them and make such statements as
would make them understand his connection with
the claim, and as he should think proper on his
own part. He did appear and made the state
ment which he subsequently reduced to writing,
and also answered inquiries proposed by the COM
mlttee. From his statement, it appears that he be-
came agent or counsel for the claim by power of
attorney executed by Milledge GaIphin, executor
OF lhomas Galphin, who was the son and executor
oil GEORGE dalphin, on Eth February, 1888. BY
agreement with the party on 23d May, 1888, he
was entitled to receive for his services without any
other charge to his principal one.half Of the whole
claim, or such part of it as should be realized A
supplementary agreement by the parties, explana-
tory OF the foregoing, entered into on the 18th
January 1888, by which it was stipulated that the
pecunlary advances and professional services of
1ov Crawford should be a consideration for one
half net profit OF the claim and that advances to- or
contracts made by, him with other persons, con-
corning the claim, shall be deducted from the sum
to be realized from the claim. Before its decision
crawford endeavored to obtain payment of the
claim by the treaty Of New Echota with Cherokee
Indians IN 1885, failing that, it was presented to
the Legislature of Georgia in 1885, and continued
70 De urged before the Legislature of that State UNI
III 1872 Gov. Crawford was member of that
6ody ayo'ved his interest in the claim, and urged in
qeoate lts payment but declined to vote upon it.
IN may, 1915, he arrived in this city, on his vav
| TO the Philadelphia Convention, and remained
ano1t a gay, and on his return from Philadelphia
,eached TINS city IN the morning, and departed for
his home in Georgia that night He did not again
WISH TINS city until after the passage of the law
ana was absent from it when the bill passed The
senate and House of Representatives; in Feb.
s.ggary, s939, he again came to the city, and in
March following entered upon the duties ~ Secra
tary OF War, and from that time he took no stems
20 prosecute the claim for interest until urged 10
10 SO by his principal. As his interest was contin.
gent and secondary, he did not think he could re.
use 70 nave y urged ss desired. About the middle
., may, !o49, he disclosed the condition of the
claim and his relation to it-that he had been
cuing It before Congress and elsewhere since
loa4-that 1t had been allowed by Congress. and
was pending before the Treasury Department and
tat ne mad an Interest in it. He did not state the
character or amount of claim the extent of his in
terest or name of claimant, nor did he enter into
DETAILS OF the claim. The President replied thai
,9 MS opinion, none Of the pre- existing rights of
GOV Crawford had been curtailed by his accent
ance OF once He employed Judge Jos BRYAN TO
prosecute the claim, and promised him $4,000 if the
clam should be allowed and paid. He supervised
ana a'ded IN preparing. Mr.. Bryan's arguments in
supporter the claim, but denied that his interest in
II was at any time, before the payment of the claim
MADE known to any officer of the Government who
was charged with its adjustment by his authority
or with his consent.
on the 9th of May, Gov Crawford addressed
communication to the Committee, informing them
tnat ne desired to state a conversation with the
resident IN March, 1850 1t appears that in the
lauer conversation, the President had an impress
sion from the first conversation that the claim was
before Congress, although as to this his memory
was lndistlnct the matter having passed his mind,
until the claim attracted public notice-that the
resident told Gov Crawford that although he
dld not recoect being told by him that the claim
nad been allowed by Congress and was pending
before the Treasury Department, vet he did not
see, if he had been so informed how he could have
gwen any other opinion than he had given-that
ms oelng at the head of the War Department and
Tue agent Tor the claimants did not deprive him of
any rights he may have had as such agent, nor
wouio nave justified him in having the nomination
and decision of the Secretary of the Treasury sus-
pended the President added that in his opnion
'ne G'ah was Just and under the law of Congress
should have been paid, no matter who were the
parties interested and that it was due to the credit
q tne good faith of the Government The de- |
csion oil the question of interest on the claim was
urged upon Mr.. Walker late Secretary of the |
easury, by Governor Crawford; and some of |
ms friends insisted upon it with so much earn.
estness, as induced Mr.. Walker to conclude that
t5ov Crawford would be member of the present |
Cabinet. Gov. Crawford alluded to IL on one oc |
easion with the Attorney General. as one in which
some OF his Georgia friends were concerned, but |
only to ask him to examine it at leisure. He
auuuea TO y three or four times in conversation
with Mr Meredith, before its decision, but only to
ask that It might BE- dfcided without DELAY |
Mr. Johnson, Mr. Meredith. and Mr.. WhittIesey |
tesuhed that Gov. Crawford did not by any act or
expression make known to them his interest in the
ciaim nor were they informed of it by any other
person where it was undecided, and there is no
evidence before the committee 10 the contrarv |
Dundles OF papers relating to the claim were sent
ny the Comptroller 10 the Secretary of the Trea-
Jury, and by him to the Attorney General; among
mem was the power of attorney already referred
o. another from Milledge Galphin to Craw ford,
l %. Dec 81, written by Gov. Crawford to some
~ tn zee OF the Treasury department in February
lo49 neither of these papers stipulated any com.
1ehsation Tor his services. Judge BRYAN appeared
IN All occasions as agent and counsel of the claim
md submitted all arguments in support of it no
oieI person was Known to the officers of the gov
rhmeht as agent and counsel for it. The commit
ee mas not been able to discover any evidence that
:rawiord ever awaited himself of his official posi-
ION and relations, established between himselfa and
ne other members Of the Cabinet, to influence a
avorahle determination of the claim The claim
vas never the subject of cabinet delberation, and
! IS due to candor and ruth that the committee
mould express their conviction that nothing has
Deen disclosed by the testimony to induce them TO
oeiieve mat the Secretary of the Treasury was
WARE, until the claim was adjusted that Mr. Craw-
Iord mad any agency or interest in it. There was
lo,hing unusual in the circumstances attending the
adjustment or payment of the principle and inter.
sst OF TINS claim, nor in departure from the ord
laTy course of the Treasury department. Then
oilows statement showing the interest on the
principal. $40,5lS, for 70 years months and u
lays, over $l9l 1852 SO less for Joseph BRYAN
5000; less half interest with Crawford S94 l76
"A; the rest to be divided among thu heirs and
recutors of Mr.. Galphn
The report concluded in the following form;
LIST resolution. That the claim of the represent
atyes OF George Galphin was not Just demand
gainst us. |
I'd. That the act of Congress made it the duty of
he Secretary of the Treasury to pay the principal
4 SAID claim, and it was thus paid in conformity
o law and precedent.
3D. That the act aforesaid did not authorize the
secretary OF the Treasury to pay interest on said
lam, and its payment was not in conformity with
aw and precedent.
The first was agreed to by Burt, Disney, Feath
Iston and Jackson, and disagreed to by Conrad.
orssEs &c Mann, Grinnel and King, of New Jersey.
\, L ne second was agreed to unanimously
ne third was agreed to by Burt, Disney, Feath-
rston and Jackson; disagreed to by Breck, Grin
ell, Conrad and King. A'
1 he report was signed by Burt and Jackson