The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-05-19
THE UNION.

snch was made il regard 10 the lands incumbesed By
Gaphins claim II Georgia appropriated the fund charged
with the payment OF Gaphins debt, Georgia must an.
swer for ia no obligation deyolyed upon the United
II States
By the ACT Of 5ih August. 1890. Congress made pro-
vision for the settlement OF the accounts between the
j United States and The individual States" The act Gre
ated board OF commissioners 10 receive and examine all
the claims OF the Individual States, and o deiemiae ON
all such as shall have accrued for the general or Pafeu
lar defence during the war; and made most liberal pro-
vision for their allowance Ii directed each Stale to be
debiied with all advances made to II by the United
States, and 10 be credited for It's disbursements and adj
yances. Under It's provisions the commissioners dis
charged The duty imposed upon them and made the set
Element Iequired and the 10Th June, 1888, reported
that they had maiurely considered the various claims
and find that there is due and from the different States
therein named the SUNS stated Among these States
Georgia; and there was found due 70 her the sum OF
nineteen thousand nine hundred and eighty dollars, M
GLIDING interest to the Slst May, 1885, which. by vir
tue OF the authority to them delegated" they declare TO be
'the final aHd conclusive balances due 10 and from the
several States This closed the accounts oil Georgia for
receipts and expenditures during the Of the evou-
ton; and Georgia appropriated any lands as bounes
e her soldiers The presumption IS thai i gave her no
claim on The federal government IL II did that she
presented IL and whether allowed refused, the claim
was closed Il is too late either for Georgia. for
Others for her. 10 raise CLAIM in her behalf account
OF expenditures or Liabilities growing out OF the war OF
the revolution, the obligation for which was fixed and
ascertaned prior to the date OF the settlement refer
| red to.
From these considerations our mature conclusion is
that there neither legal equitable obligation
on the United States to pay this claim The terms OF the
&c, q sts noweys5 have properly been held q direct
II proper 70 pay interest on i'll To determine this,
naturally first led TO examine the act itself Its terms
authorize and require the Secretary OF the Treasury
examine and adjust the claim" and to pay the amount
which may be found due to Miedge Galphn, executor"
&c The claim is described ''ihe claim of the late
George Gaphin under the treaty made by the governor
OF Georgia with the Creek and Cherokee Indians in the
year 1773" The words of the act contain nothing in
their arrangement far they point and direct the
duty OF the Secretary. which indicates intention the
part oil Congress TO take the examination and adjustment
OF the claim from under the and ordinary rules
which govern the accounting officers in similar cases
The language employed seems TO be that in common
use: 10 iuqaidae and SETTLE. sfo adjust and SETTLE"
to audit and setile" to audit and pass" .o settle"
!" to liquidate and adjust" TO audit and adjust !"
phraseoogy OF the acts OF Congress in relation to the
settlement of claims. Sometimes additional words are
added, as. according 70 the principles of equity"
these words have been held be directive Of the rule by
which the adjustment shall be made while their absence
has been considered leaving the settlement under the
rules ordinarily applied But there such words in
the OF August ls4S; and if admitted that the
language which describes the claim could be held as d.
receive Of its settlement claim under the treaty OF
l773 still that settlement required TO be made accord
ing TO the ordinary rules in such case. II to be
examined and adjusted under the ordinary application OF
the established rules.
In relation TO interest on claims against it. the rule Of
the government is well established. The goyernme
does not allow IT,
The act OF Congress does not direct the payment OF in
teres does refer 10 principles Of settlement from
which be inferred that interest nte nded to be
allowed -topinion Attorney General VIM. Wir, April 8,
The claim for interest appears The accounting officers do
pressy give interest Asa general rule their view the
co.rect one Opinion Attorney General b. +. Butler,
am given understand that 1t has not been the prac-
tce Of the accounting officers Of the Treasury Department
paid by an act Of Congress unless there BE- IL n. a .
special words 10 thar eifect-topGion Attorney General
There may be ia which might think the head Of
department authorized TO allow iasres but they would
eral H. S Lsg1e, I'd April isa2
Is confidently believed thai in All tno OF
against the government there instance where interest
ma, ever been allowed except only where those acts have
Attorney General Criuenden, 18th June, lsal)
In mis- reply 10 call Of the House of Representatives.
on the 23d march, 1910. Mr. Crawford said Gas quoted
in the report Of Mr. Whtilesey) that the general usage
OF the War Derartment has been II pay interest"
Mr. Whesey himself, in this case, tesfes 10 the
rule.
Ills admitted that the governmeu, general ought not to
pay Interest In the absence OF special contract effect
IL Is admitted that this is but ssary
ion Attorney General II. $. Lsgare. 10Th Dec, isis)
So rgdly the rule adhered TO- that interest is not al
lowed though the principles oil equity and the rulings OF
The law, as between Individuals may demandit.
There can be doub that the wellestabished equiia-
bic principle brssn ms and man "a in general fs other
ray The trcpfioa in favor Of the government has been
tabshed by the policy OF society," and fo the protection OF
the public-iOpinon OF Attorney General II. s. Legare
10Th December, 1873
also confirmed In ibis conclusion by conviction
after looking the original contract and all papers,
that the claim interest agreeable and
This conviction, Ia the absence OF special reference &C.
Ec nigh not perhaps have been sufficient to take the
out Of the general rule stated by the accounting officers
&e-lOpiniou Of Attorney General 4. Butler, ll60
Nor will the executive departments permit this usage
10 be set aside by judicial authority If il be inferior
TO that OF the Supreme Court OF the United States.
The right the Judge allow therefore an
OF Attorney General Crirtenden, 18th
June, lS4l
folly aware OF the great weight that aght 10 be At.
taehed 10 decision Of the circuit for the first
cult and have objection admit that bcrtsn fHdi-
rdaas the claim for interest in such would
equitable and reasonable Bat that IL ealngA
ffg the department In deyatIng N W
always understood be OF best and
u1a inGribt rules OF rs administration.
Again:
II Of Justice allow Of set-off against the United
States, alleged prime rlesef and equity, by way
against haal decision that effect Bat when on
the strength OF such decision authority colaeray
binding upon the executive department, these reqnf
ed depart from their clear and fixed rules
that The doctrine (Opinon Of Attorney
General H. s Begare, I'd April, 1922
am bound 10 adhere the OF the executive de-
parnnent until Cesgros shal fi 70 change H.
The accounting officers bound By the iac The courts
have authority under that statute t7g) 70 admit eqnite
! Qbid)
Ii is not the duty Of your committee 10 inquire either
into the proprety the OF the rule il is sufficient
Tor TO learn that the rule exists that IL is well estab-
lsheds
Usage alter the Law; but evidence OF the con-
past aasac0ns Hence OF necessity, nsases have been
established in every department Of the government which
have become kind Of common law, and regulate the
rights and dufts Of those who within
Init &faAak Ma uuf Al \