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

e reasoa in ass. in equity oashi % make aons, and
" senIs o. Law % as any sait could
WY y would not be much the duty the cousl 20 ron
20, 70 such su'. 70, the principal and The
.ns case q private citizens The United ssaies have
pslokatise 70 claim one law their contracts
entitled % interest," debtors they bound also 10 pay ID
The opinion Of Chief Justice fancy, while Attorney
SAIL places the subject also upon the true ground He
mai am not aware OF any statute OF the United
Siaies that forbds the Secretary of War; the
ing Officers. 10 allow interest 10 claimant If il should
appear that interest ls Justly due him AS the United
otaies are always ready to pay when clam is
supported by proper vouchers rarely il ever, hap
pen thai they are Justly ehageable with interests because
Is the fault OF the claimant he delays presenting his
claim or does not bring forward the proper vouchers
prove u and justify lis payment But il in Major Tharps
case or N any other, the Secretary OF War; upon
view OF The whole evidence, should be OF opinion that
interest Is Justly due to the claimant think be may le
gally allow it."
But. whatever may be the general usage Of the
government as TO interest," i is not applicable 10 this
case as II was not originally claim against it, II
was claim against third party. the State OF Georgia.
which the government has assumed to pay and TO pay
all that due upon IT, whatever the third party was
in justice and equity bound TO pay The word due this
act what s justly and equitaby due Il can mean
nothing else All claims against the government ad
justed upon the same principes-upon the principles of
justice and equity But the payment OF the interest in
this violates precedent because analogous
has been cited nor can any be found unless be under
the act Of 1882 by which the government assumed the
payment OF claims due by Virginia In that case the en-.
tire liability oil Virginia, interest well as principal was
assumed and paid In this case the Liability moi part,
but the entire liability of Georgia. regard TO this claim
has been assumed, and as we think, Justly paid
is not perceived that The relied OF the claims
OF Georgia against the Creek Indians under the treaty
1921, and which the United States to certain extent.
had stipulated to pay has any application to this
an authority against the payment OF interest The only
claim asserted By Georgia in that for the return
OF specific property The Attorney General, Writ says
'.The claim ought be lqaidated against The United
dated against the Indians and il is believed that
OF interest against nation OF lndans under
like these wo1d be Unprecedented"
The Attorney General decided against the payment OF
interest and assigns, among other reasons that the
property. return Of which was claimed. had been
the claims were in the nature Of unlquidated damages
upon which, general rule OF law interest was not
aiowed that The principles Of equity did not call for the
allowance OF inteesso far from if. that they forbid it,
Under circumstances like these, il is believed il would
not only be unprecedented TO charge nation of In
dams. but any other nation with interest But the case
to be relied authority show that because
held unprecedented under the circumstances OF that
case for nation Of Indians to be charged with interest,"
therefore Georgia and the United States not bound
TO pay interest Gaphlns claim The case would not
have been particularly noticed were il not relied on
as prominent authority why interest should not have
been allowed in the present But before leaving it.
against the Indians, under The OF that case
she ought TO be estopped from denying the claim OF
Galphin TO interest in this case and as the United
Georgia, they should be subject TO similar esioppsi
The great antiquity of this claim will be found emit
tied 10 weight objection against it, when is
understood that every material fact upon which its jus
tce depends = incontrovertibly established il has, in
fact for three fourths of century, constituted part OF
the history OF the country and there is little hazard in
the prediction that il is destined to give more extended
nnf n Of he han WON
otherwise probably ever have obtained.
The amount of the claim. although large, constituted
reason against It's payment. In regard 10 the pay
ment Of the principal, il Is conceded on all sides that il
has been paid in conformity TO law and precedent In
this all the accounting officers Of the late well the
present administration concur but different opinions
entertained IN regard 10 the payment OF the interest
/, The auditor to whom the former Secretary OF the
Treasury referred the claim reported in favor of paying
the nss,ss; as well as the The e
payment OF the principal but his impression being
against the payment OF interest and having time
examine the subject ne left the question to The interest
undecided open question for his In his
testimony, however, before the committee he says II the
claimant had presented TO him such argument that
OF the opinion Of the Attorney General he should have
referred the to the Attorney General, and been
guided he thinks, by his opinion.
The present Secretary referred the claim TO the comp
roer, who decided against the payment OF interest He
then requested the opinion OF the Attorney General and
in pursuance OF his opnion-which indicates thorough
investigation OF the case and fully sustans the deserved
~ high character OF that distinguished jurstdreced the
interest TO be paid.
Whether the Secretary required TO pay the inter.
est was question OF law, upon which il the duty
OF the Attorney General, when requested, 10 give his
opinion. The law has constituted The Attorney Gene raj
the legal adviser OF the executive department Of the
governments and rarely, II ever, its history has his
opinion, when sought, been dsregarded Ia the adjust
men, and payment OF this claim therefore, appears that
all the acquisitions and forms OF law have been complied
with. The proper officer has decided the law, and pay
meni has been made accordingly The revision Of his
opinion, or decision by committee OF the House OF
Representatives, is believed TO be without precedent in
the history OF the government The committee being Of
opinion, however, that the resolution OF tue House re-
qured the merits Of this claim and whether lis payment
had been made in conformity law and precedent be
investigated, the undersigned, membes Of the commit
tee, after aborous examination and full consideration
have come 10 the conclusion
LIST That the claim was Just, and that the government
under an equitable obligation TO pay il
I'd. That the interest, well the principal have
been paid in conformity 10 law and precedent
The undersigned, as appears from the report OF The
committee, fully IN the statement OF facts therein
DANIEL BRICK,
c. M. CONRAD,
JAMES q. KING,
JOSEPH GRlNNELL.
ny Mr. Dtsaey.
The undersigned, members OF the committee appointed to
make investigation into the origin and nature OF the
Galphn claim, together with such other matters con
neced herewith may be necessary 10 full under
standing OF its merits and IFS mode OF settlement beg
leave 10 report:
That the facts OF this case, as set forth in the report Of