The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1851-03-16

For the payment Of the OF judi
the United States crcut court for the southern s'c OF
venber. 1885, Ia suit brought against Lieutenant Col
d Mitcheu, by Mansei Harmony. he paid under The
be by him conside red final. S9S, ,055 So'. tat I.
Ms. HALE said: When this claim was before the Sen
ate was iavoraby impressed with IL But simply rise to
and of the senator from Florida Mr.. YuLEsl They
say that this is not private clam, because there is
public obligation resting upon US 10 pay H. Well sup
pose that II is the ground upon which every private
claim is sustained here II is coniended that il is
gratuy but that there is obligation upon the public to
pay certain money to private individual. That cons
utes private claim upon the government; and confess
that little surprised to hear those astus lawyers
say that this is not private claim because there is
public duty to pay H. What is private claim II is a
pri vae individual making demand upon the govern
nent Of the United States; and entirely al loss 10
conceive what private claim can be, il this is not one
Mr. BADGER What is public claim
Mr. HA LIE. am asked what is public claim. l
suppose tbat il that imposes obligation upon the
government growing OF the operation OF a general
law-not the operation OF private individual ltls Tor
rule we have adopted.
As stated before. favorabIy impressed at first
with this claim but as 1t IS now presented, and as must
member OF the Senate, 10 equal justice to all private
claims, If all other private claims shut out by this
rule from being received TO the appropriation bill, must
hold this as hold all the Of mankind, and
cude him under the operation OF the rule have adopt
ed. @
Mr. BADGER consider this as case clearly not
falling within the meaning OF the rule OF the Senate
which precudes the Offering OF amendments 10 the appo
prianon bills OF The nature OF private claims It not
within the meaning OF the rule, private CLAIM
A SENATOR. What is in
Mr. BADGER i, is public claim as I will presently
explain, the senator will allow opportunity The
senator from New Hampshire says it is private claim
because the money is intended for the relief Of in
dividual who is private man II so, every claim that
comes under the consideration OF this body must
sary be private claim. II il is question relating to
the salary OF public otcer-f il relates to dshuTse.
IN a puh narttv-
money when II goes is to go to individual who has
10 receive it, Il is public claim upon this ground as
conceiye and that is the meaning of the rule
the sooner 1t is rescnded the better. Thus oblga
on TO which this party has been subjected in
quence OF the mere discharge OF pablo duty imposed
upon him by law and by the lawful orders of his superior
officer during the war with Mexico In consequence OF
that order and that onlynot OF any act done by him
an individual not OF any transaction in which he in his
individual character concerned but in consequence OF
what he did as lieutenant coone under the orders OF
the commander OF the expedition TO which he belonged
solely on that ground has action been brought against
him and this recovery effected
Now, TO expound the rule of the Senate, as TO pre-
vent this body IRON nlerposing prevent public officer
from suffering wrong IN consequence OF the discharge OF
his duty is to give exposition of the rule unjust
enable, and therefore TO be supposed 10 have
been intended BY the Senate
The senator from Indiana Mr. BRlcHrl says he is for
arestlng thus claim So am He says he is for arrest
ing in the first place through ordinary appeal if il
can be done and II not, by resoning TO wrlt OF error
The honorable senator should understand that the only
error. No appeal can be prosecuted II is an action at
law and judgmen, has been obtained. Thatjudgment
stands hna unless writ OF is prosecuted. Now,
the very purpose OF this appropriation 49, TO enable US TO
have The validity OF that claim tested in the Supreme
Court OF the United States That is the great end of it,
Without this appropriation how is this gentleman ever
to bring that question to the consideration OF the Supreme
Court OF the United States II he brings writ OF eror
in order TO supersede the execution of the Judgment
for While the Of
pending, what must he do He must give security for
the ultimate payment of this judgment Of ninety thousand
dollars and odd That he cannot do without this appo-
prialon made Who would be his Individual security
Tor lbs, Persons joining 10 the sureysbip 10
be called upon TO respond in the event OF his partial IN
sucency, 10 make up the amount Pass this appopria-
ton, contingent is and then the sureryshp required
10 be made becomes nomnalany body will become
y, because IT is understood that the government is u
naely liable by this appropriation if the judgment is not
reversed. Then you have wrlt OF operating
relieve The officer from the prosecution of the judgment
Then you bring the under the revision oil The Su.
Weme Court OF the United States, and them doubt not,
the judgment Is in my opinion vicious and wrong, and
the instructions OF the court become erroneous that
judgment will be reversed and opportunity will be
gwen to discharge the government and faithful public
officer from all liability For that reason, | think
this motion perfectly In order, and within the rules OF
the Senate, and that the Senate it TO ITSELF and
high consideration OF public duty encouagem eDt
OF their officers IN future wars 10 discharge their duty
faithfully show that when they have done heir duty.
ihey are not TO he sub cted TO pobc respon
slbiy, cumbenng their whole life with debt which
Mr.. FO0TE. Had the Chair maintained his decision,
\ certainly should have sustained him in it, | should
have fell bound to do II, though might perhaps,
have entertained different opinion from the Char But,
inasmuch the Chair has thought proper withdraw
that decision, the respect TO his Judgment which
would have induced me in somewhat doubtful TO
sustain him will induce also recognise this ques
ton doubtful; and looking upon the rule very
rigorous one, shall vote favor OF receiving The
amendment must say thai my mind has undergone
several changes in the OF the discussion was
at first strongly against the claim but alter the
explanations that have been made, am induced to be.
lieve that II really equitable claim, far this
officer ia concerned, Mt least and hope the ndment
will be received and adopted.
Mr. WHlTCOMB. Mr. President, take il that this is
nothing but private claim. In reply TO an inquiry
the way TO what is public claim answer that IL s
when the public have claim two ind viduals
Is just the OF private claim This pri.
vate claim II is claim Of Col Mitchell the United
States to be indemn6ej That is all desire 10 say on
that point
Now, 10 whether this Judgment is final or not the
amendment its face admits that il is not final We
are therefore to preclude II by the amendment itse
The amendment provides that this money shall be paid
when the Attorney General shall be satisfied that The
judgment is final which implies that il is not now final
As to the merits OF the Gaze there has been 80 much
said that shall not deain The Senate all on that point
s that every speaker admits that this an unjust claim
on the part OF the United States and that Col Mitchell
did not attend in person AT the trial of this know
not what the character OF this gentleman but from The
testimony borne all sides, suppose he is pure in
divdua but think he did correctly, both As re
CARDS himself and regards the government II he ex
pected the government 10 indemnify him not att M
particularly upon thai tria and aiding be public Office
in every point of II; and do not wish in my coarse
IN hrid indhc nta IN oha