The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1851-03-02

give any opinion upon this bssoch Of he snbl-sL
AIRY Marcy hen having dssl.isd sh., hs 20 ,s
mus have ss.,dsa &c y s 81 sss s sn,s
Second A~di'or AID second Compuoe'. which seoe,.
sai he lad 40 powss snd set aside
= - Ha.Na 81 AUTHORIZATIONS
al sa,i Subsistence OF inais"s Siizo'z 10
"TKkssuHy DEPARTMENT,
.Sreond Auditors Office, September D, 1916.
~ certify that is due from the Uniud States TO the
and aI orvMo dollars and a"e nine cents being
amount their account tor ANONYMOUSLY paid
oersons foe provisions purchased in Cinoinnar in 1881
Appears there is bat S5s 24 a to the credit Of the
requision The credit Of appropriation carrying into
effect treaties with the Chickasaws, per act 2oh April
Nov, i seems to have been entirely overlooked by The
Conms sioner that that decision. which the law makes
final and conclusive and which MnSy ,e ws
question now IN controversy as to tho NV
that decision The branch Of isin these words. y
certify that there due om The e., u 1a states 70 Tue
Of her account for moneys paid BY United
safes The chistasaw fund 70 'uad persons Mos 70.
this was decision. only that this sum was due the
b" hs os s"s ns oa o 81 the
fund" was hnal. therefore on hal point i ss!ssd me
n DsyG"s money wa. Of
fund THIS being so, the correction OF me error became
nboaied in the same decision viz as then decided BY
sanlon s in faye, Of ne &c, oh iss "
approximation carrying ,sss effect treaty with choka
point also 1t conceded thar the decision was final 80
declared the moneys he erroneously paid by the
United States Of the Chiokasaw fund Who then, was
n hs n sa, Wnv Sy donx Ssn
they should done the first misunderstanding tbs
shs Ch,eSa.aw., as should have been done orsnaIy
the mode decided in 1880 by me proper accounting oncs
upon It's face that the OF the Second Auditor
(Which is the printed form prescribed by law) was
thereon" who thereupon did affirm the whole decision
which, in all is parts. was final and conclusive. u
ION o .nd should b. ansi and conclusive a. 20
| the payment of claim, but not as TO The fund
out Of which i was psyabe by Jaw. u .hs were 30,
case because ia all they are required deolds
decide only the justice of the claim but under what
paid. Their decision is upon Of Congress in all
cases, and issppicnb,ly TO the payment Of the claim,
and is necessarily equally conclusive both points 1t is
not naked justice equity OF the claim upon which
they decide but under whatw IL payable and that de-
cision fual and conclusive. .-#f III. s.#e
come now to the general ground which the Commis-
undertakes TO over,ule what final decision OF
Of which this case payable Now, that this fund
standing the books OF the treasury when ns decision
Com that two years afterwards portion
Of THIS fund IN, Treasury Department wa. informed
to the surplus fund Now on reference records.
find the OPINION oil
have been ia is.s part !hs officially
ported by The of War TO the Secretary of the
qured odo he de.irrd such transfer OF that fund,
der the act Of Congress OF 1870 Under this nc, The
surplus fund appropriations for and payable through
the War Department, unless upon the official report and
made in this SO the Commissioned is mistaken
his facts aud there obvious why il
made. The proper accounting officer oil the
treasury, September isa6, had decided tha this den,
cal appro prxilon applicable 10 the payne OF the
w n nu.a nj
which decision remained on record nnresersed and ar
could not reverse directly denied. How
then. could he do It indirectly. by transferring the baAncs
pose that Secretary Marcy attempted make
ion entrey unauthorized by law. Il can only be doas
make the ,ran.ir Now that Official request. as before
stated made and IL it had been il would have
impossible for the Secretary OF the Treasury, as
shall briefly show, TO have carried II into execution willis
prsvioo. approving OF the proper account
iu force This transfer to the surplus fund effected
Of the Teasuy, which would have brought up ali The pay
and decisions OF the proper accounting officers OF the
aenos decision Of The Second &uito and second Comp
oer, directing tbs Chcknsaw claim to be paid OF At
power OVERRIDE did he undertake do
did the Secretary Of the Treasury have any pre,ence fol
OF the Treasury had attempted this transfer to the surplus
; nnd, it would have brought Immediately before him
Comptroller, either be ovenued continued by him and
the Frs, Comptroller. It's evident. therefore, mat what
the desire of the Commissioner might have been
ds this transfer the surplus fund.- or however he
DIES grated part of 1t which in his Judgment might
properly be transferred, the Secretary OF War did
request such transfer could he legally do 80 whs
and second Com poler rema aims in force. Nor could the
Secretary of thc Treasury have made the transfer for he
had power override hat adjudication. SO much
regards position OF the Commissioned that the bal
OF this appropriation was transferred 70 the surplus
fund.- which. win be perceived founded
HIS only remaining Objection 10 The out o.
this fund - this The existing appropriation certainly had
the Chickasaws, Tor II was made subsequen
removal" and altsr the expense thereof aud
their bsistence had been incurred Now IL is cuff
remark that this original appropriation IN AIDE
beForA the removal OF the Chckasaws and would
been clearly appcs BILE the purchase of the provisions
with which the Chckasaws were effoneonsly charged
and the subssq law which the Commissioner
shows pom face that II Is appropriation of
which had been carried from this appropriation to
the surplus fund. H#. .... ... .e... -
Th. appropriation for removal and subsistence Of In
dans was made in 1881 1882. Increased la 1886
Isa9 and used constantly during the sue
ceedipg this re-sppropriaion by The War department,
showing well by the ACT itself as by the uniform action
undetii that Il comcmPia longer period than two
years for s execution; and portion of IL,
Mr. Medl says In bis report he still puposed retain for
future ndtptes showing concusively that under
his Interpretation OF the law would not the surplus
and merely by the lapse OF after the expiration OF two
appears by the act Of May 1920 well by the In
expectation given that INV by Attorney General Grundy
on the lth February 1889 (psge l240 At on-y Generals
Opinions portion OF this stion could
Secretary OF War the Secretary oi the Treasury.
which wi made, and, in Tact, have seen,
could made This with the decision OF ihe
second Auditor aud Second Com poIer Ale, correcting
b. error by decision hna and conclusive, and
app roprin ting this fund TO pay the Chicka-sws
i IN any doubt could remain tho of charging