The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1853-01-24
THE GARDINER CLAIM, ETC.
OF HON. G. CHAPMAN,

SPEECH OF HON. g. CHAPMAN,
OF coNNEcrIcur,
In the House Of Representatives., January II, 1858,
on the subject of prosecution Of claims against the
GoU1nmsny BY members Of Congress. &c.
Mr.. STANTON. of Ohio, being entitled to the floor,
after few remarks, yielded 1t to
Mr.. CHAPMAN, who said:
Mr.. SPEAKER: Having been a member of the
special committee which reported this bill, avail
myself Of the courtesy of the gentleman from ONO
(Mr. SrANroN) to submit some few eqggesuons
upon topics which have been drawn into THIS as
custom.
have hitherto, Mr.. Speaker, contented myself
with giving a silent vote upon all questions in re-
laton to which have been called to act at all, and
had not been one of the majority Of this commit
tee Who reported the bill under consideration,
should not now depart from the practice have
hitherto observed. But, sir, agreeing as l do in
recommending this bill to the favor of the House,
wish in brief manner to assign the reasons for
my own action.
/ am satisfied, "a trust every member of this
House ia, that practice has prevailed to a con-
siderable extent among members of both branches
OF Congress OF acting as agents for persons having
claims against the Government, in some cases for
compensation certain, and in others for compensa-
ton contingent upon success. If such a practice
exists, and is an evil believe it to bean evil
winch Is increasing with the growth of the coun
try and the increase of its business-then | think
it ia the duty of Congress to applya remedy which
shall reach the necessities of the case While
doing this, it will be we'll in my Judgment strike
at mischlefs OF kindred character which am
LED TO believe exist among other classes OF men who
hold office under the General Government. be-
eved that the ends in view could be best attained
by the introduction OF a bill like the one now I'M
der consoles ation and in the mode adopted by the
committee. The task of introducing and plotting
bill through this House upon the part of single
member, according to my observation, is not an
easy one. If bill were reported by committee,
thought it would receive earlier, perhaps more
favorable action, than if it were introduced into
this body by single member.
bill embracing the principal provisions of
the one now under consideration was introduced
into the Senate at the last session by the Senator
from North Carolina, Mr. BADsER;) and when
the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. OLDs) said the
other day that it was drawn by master hand, he
said truly. The committee of which was men,
Der amended that bill in some important particu-
lars, and, thus amended, have recommended it to
the favorable consideration of the House. In pre-
senting this bill the committee have in my judg
nent, undoubtedly departed from the letter of their
instructions; but they have done without any
apprehension of cenEure, inasmuch as the evil
which the bill is intended to remedy is pervad-
ing one, demanding the application of an efica-
cious remedy. Let me say here, Mr.. Speaker,
that nothing is nferable from the bill reported by
the select committee as to what the opinions of
its individual MEMBERS which Is inconsistent with
the finding OF that committee, 30 far as it relates
to the Secretary of the Treasury There should
be misconception on this subject and no mis-
construction of the opinions or motives of the
committee
Now, what is the mischief of which complaint ia
made? 1t is that gentlemen holding official sta
tions-members of the Senate, members of the
House of Representatives, heads of departments,
heads of bureaus, and myriad of subordinates-
have been engaged in the work of furthering the
prosecution of claims against the United States
This practice has been confined to no party or
class. 1t has been a prevailing practice in both
branches of Congress, / am informed and be-
lieye, and has had the sanction of distinguished
men belonging to the different parties of the coun-
try. Among the individuals acting as agents for
claims against the Government, some have
dered the service for their constituents without
compensation. Tbisis unobjectionable; and the bill
is not aimed at them. Others have performed this
labor for q certain compensation, which is objec-
tionabe. There Others still who have labored
for a contingent compensation, which is, in my
judgment, more Objectionable still 1t is not too
much to say that their success is sometimes attrb
utable in part, and sometimes in whole, to the Off
clal influence which they may bring to bear upon
the subject.
1t is matter of complaint that claims against the
United States are most unreasonably embarrassed
and deferred, upon one pretext and another; that
honest, bona tide creditors are compelled to waste
their substance In prosecuting just claims, and that
the delay is ultimately equivalent to- if it does not
occasion, defeat 1t ia insisted that claims rep
resented by ofhceholders, although of less equi-
table character, often receive earlier attention than
those which do not have the advanta of such aid.
Doubtless they are, in other respects, more favor
ably regarded do not think there is any con-
siderable diversity of opinion in this House in
gard to the character OF this evil. the oxpedency
OF applying an appropriate remedy. Whether the
bill reported by the committee meets the necessities
of the case, or whether it may be proftaby amend
ed, leave 10 the determination of the House. do
not intend at this time, examine lis Details nor
the amendments which have been offered to it By
the gentleman from New York, (Mr HAyEN.) /
will say, however, in regard to those amendments
that have read them cursoriy, and they meet my
individual appreciation.
But prefer to address myself to the report of
he he of fboe
from Ohio (Mr. OLDs) upon it. The resolution
creating this committee, as originally ntroduc
by the gentleman from Ohio, and as amended by
the gentleman from Virginia, (Mr MEADE,) has
been differently construed by different members of
that committee. Ii Is, as it stands, piece of
patchwork, rather nartistcally put together. The
following are the words OF the preamble:
"Wbereas strong suspicion rests upon the pub |
lie mind that fraudulent claims have been allowed
by the late Mexican Claim Commission with one |
of which it is suspected that Thomas Corwin Sec
rotary OF the Treasury, has been improperly con-
nected.''
Yet of this Gardiner claim nothing ia ga i'd in the
preamble to the resolution. The resolution, how
ever directs an investigation into the facts touch
ing the connexion OF the said Thomas Corwin with
the said 'Gardiner claim" 1t was thought expe-
dent by majority OF the committee to investigate
somewhat the character Of the claim itself. No |
such instructions were given, and | am by no
certain that the report in this regard ia not
subject to just criticism.
But it was said that this would be an aimless |
inquiry, if We were to inquire into the connection |
of Thomas Corwin the Secretary of the Treasury, |
with the Gardiner claim, if that claim were an
honest bona fds claim upon the Government; and |
this certainly said with good degree of force
Why, it might be asked, while members of both |
branches of Congress have been, for long series
of years, concerned in pressing claims upon the
Government, why should this occasion be eought
to stab the Secretary of the Treasury for doing
that which had been done by his fellow members
of the Senate, and by members upon all sides of
this House? II was then said, and perhaps truly,
that the committee ought, in this investigations to
inquire into the honesty integrity and validity of
that claim.
1t ia due, sir, to DR. Gardiner, who is to me
stranger, and whose face, 60 far as know, / have
never seen, to say that this inquiry before the
mittee touching the validity OF his claim, for
the most part &c parte. Proceedings had been COM
menced against that individual in the civil and in
the criminal courts of this country, and he seemed
unwilling to litigate the question relating to the
validity of his claim before US. think he was
right in doing. Whatever the character of that
claim was, think it wise in his counsel to ad
wise him, if they did, to have nothing to do with
the examination of the character of his claim be
fore US. i'll had been bis counsel, would have
given him the same advice. He denied in his pro
test, which accompanies the report that the House
had delegated, or intended to delegate, any power
to the Select Committee to examine into the merits
of his claim 1t is true that UPON one or two occa