The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1854-04-18


the government justly responsible am willing to sane
op, by any Of mine recorded here, the conduct Of
Great Britain during The Of 1919 that "a what you
are asked 10 do In the allowance of this claim.
come to the fhcts of this The Senate viii
lind, think, that compensation for personal property 10
party IN consequences ofits destruction by the enemy
where has not been taken possession of by the govern
ment has in instance been made. viii say thai
in the multiplicity of special laws which have been passed
the principle Of the laws Of 1916 and 1917 may have
been msapped and that theso may not have been soma
which personal properly destroyed has been direct
cd to be paid for by special law where the app
of the principle of relief may well be questioned
But If there has been such case II is one of very
date-wthn the last ten twelve years. Claims this
kind were presented to Congress at an early period wer
DUPLICATED, dsalowed and suffered TO lie for period
U do speak OF the particular claim now before but o
the class Of caims of twelve years until 1885, when
there was which acted upon and compensation
afterwards obtained II as upon this one Of the class that
the whole ground of claim in this must rest; and for
unaey the compensation in that case was not received a.
ii was decided by the Congressof the United States but
paid as think through most Unauthorized Il speak
without any dsrespcct for the then President or any m
ations upon his motves) interfere nee by the Pesden
the United States with the facons OF the officers Whose
appropriate duty aetle the particular and
give the construction the law The case TO which ald
il that of Charles Cate shall read all that is maies
of the proceedings In that because they not ol
complete the facts in this case but il establishes
the adherence by Congress to the psincpeso
think the Senate cannot doubt after they have heard them
In 1855 Frances Swan applied Congress- for relief for
bacco deposited in these very warehouses; in which ii,
tobacco for which compensation is claimed 10 these
was deposited. The precisely the same
Mr.. FISH. The same warehouses;
Mr. BAYARD. The same warehouses precisely--Ms|
gruders and Nottingham. report was made by CON
mec of the House of Representatives in 845 that
mean to read that report mean TO read some Of the do
msnts connected with il, which include tho proceedings
Cadetts case; and think that after hearing them the Sen
ate will the conclusion that they have already
mined that this s not case proper for relief and Therefore
that this bill ought not to pass The Senate will Fecol
that the precisely identical The property
the warehouses this Mrs. Swan held certain
tobacco The claimants here hold their tobacco
Her claim rejected. The principle of reasoning
which pursued in that report ought to be applied
this case; and thai reasoning exposes aud refes, think
the only in which relief has been received no
granted upon naked claim for personal properly whore ID
party had no interest in the realty destroyed. shall
IT, because conclusive 10 the merits of M
present claim Il report No l55 at the second session
the twenty Congress, made on the 25h OF February
1915, by Mr. Ramsey, from the Committee OF Claims in The
House:
"The claim appears to be unsupported by any testmon
Of nature constitute legal demand upon the treasury
II the claim had been fully proyed--wheh IL, in wot
that the British had destroyed lin the last war; ye hogs
heads of tobacco belonging 70 the pet.ioneI-s paymer
would be at with the provisions OF the acts OF 1916
1895 and with the presidents at various tins
by Congress Congress has steadily refused to enlarge
provisions Of those acts take in claims for indsn
Iy for destruction OF personal property by the public enemy
The petition appended hereto s also The letter Of
Third Auditor dated January S45 as they state eas
fully and establish the identity OF the principles covering
this with those Involved in the of Charles CAT
lett. The tobacco Of both stored ia the
houses, and was lost or destroyed at the same time"
The same romsrks apply to this case
" On the % Of July, 1885, law was passed authorizing
the accounting officers adjust and settle the claim
Charles Catett upon the principles Of the acts Of Con
ofthe oh Of April 1916, and Sd ofMarch, 1917. UnderaA
law the Third Auditor Of the Treasury examined the claim
Of Mr. Catlett and the 30th December, 1885, made
elaborate and able report the Second Comptroller of III
Treasury, in which, in the opinion of this committee
cearly demonstrated that the claim in material point
within the principles of the Of 1916 and 1917. T
report examined by the Comptroller in January, 1851
and concured IN 10y him. The report and the eoncuena
are annexed hereto.
"Mr Catlett, anxious obtain compensation for b
tobacco and not satisfied with the decision Of the Irca
Department. continued to aga,c the subect and the Snsn
accordingly directed all his papers and the Treasury deer
ion TO be laid before IT, This was done on the 18th Of jar
uary, 1892 and they were referred 10 the COMMITTEE
Claims; but in few days thereafter clearly is
perceived that the be brought within the primo
piles Of the acts Of 1916 and 1877 motion of the chana
Of that committee, IL ordered that the COMMITTEE
Claims be discharged from the further consideration
petition of Charles j. Catleu.n
Then comes the extraordinary part OF this case;
Notwithstanding these decisions Of the accounting
Of the treasury and Of the Senate of the United Stale
years aferyz towards the close of the year lsil
the President Mr. Tyerl ordered statement OF the val
Of the tobacco be made and reported 10 HIM IN
done by The Third Auditor the Goth of Sepiemba
ls4l The order Of the President the reply Of the Aodn
September 81, lo4 the order Of the President to the
counting officers of the treasury of the 20d sepembe
lS4l, re-examne the claim Of MIR. Caeu and II ht
could not allow 1t to report specially TO him their reasons
dsalowing; the reply OF the Third Auditor to the Prede
directed TO the Comptroller against the claim, under dat
the 2sib OF September, 1871; and The final allowance Of
clsin Of Mr. Cstle by the accounting officers on the ~
September, l54l, Notwithstanding their conviction
icgality) upon the opinion Of the Attorney General gvU
by direction Of the President, Of the United States ~
added to and made part OF this reports together win
abstract Of the laws of 1916 and Of 1917, showing the
LEGALITY Of the allowance upon the principles imbodrd
aaid laws. tNt
Your COMMITTEE have dwelt upon this case OF Cary
because II IL entirely similar 10 the presented by the
tiiioncr and has been relied support Of The clam
der consideration and the freely admn ra
Charles J. Catcti had valid claim upn the treasury
remuneration for his losses, 80 has Frances Sven"
so admit az TO The present case.
"of this there can be 90 reasonable doubt for the pro-
81 los Is good, and the loss sustained at the
times and p,sces in the Of Cat ett. Tie uag
one, therrf.re, and ds,low the other, would be nex
bic partany, unless the payment OF the fret be aho
to have been inpropet ,mPolnie, or unjust
The committee fully Of the opinion that -
fol pcrusal ~ me documents which they have srahgs
and submit her With. Will carry copsietica TO lerge
iorny OF the rnds that viii investigate hsm Of The
biy OF Cstleit Of SWIM 90 bring their claims within
principles ahlshed blythe net Of 1916 and Of 1917
interference of ihe President reversing the decision
accounting officers of the treasury, supported by n"
authority, and by rg, nor by any prtoedehA
not entitled 10 weigh against The rlsin facts and m3
argument dlsliaotly forth by The Third Audfe
tho Treasury in ths bold and courageous discharge o.
duty.
In the importance Of the prsnclp~ Iuyoved--gomt
deed TO throw open tho door 10 the payment Of Wv
Vulnerable claims fss Losses of rerrone property ~