Richmond daily Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1842-1861, 1854-09-09

Personal LIABILITY AGENTS OF TIE GovRKx-
NESr-Captan HUius OF the Cyane has held to oail
in the Superior Court OF New York. answer the com.
plant OF Mr.. Cayi Durand, who alleges in his bill Of
complaint that he was the OF certain warehouses
and other property GreytoSn which were DESTROYED by
ons at the time OF the destruction of that town and
by Of which, he Durand sustained damage 10 the
amount of tweny thousand dollars. This is a case of
very considerable Importance, arising from the nature OF
the principle il involves. II United States officers are TO
be held responsible pecuniafy for all which they
perform in Obedience orders OF their own discretion
in the faithful discharge of the duties which their official
station impose them, it will be impossible to trans
act the public business. None but Of overa helmng
fortune afford UNIT to the losses which NAV re-
suit from the performance of duty, def nd the vexa
tons suits that may he brought against them. Much as
deprecae the destruction OF Greytown, and believe il
to have been outrage, far as Captain Hol
ins IL concerned hold MIN blameless Of the conse.
queuces the simple circumstance tha, Captsn Rollins
has been called by the Government for
exceeding his instructions demonstrates that his conduct
has its full sanction. Captain Holius certainly did not do
his work with much grace. The bravado which he ad-
dressed the captain Of the British vessel was totally nm
worthy OF his position. Bu; however severely he NAV be
judged for this by honorable public sentiment he il H.
nowise answerabe for the bombsrimen, itself The ad
ADMINISTRATION Is the guilty party; ard Congress its
session. when II is called upon as it will be, make repa
ration for the property destroyed is bound 10 x an sp
propriate stigma upon the act
There at least Of which we are cognizan,
whr the officers Of government have BEEN sued and
Judgment recovered agans them for done in the *
ercse Of official duties for the United ates Both ofthem
arose during the progress OF the Mexican The 6st
was that of Colonel Fremont. In the 1896 Fremont
then Msjor in the United States army was engaged in
exploring expedition in California. The Mexican war
broke out and Major Fremont raised troops for the purpose
Of participating in that He became personally res
ponsbe for the expenses OF these soders-ther
ranons clothing forage, quarters, and forth He did
good service and so valuable his assistance that Com
Stockton Washington that on his d,nar
ture, be should appoint Major Fremont Governor Of the
Territory and he received the brevet of Lieutenant Colo
mel. He was afterwards promoted 10 be a full Colonel
which rank he held until he resigned his commission
Consequently there be doubt that all OF Major Ere
monts acts approved by the United States Govern
ment.
The debts incurred BY Col Fremont were for proyision
purchased for the Of the u s. army In California and
they should have been pompty paid By the Government
but they were not paid and after lying over be Frcmon
was sued even imprisoned, in foreign country
This case appears TO establish the legal individual la
blity Of persons acting for the United States
The second case il that OF Col D. Mitchell Lieuten
ant Colonel under Doniphsn in his expedition into New
Mexico. COL Mitchell obtained supplies for the army
from suttler in New Mexico. Tie Department de-
INJURED to or refused TO the bill and party
suit against Mitchell in New York. aud obtained iudg-
ment TO at amount exceeding hundred thousand dol.
lars against Mitchell personally, which judgment the
Government finally paid.
The of Commander lIolns does not resemble that
OF either Fremont or Mitchell In each of these cases
property received in exchange for promise TO paw
but in the Of plns property received being
claim OF damages for tort wrongful act committed
by the order OF that authority which he was bound 10
obey
II II is law that officers OF the or army are indi
viduay liable in damages for done in Obedience TO
orders received from their superiors it ubiquitous law
and ought promptly 10 be repealed.Lonisve Journal