The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1854-03-30

commissioners had decided previously that claim made
by an American citizen which OF Mexican origin
though held by an American citizen al the time OF the
conclusion oi the treaty. not within is TERMS aud
therefore they had rejected them, aud, think. upoa
sound giounds But, contrary 10 their principle AZ es-
tabished in relation all this class Of cases in the case
OF Mr.. Herrera, although the claim. they say, WAS an
undoubied claim, yet because was held by hiur they
reIecledit La what manner IL transferred TO him
DID not appear before The committee bu, there an
American clsim--American ia its orgin--of which The
benefit would 10 Mr.. Herrera. whether a. collateral
security or absolutely, the committee have no knowl
edge Bat take the siatemen, Of the commissioners
they rejected even the hearing OF that claim as we
thought clearly IN violation OF plain principle OF JUS
tice Hence we thought that that claim ought 10 be
heard by the accounting officers of the department,
that they may decide whether not il a valid claim
under the treaty. That is case The other
10 reference to portion OF the claim OF Mr. Levy which
majority OF the committee believed stood upon The
principles and they regard proper that should have
a reheafiDg.
These the only two cases in which we have come
TO the conclusion that the petitioners ought 10 be reheard
and while say that will also add that against the
rights OF the petitioners their statements of facts the
committee could discover no grounds for relief whatever
couple IT further with this fact, that in my opn-
ion, and, believe in the opinion OF the committee
pressed in their report there eminent, ability display
ed in the general investigations and opinions OF these
that regards the OF Gardiner and Mears il was
not displayed The opinions OF the committee, and the
ciusions which they draw from these cases. mild
could be drawn But, without entering into that matter,
will say that there is also other case, AT least where
the decision in favor OF the allowance OF the claim
against the United States in which have been unable
myself to appreciate understand by what possibility
lawyer could ave arrived at the result at which these
commissioners arrived in reference 10 the allowance Of
that claim--l alade to the claim of Aaron Leggstt,
which had been before The mixed commission, and
upon which the American commissioners and the Mexi-
can commissioners had dlfiered-ons rejected the claim
in co. and the other admitted il to the amount of over
four hundred Thousand dollars. An umpire heard The
case decided H. and allowed the claim to the OF
$50 ooO and the commissioners under the treaty of Quad
dp,tyta thots
dcon AMI that they had right under the treaty to re-
wise The decision made by the umpire and yet they drew
fancu distinction could possibly bedrawn for the
purpose Of making out original claim against the gov
eminent Mexico. and revising the decision OF the u
pre- and allowing an additional amount for injuries
tanned, under claim which had been adndcaed under
orally without going into detas but confess that Of
all that read. and OF all the which examined in
reference to The proceedings OF the commissioners, the
most nnfayorable impression made upon my mind b.
the decision IN the case OF Aaron Leggeu There wal
testimony whatever before the committee in regard
it. and this is nothing but the result to which arrived
10 the almost legal impossbily of the conclusion
which had been arrived at by the commissioners in tina
case. 48 ..s avs
Mr.. BROWN. This report is the result Of tsdiou.
investigation into matter which has created great dea
OF public excitement and talk. The report, when printed
will be sought for very generally will suggest. there
fore. 70 the honorable senator from Pennsylvania, who
submits IT, the propriety OF asking the publication OF
MI BRoDHEAD. Tha, can be don. hereafter.
hlr. bROWN, 4 thought this was the proper time Il
make the order.
Mr BRODHEAD Before the vote il taken on tn.
order to print beg leave to make remark respecting
the case OF Mr. Leggeti, to which my colleague on ht
committee MIR. BAYARD] has referred concur with
HIM IN the opinion that there jurisdiction tina
in the last board OF organized under
the treaty oil 1S4S with Mexco-that although Mr. Leg
ge may nave bad injustice done him by the mixed com
mission which deny still the matter bad passed in re
juSica'a and the last board could not properly take u
rsdicton OF the But yet sir. as there appeared
10 be fraud, no cOncealment no undue influence in
the upon the part OF those who presented it, we
make no SPECIAL recommendation in regard 10 il. Ninety.
nine thousand dollars allowed TO him BY the nike
commission, and hundred and seven thousand dollars
by the last commission There appears TO be no evidence
OF fraud in the but only misconcepon OF juris
diction. ts
MIR. HUNTER. Mr.. President believe the hour has
come for The consideration Of the deficiency bill.
The PRESIDENT. That is true but this question
must hrst be disposed Of
MIR. HUNTER. II gentlemen are ready otake the vo,
on having the report printed, will for thai, but
moi, shall be compelled to that this matter b
postponed
The question being then taken. the report was order
TO be printed.
DEFICIENCY BILL.
The deficiency bill then considered for an hour
half when ITS further consideration was postpone.
unl one o'clock, and il made the special order 10
that hour ~
This debate will be published hereafeLl
EXECUTIVE SESSION.
On motion by Mr. MASON, the Senate proceeded 1
lhe consideration OF executive business and alter CON
time spent therein, the doors were reopeDed, and
The Senate adjourned