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

the Of New York such prosecutions may lead 20
the conviction and punishment of those psdsons who may
have been guilty Of the crimes Of perjury and suboaon
perjury support Of fraudulent, claims against the govern
The Uned Staes under the aforesaid Of the
9Th OF April Isle, and Sd Of March, 1872
Thus, MIR President that IN 1915 great system
of fraud had developed itss under the laws Of 1916
and 1917 construed they strictly by President Madi
soni and presume quarter of tho country is just
such an extent that the committee Of the House Of Repre-
sensses were Obliged 10 refuse recommend extension
OF me within which these claims might be adudeAsd but
recommended prosecutions for forgery and perjury under
those laws Then, ask. there be any safety at this
day, after lapse OF forty ye.Is in passing special laws
obisning g. for the purpose giving special relief IN
Why SIR have examined the testimony in most, if not
all Of these rcolect that in the examination of
them at former session. q member Of the Committee of
Claims found that IN claim had been presented
for building destroyed during the war, and during the life
time of the party valued 400 and il rejected; hut
subsequently, AFTER his DEATH the claim presented at
5Od the value Of the same building at the time Of its
Destruction 0t
Again in of these very that of Hodges and
Lansda but that Of Mackahthere among the papers
ahdayts of the same man on the same day. IN one OF
which his valuation is double whatit is in the other.
Again among the papers in one OF these cases
found letter dated years ago from Of the caim
agents who besoge this Capitol stating that before the bills
which were pending in the House Of Representatives were
up that body he wished be passed by the
Senate, form precsdent and he Was fearful that
tho fa,e-- that is, be rejected.
SIR mention these facts 70 show the danger Of imposon
marks this point this particular have consid
cred the testimony as amply sufficient 70 demonstrate that
the claim does within the terms Of the law of
any correct principle of action But have word more to
say as to the testimony by which il ia supported
The evidence of loss in this founded what
called tobacco They certificates issued ~ the
inspector of the warehouse stating that many hogaheads
Of tobacco with certain numbers and Marks had bseA de-
posted there be delivered 70 the deposition or his
notes bearer and the o,hor half order" Now
as legal propositions submit TO any gentleman in this
body whether when instrument Of that kind, payable
A. ORDER is presented as evidence OF property you
can, If the instrument be unendorscd, justly make
ground of relief to party who merely comes forward as the
holder without any evidence of transfer Of u.le' admit
that where the drawn payable to searer the hold
ing Of them sufficient evidence that the party holding is
entitled 10 the particular tobacco described in them.
Again there another difficulty all these In
one The first Of the claim in l846 and the
other in 1885, and whatever is given for their
at earlier day and the parties represent
themselves the holdes Of these without giving any
evidence of how they obtained them. have examined oil
these tobacco notes in this and find that not one OF
them issued Hodges and Lansdale They were
issued A, b. and O. and great variety Of names; and
they have into the of these PARTIES
whether for their full value upon the chances Of specua-
ton impossible for 10 say. All know that at
the of its destruction, according to any evidence
befoe the Senate the property not theirs but they
have puschaseo acquired way, snce ts destruc-
under the circumstance this fact additional
why great caution ought bs exercised in allowing claims
Of this charac.er because you not really emunerang
the individual who has suffered but who has perhaps
j bought for song, the evidence of the property
Mr. President, there were other matters which
had intended dwell upon but have trespassed 20 long
upon the of the Senate that shall forbcar % notice
them Ihope may again be my duty to DO obliged to
enter such investigation reference either to pr
vate claim TO a class Of private claims While was
member Of the Committee Of Claims felt to be my duty
to fully into these acts and required Of me not
merely hours and days, but may say, weeks Of labor
wished do justice to the parties endeavored to exam
every report which could find in the records from the
origin of these claims down to the present time for the pu
seeing whether any principle had ever been adopted
which could sanction the allowances asked for After
considering and remembering and reading every report That
could hndand have referred to-day TO onchhh oil
i those which readI the conclusions that have
stated the remarks which have addressed to the Senate
came further the conclusion that the report OF Mr.
Ramsey the House Of Representatives, - late a. lo4o
on petition of Frances Swan was nu principles and
in of facts literally and entirely true; and that
distinction could be drawn between the facts and princ
Piles which that claim rested, which rejected by the
House. and the facts and principles of the case now before
the Senate Having that conclusion, after thor
ough Of this claim and those connected with IT,
and finding that the conclusions Of majority Of the COM
mttee disagreed with mine became pecessary though
not agreeable duty, TO sustain and indicate, AZ best
might opinions which entertain, principles which
though relating private claims, important as the foun
of previous general laws which, the event OF future
war;, might again become requisite.
Il