The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1855-02-25

~.
Secretary revise decisions i Florida on
claims under the above acts did not take into view the
70 be found according 70 the rule prescribed by the Law
tons but rather regarded a. question arising under
which governs in Of claims by citizens
own government Whatever decision made the ques
ton Of interest the Florida claims had pros
Pset'se interest aecraiag after ne aord made 90 the
allowance Of interest aoias and Of
ptnaon at the time OF the award for losses Of property
and so far my decisions may questioned they are not 20
I have any bearing on the points herein stated"
\ Judge Blbb, another of the Secretaries SAYS;
signed an order drawn up by the clerks accord
ing 70 the form previously observed in like eases"
Although read from printed pamphlet have before
ed gentlemen, Secretaries and Attorneys General the
same effect.
Now sir Judge Bib signed an order written by one of
the clerks and he says II bunder and that IL the
question had been brought his mind he could
decided in that way. Well how did Mr. Secretary Wood
bury treat these cases? Hs said approved with the
cepion of interest This his exact language the
exception of interest which, il is believed has not been al
/ lowed in similar cases That is the whole thing Now,
Mr. Woodbury. might have intended the apply only
10 acernng prospective interest stated by Mr. Spencer
He might have intended IL apply the interest al
lowed By the Florida judges and incorporated in the body
of their awards 1t Is possible and might say prob
able that his order msconsrued by the accounting
officers 1t afterwards to have been followed
precedent without question and with little consideration
/ am that when quote the statements of these
distinguished gentlemen made after their retirement from
office it will be said that magn influences have operated
upon them. There might be plausbilty in this OBJ
lection IT there were only or two who had placed
themselves in this position and If their weknown char
did shield them from such an imputaon but
when there is such general among these dis
tnguished gentlemen the suspicion Of their being iuhu
enced by undue motives controlled by plant and
yielding disposition, becomes prcposterous The fact
therefore stand out unquestonabe that most of the
Secretaries who quoted having decided against the
present claims did not intend their decisions TO have that
effect
The gentleman from South Carolina remarked in the
commencement of his speech that this bill designed
to overue the consistent action Of the Treasury Depart
Il %
derstand it. II is to overrule the department in any
Particular for by the declaration of Mr. Guthrie in his
port which have here it is stated that the decision
based upon the usages Of The department. and Me preceds
IA these casehat is upon the supposed principle that the
department was not authorized in any case TO pay interest
1t decision against the propriety and justice OF
the allowance made by the judges
Now, Nr Speaker let us look at this position for single
moment The department is not authorized in any case
to pay interest Well now the Secretary of the Treasury,
according 60 the view OF my friend from South Carolina
in which view, however, do not concurwas acting as
commissioner in deciding upon these and not Sec
retary Of the Treasury He acting Judge as an
appellate tribunal according to his dea 10 review the de-
csions made by the Florida judges If be not acting
Secretary of the Treasury he acting under the law
of nations and should have been controlled by the prnci
Piles of public law which have governed the United States
in all similar cases and which have governed not only the
United States but every the face of the
earth and every court that has decided questions Of
the kind as have shown in my report quoting the decis-
ions of the courts and the action OF the government in sim
liar ss
\ Mr.. CLINGMAN. win the gentleman from Tennessee
Mr. STANTON. The gentleman from North Carolina
will for the present. Every who considers
this must ledge that if the Secretary had the
power review and alter the awards of the Judges that
could not have been in his capacity ministerial
paving officer. He not acting Secretary of the
Il treasury he acting a commissioner Judge
lis functions which he have confounded with the
ordinary duties of his Office OF wholly different
character do not mean to be understood admitting
that the Secretary had any such authority under the law
but insist that upon the supposton of his having such
authority he invested with character and had
no right to apply the usages Of the department to case
national law the only principles upon which his de-
cisions ought to have been founded To repudiae those
principles upon whatever preex will be in my judg
ment, gross violation of public faith.
Mr. ORR, (nterrupting) desire to call the attention
of the Houseand particularly that OF the gentleman from
Tennessee the second section of the act Of 1923 to in
dcae the discretion which intended TO be conhded to
the Secretary of the Treasury who, being satisfied
just and equitable within the provisions of the treaty shall
Il Mr. STANTON Exactly
\ Mr. ORR. Equitable and just is the general direction
and the controlling Of that equitable and just m that il
4 shall be embraced within the treaty.
Mr.. STANTON. True, such is the language Of the act
of Congress but refer to the treaty in order to show
that the position assumed by gentlemen here and elsewhere
and attempted be sustained by the decisions Of the Sa
preme Courtnamely that the Secretary Of the Treasury
had the power review this and to decide he did
cannot be sustained upon any sound principle OF consruc
ton. shall presently argue and show that even u the
Secretary Of the Treasury had such authority he de-
cded wrong that his decision is against every principle
that has been adopted in similar by sort Of
tribunal But say that he had such authority, And
take that position the ground of the decision OF
the Supreme Court rather of the decisions Of the
Supreme Court of the United States quoted in Ferreiras
case and in the note appended by Judge Taney In the
of Hale Todd stated in note appended to the
quoted-- being manuscript and never reported
the judges could not act in the capacity Of commissioners
Why? Because commissioner is judicial officer OF the
government under the constitution He Is clothed with
Of judicial power and certainly exercises high fnnc
tons of important character be cannot therefore
be nominated by act OF Congress That is the effect Of
the decision of the Supreme Court understand it, in
the of Hale Todd reported in l3 Howard Judge
fancy directed the note to be appended to the report OF the
case although he does not bis decision in any
tcuar and for aught know, he may still entertain the
same views a when he first drew up bis opinion.
must with all Difference to that distinguished gentle
man. and the which he presides dissent n toto
from the effect and operation of these opinions The
4 ernmen OF the United States might probably appoint
Judges to be commissioners in the constitutional mode
but t must be done by regular appointment with the adj
vice and of the Senate before party exercise
the function Of his office appeal TO every gentleman
whether this is not truth which no man can deny
But then il may be said, Judge Taney inmaes that
the whole of these proceedings void Not ut all be-
by treaty these claims be adudicaed by
of Tar, and because BY the act Of Congress the For
da Judges we're clothed With authority and jurisdiction
over them II is fair and universal rule Of construction
that il law can understood 70 do proper eonsttu
tonal thing il ought to be so construed ard
he void and without effect Congress has the power
tend the jurisdiction OF any particular court II had the
power extend the jurisdiction Of the Florida courts 70
the adjudication of these Ii is only fair eonstrue-
ton Of the Of 1923 10 consider II extending the j
risdction Of the Florida courts In order 10 fulfil the