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


not IN the executive departments But Il the principle
were different unfair and partial tribunal r he
adjudication Of international demands could NOT t. well
devised The very instinct Of paying officer i Go resist
all Demands aud % pay only upon positive law settled aud
But what the effect Of the language used ia the act
q 1879 directing the Secretary pay these auoaan9
Il gave authority simply TO that the ses werc Justly
and equitably within the provisions of the treaty The
authority vested in every ministerial officer whose
duy i Is 70 execute The orders or judgments o. II
he attempts he is guilty OF Imprisonment
unless the court had power issue the process upon which
he acts He is bound TO know his peril that be not
acting upon order which beyond the authority and
jurisdiction the in the way and 10 the
extent the Secretary OF the Treasury authorized
by the law Of 1923 to examine the grounds aud evidences
upon which these based in order whether
they within the provisions OF the treaty.
Mr. ORR (nterrupting) l have harriedly glanced over
The note to the decision 70 which the gentleman has di.
recied my attention do not think THAI the opinion there
expressed conflicts all with the opinion gisea by Chief
Justice Taney The second point made 10 the this
THAT the act o. Congress intended the power
ed authority to the judges composing court 20 ex
reise the power out Of court in the character commission
do how there Is any conflict between the two
Mr.. STANTON ! look upon the effect Of the decision
N an entirely different light from my friend from South
Carolina The of Ferreira carried up TO the SUI
preme Court of the United States the suggestion Of the
Secretary Of the Treasury for the purpose Of determining
the question of interest The district attorney OF the un-
ted States was directed 10 argue and that be-
fore the judges In Florida He did so and the Judge
Bronson delivered one OF the learned forcbIe and
conclusive opinions that have read now have IL
before and fit necessary could quote passages
showing that the decision Of the Secretary utterly un
Of the United States whatever they may have said in their
decision have not touched the points contested in that
They dismissed the appeal for Of Jurisdiction,
and having jurisdiction Of the case whatever they may
have said upon any point involved is not decisiout s
in technical language mere obr dscfaa and ought not
to be cited as authority especially when their argument is
ton.
But now, Mr.. Speaker suppose the Secretary of the
Treasury had authority review these cases aud sup
pose in of that authority he has decided those
claims upon the grounds upon which he has placed his
cision and suppose further he has committed gross
what is Congress 10 do? II You viii read the opn-
ions OF the Attorneys General from the inception this
controversy you will find that every them entirely
overooks the principles Of public law applicable the case
and bases his opinion solely aud distinctly upon the
usage Of the department have already shown, think
that whatever authority the Secretary may have had to
review the awards and modify them could have been
in his capacity Of Secretary but in the wholly different
of commissioner Judge If the judges in Florida did
not act as judges the Secretary q the Treasury did not
set executive officer He was, therefore not at
all confined TO the principles governing in the ordinary
routine Of departmental business He Judge aaiudi-
eating treaty h ions and subject only to the principles
applicable Is. l that capacity OF judge, he has
decided prn, y VI International law contrary every
authority be found upon the face of the globe ask if
ought not correct these mistakes made by the Scee
tlry OF the Treasury Here Is the opnon of the present
Attorney General in which he distinctly admits that the
weight OF he ought have dH dthoy~
ayis agans, the decision Of the Treasury officer. But
admitting the mg Of authority to be against it, he says
~ recommend therefore that the be laid be-
fore Congress IN the form required by the ro'aon Of the
For what purpose? To decide great principle of inter
national law, which is to control this government and all
other governments, in all similar Cases
Sir have cot like the gentleman from South Carolina
thought necessary or proper to 90 behind the decisions
20 behind them, h has appropsd ose auaras Lex this
fact be distinctly understood Whatever authority he may
have thought proper exercise in reviewing the and
ordering them back he has approved the awards and they
stand nnimneached and unmpcachabe upon prn-
cipe notwithstanding the violent denuncaon of the gem
tleman from South Carolina.
Mr. ORR The Secretary Of the Treasury In the exercise
of the authority conferred upon him by the Of 1923
ected many Of the claims which sent him by those
Judges. s.t.s
Mr.. STANTON The Secretary Of the Treasury did re-
ect and send them back and the judges in all in
stances directed to re-exanne them and take proof
These sfted thoroughly any
sifted in any court OF justice The interests Of the
United States carefully attended to- both by the
Judges and by the Secretary of the Treasury Every sort
Of testimony ia the Of either Of tho parties wa
reced be TAKEN and only when the thus
fed that they came back to the Secretary OF the Treasury
and by him approved beg the House will under
stand this fact that the Secretary approved these decisions
and allowed them with the exception Of he interest which
he believed was not allowed in similar There
his mistake; there was his plain violation of authority
because be approved the estimates of the judges Of the m
dcal tribunal which made bem and he pronounced upon
mere point OF law, in which the Florida judges
right and he wrong place this important fact
against the loud and violent assertions of the gentleman
from South Carolina The Secretary did not consider
decide that the Florida Judges had allowed too much On
the contrary he admitted their awards aud endorsed them
with his approval but be accompanied his approval with
decision against the allowance Of interest. insist that
the action Of the Secretary shall be considered precisely
according its legitimate force and effect which
sanction the facts and estimates OF the Florida judges and
TO oyerrule them in the application of rule OF law
therefore maintain that the awards not open 10 que
tion except far the Interest sconcened The gentle
man from South Carolina is not justified upon any prne-
pie going behind these awards but if he Il would
be unfair and libera stigmaze tho awards approved
they have been, without looking az the testimony
which they made.
The whole question, therefore being narrowed down to
the point of law involved the decision of the Secretaries
feel il would be insult 10 the intelligence OF this
House. aud especially OF the many professional lawyers IN
it, TO produce argument 70 show the committed
myself with referring to the authorities quoted
No has contested those citations Of
thority The principle stands acknowledged Every
and every commission have allowed interest In like
Our government demands il upon all occasions and
have heretofore said hereafter abandon All such
claims and principle in The law nations,
II refuse to pay the present demand II will be ,he
touest violation of past obligations is true but shall
measurably redeem ourselves II ia rcpndatng this debt
we at the time announce that shall always act
upon the principle when demands vi lndem-
nifty from either governments.
Ny friend from South Carolina alluded 10 the fact that
the Florida judges had been allowed additional oompensa
ton for their service ia these cannot that
this et has any bearing upon the question They we're
required to take cogBzauce Of which opened up
Geld for adjudication, which greatly increased their
abos for period Of several years II was Just a. reason
Al.