Daily American organ., 1856-04-24
Court OF Claims.
ABSTRACT OF OPINIONS DELIVERED.
PREPARED By JOHN G. DKvxREUx AND N. rHoAP-
SON, coUSsELLoRs AT LAW.
DISAGREEMENT of Pa6lie Aonsy.

DtoO"ToCWcUt " n WOstC money.
so. The act of slst January, 1928. Is Stat at
public money" forbids advances Of public money
In all cases; but on contracts for the performance
Of any service for, or the delivery of articles of
any description for the use Of the United States,
IL allows payment to be made not exceeding the
value of the service rendered, or OF the articles
delivered preeiously to such payment--Psv Scar
b,irgh, il; Gibbons d. Shelby vs. United States
TO- An adpance of money on contract, strictly
speaking, is payment made before an equivalent
is received. 1t is such an advance that is forbid
den by the act of 3lst January, 1823.--Ib.
II. The payment which the act Of 3lst Jan
uary, 1928, contemplates, is payment for full
equivalent received, as contradistingushed from
payment for an equivalent expected. The former
1t allows, the latter it forbids.--I6. ssa
70. The act of Slst January, 1923, prescribes
three requisites to constitute valid payment:
lst that it be payment In the sense Of the stat
ute; I'd, that it be made in case OF contract for
the performance Of some service for or the deliv.
cry of articles Of some description for the use of
the United States; and, Sd, that it shall not ex-
ceed the value of the service rendered, or Of the
articles delivered previously to such payment 10.
Aets Of Congress
ia. Any person who is entitled to a benefit un-
der an act of Congress may waive it, but he cannot
waive rights belonging to third persons without
their assent.--Per Gilchrist, G. J--Magrnderys.
United States.
Private Claims on Foreign States.
IA Previous to our treaty Of 22d February,
1S19 with Spain, CLAIM, for the redress of the IL
legal seizure and condemnation. of an American
vessel by Spanish authorities could be preferred
only against the nation that had committed the
injury.--Per Biacktord, J.. Thomas vs. United
States. gr 8s fefGsi 5kat
T;uI:J;y., a.. s.,S xor ,.,. or "a. uc.~S,
75. In all that the commanding officer does in
an enemys country, so far he is justified by the
law Of nations, he represents the country by whose
authority he is there in command Of military
force.-Per Gilchrist @. j.; Porte vs. United
States. ~ M NJ ye yss fnars
10. In state Of war, where the ordinary tribu-
malls are silent, nation incurs the risk Of pecu-
mary liability for the acts OF its officers in the
my's country, who must act with promptness and
decision, without the experience OF legal skill
which, at home and in time of peace, are applied
to the ascertainment Of legal rights their course
of conduct must be determined by what seems best
under existing circumstances. ssst
n. 1t is the nation that carries on the war, and
not the individual officer, and 1t follows that the
nation is liable for the acts of such agents as IL
sees fit to employ in the prosecution of its OBJ
ject.--Ib. .s 6as
rs. Where sale was made by the United States
occupation, of personal property in their posses
sion to which they claimed tito by the rights of
war, which property was delivered to and paid for
by the vendee, but was subsequently, upon the re-
port Of military board ofinquiry, taken from him
and delivered to the ightful owner, held that such
retaking was the act Of the United States and
their vendee has an action thereon against them
I6-[ Rearranged from the N. Y. Euening Post.
NorE--Where the court afnrms or accepts prin-
- L. -
ton, it was deemed advisable and proper to state
such principle decision in the abstract The
course is adopted az to principles or dcta of public
law. kS tt g.
From the N. Y. Evening Post]
PRACTICE.
I 10. II seems this court win entertain the petit
ton Of one not citissn and grant him relief upon
claim arising on contract with the United States.
Per Gilchrist G. J.--Porte vs. Tho United States
CONTRACT. . =, sa..r.
8O In all suits for personal services, it must ap-
pear that there was an express or implied contract
Per Blackford, j. McEldery w. The United States
81. A mere voluntary courtesy will not support
even an express promise to pAy.--Ib. p
81. One may be liable for work done for him,
although the claim for compensation depends alono
on the fact thGt he knew Of the work while II was
and made no objection; there the law
implies an assent.--I6. ss...s . gsss Il
S3. No one can make another person bis debtor
without the consent of such other person; the law
is the same as regards the government 10. sas
m ilw SERVICES or EXTRA cLraKs. .g@r
"a. No one but the head of Department, bul
reau or Office at the seat of government can under
any circumstances contract for the services of an
extra clerk on account Of the government, in such
bureau or office-f6.
IS. IL seems proof of voluntary services as extra
a. ;,, hur ofy7c - tho
seat Of government" rendered with the knowledge
Of an agent Of the government, authorized by law
to assent either expressly impliedly to the per
formance of those services, viii sustain claim for
against the United States.--Ib,
86. Where such voluntary services as extra clerk
are performed, but not with the knowledge Of an
agent of the government, authorized by law to as
ance of those services !" Held, there exists no
claim for compensation against, or contract with,
the United States.--I6.
81. 1t seems the head of department., bureau
or Office at the seat of government, can contract
for the services of an extra clerk in such depart
ment, bureau or Office only, during the session Of
Congress- or when the services of such extra clerk
are indispensaby necessary to enable such depart
ment, bureau or Office TO answer some call made by
either House of Congress at one session TO bo an
swered at anotber--Ib. ~-,s se,( f,ss ens
IS. II seems contract for services as extra
clerk in department., bureau, or ofice at the seat
of government, entered into by the head Of such
department. bureau, or Office, not in accordance
with the provisions Of the special appropriation act
Of August 2e, 1912, sec. 10, Is Stat at Large,
$780, is in violation Of such act and void as against
the United States--Ib
N THE CUSTOMS
80. Prior to act of March 8, 1882 Is Stat at
Large, s4s,) an importer might maintain an action
against collector for the recovery Of the excess Of
duties Illegally eIacted; a. where the payment
was made for unascertsined estimated duties, and
(2.) when il was made under protest. Per SearS