The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1857-02-10

stricken during his renarks argued against these pa
nces am only asking that the government shall perform
the oogatons that clearly cast upon ~ and not under
take to avoid thoco obligations by clamorng against the
laws under which they arise. All contend for legal
aud correct construction gentleman admoniihed me
,nat heretofore be had seen my former as he
designated him, (Mr Fnore) stand where did, and DE-
claim against such exactohs upon the lrNSuty Sir Mr.
Fillmore the author of tie law Of s4s against extra
Compensation and extra pay for services and he was
right stand now where he stood then; and only re-
greet that The gentleman from Ohio did then unite with
nln anu provide against one man holding two Offices Iu
hat event. most OF this debate would have been unaecs
sary.
Mr.TAYLOR addressed the committee for an hour, His
remarks whlch he has withheld for revsion viii be pub-
Mr.. LRTohaR. desire to clr.s the following anne
ment to the bill '.N
r.os,d,d, That the eau Nourse ,b, mot in The ,do,,
Us --oounts BY the officers Of the treasury De al
LOT any portion oil time subsequent to the date of Sep
TENDER 2, 1897. p
have listened With good deal of interest and pleasure
to the speech of my colleague Mr. STH and particularly
to that portion of it 10 which he undertook TO
the Propiey OF adherence 10 preceden Now, believe
that about The chef value Of pecedents sancfy
ror and so far my colleague and myself concerned
he and have, over and again. expressed sovereign
contempt for peeedents IL you wanted TO establish the
fact that Unied States bank would be CONSTITUTIONAL
precedent could be relied upon do It, You have the pre-
cedents here upon the stutehook-and cot ongahat but
you have the decision Of the Supreme Court TO bk them
up But 50 fir as have been concerned Fave always
thought That the legislative powers OF the government
pfceden that may be on the statute books In the Lam
guage Of the gentleman from Louisiana Mr. TAYLoR,l
had supposed that when measure up here for
siderauon, we were not TO look 10 whether there
precedenis on question of the sort--but that
were to look TO The justice to tie absolute merit to the
right OF the case and that to decide it with refer
ence to that right and with reference TO that merit
But my colleague tells ought to look to precedens
lie cites us precedent VIII oh occurred ia 1901 and which
we lind paid in 1850 Fory-nine years after the claim
originated il is reported among the expenses of the gov
eminent TO have been discharged Now if that claim
just how can my colleague explain the of delay for
forty nine years. Why was it not demanded sooner?
Why Yves il not paid sooner? In this very case if the
ney is fairly and justly due under law why not the
claim entered until row. after long interval Of time
from 1929 up 10 The present day.
say, then that when you look at the case which
has been presented here for the consideration of the House.
you are u look at the attendant circumstances what
those circumstances were in connxicn with The validity of
the claim and the propriey Of its payment Do you inn
agne, Mr. Chairman, does any gentleman in this liouse
imagine that there was an understanding at the time these
duties were performed By Mr.. Dickins by Mr. Nourse
that they were to receive compensation for their services
either 10 proportion the higher offices or in any other
way whatsoever We know sir, that vixen moaey due
for services rendered that money is claimed and partcu-
larry by those WHO hold office; for general rule
of them are poor They cannot afford lie out of the
money II they have legal title 10 it they assert that
claim, and the law assigns the which may be due
But the attendant circumstances in these cases land
the memorial of Mr. Dickios himself shows his CASEY show
that they did not regard this money due TO them Mr.
Dckns comes up and pleads the precedent MCCotock
Young as an authority and warrant for the his
| part
II to me- then to be clear hat go far as these
Claims are concerned there neither obligation
the part Of the government 10, expectation the
part OF the claimants that they receive paw the
tune these services were rendered If that be So is This
House urder any obligation On the contrary, is it not
bound to take the opposite course and not pay the claim
But do not hold to Colleagues views in regard my
daly MS member Of this House bills OF this sort He
pokes Shakespeare at me aud tells that have from my
youth, come up in hostility all these claims Now let
me tell you my notions about them. have right to do
as please with my money to sIend it for any
thing desire TO apply it in the way Of gratuity to
pay an individual who claims debr Of ne beyond the
amount of that debt if choose; but when come here
representative my idea is that bound to see that
these demands presented against the legal
demands that they sustained by the requisite
CT evidehce and that, until these facs appear clearly
ana conousive it my duty land tina. has been tie rule
of my action) to oppose them
Mr. SMITH, OF NIg MIA beg to say hat my COLI, ague
has misap rehended The committee viii fecoect that
my colleague few days ago urged that there pre-
cedent for this bill hattt have only calc lis
attention 10 the fact that there precedens II hat
II is not novel case have done this-not that bow
10 prec denS though presidents entitled TO respect
but to show that here many prcedenls usy the
House in the present proposed action We have the opin
ION In its favor of Attorney General Le,are, Of
great private worth and noted legal aanmens In this
very case OF Mr. DckDs be in 1881 allowed portion
OF the claim be now presents to Congress. There al
SO the precedent case Of MsCiin,ock Young only refer
to theie cases TO meet the argument OF my colleague and
think they meet it successfully. AS TO being bladl}
bound to precedent do not think that is ofmy char
acterlstlcS. But when md succession authorities,
recognised such in the country, avorng the principle
involved in this bill am disposed TO agree it unless it
| is manifesly improper and nnwse. nNsra
My colleague mistaken in another thing lie imag
that accrsed him of making carpug objections against
all claims did no such thing quoted Shakespeare
him, but only in reference 10 his objection all claims
this character 10 reference his distinction bet tsm
porary absence and temporary vaanco between the pow
conferred by appointments and powers conferred by
authority to tNercise them, simply quoted him the
| words Of Lady Macbeth
|
ST.. :" Ny lord is often thus,
| " ... And hath been from his youth" tan.
These have discharged the duties of the higher Of
fee and think, in use, they should have the compen
sation of that higher Office. Bn oppose giving them
double saariethe sol ires of both Offices And in reply
another remark of my colleague will say that repre-
sent part of the people of the United States and
would for myself individually, viii act for them in
this will for them first though they here
in grand essembage pass these claims for if they
were here they would act in liberal and generous
spirit towards all their claimants.
Mr.. WAKEMAN moved that the committee do now
rise l..... ... t....s @sr
The motion was agreed 10. -sg .. ...
SO the commit, rose and the Speaker having resumed
the chair Mr. NCoLs reported that the Committee of the
Whole House bad had the private calendar generally under
onderaton and particularly bill &C. C. No 81 for the
relief of Michael Norrse, and htd come TO no resolution
thereon. 49, Al. 81
From the New Haven R,sstr
SENATOR TOUCEY.
The Hartford Couant endeavors to find comfort amidst