New-York daily tribune., 1858-03-05

We copied the other day, from The Sunday At
las, a statement respecting the case OF Sturges,
Bennett i Co., low pending before Congress on
Judgment in their favor in the Court of Claims
Since then, We have read the report of Mr. Simmons
of Rhode Island, on behalf Of the Senate Committee
on Claims and the argument filed in reply thereto
The demand appears to be for the return OF
S2,C68, certified by the Collector of New-fork to
have been overpad to the Treasury. This sum
could have been recovered in the Circuit Court OF
the United States but for the fact that no protest
was made At the time of payment, because the
merchants were under the impression that
the Government knew its business and I'M
derstood its own laws. The Government admits
that to take the money was wrong but asserts that
70 keep il is right for the reason that protest is
made by statute condition precedent to recovery
against the Collector. The Court Of Claims agree
TO this, but cay that it is uncOnscientous and dis
honorable in the principal to plead in bar pro-
vision which was manifesty intended for the pro-
lection Of the agent and that therefore it will en-
tertan suits of this description against the United
States. The Senate Committee say the same thing,
but present sn adverse report, which proceeds
upon the idea that the nine Judges of the Supreme
Court and the three Judges Of the Court of Claims
have misunderstood the law.
However proper it may be for the Legislative
and Executive branches Of Government, or the iu-
diyidual States to deny the constitutional power OF
The Supreme Court to deal with political questions,
it, power to put binding construction upon rev.
enue law in matter of individual right is too clear
to be- argued. Its decision upon such point should
be respected by Congress AS well as BY private per-
sous The law is uncertain enough, at best; but
who shall know what his rights are, if the Senate
or the House is to Oyerrule the decisions OF the
Supreme Court or of the Court of Claims, and to
entertain appeals thererom as against the citizen
The Court of Claims decides questions of right be-
tween the Government and an individual, only
after bearing elaborate arguments and giving the
matter u deliberate examination. 1t renders five
judgme nts against claimants for one in their favor,
since it naturally leans toward the Government
which created and sustains it. We submit that
when such tribunal cOncurs with the Supreme
Court in the Interpretation of statute it Is, to
cay the least, mistake for a Legislative Committee
to attempt to shake public confidence in its con-
clu.ions, even with we'll considered arguments, OF
vhch We find cone in Mr.. Simmons report. The
Court If Claims shOuld be respected, as the ony
means Of relieving sutors from the necessity OF
prosecuting with entreaties and brbes, members of
Congress. Let il be understood that its judgments
are TO bind only when they are against the sutor,
al that if successful before it, he must reargue
his case before Senate Committee and House
Committee, and the usefulness of the Court 10 de-
stroysd. 1t becomes one more bar between
claimant and justice.
That three members of the legal profession,
Nessrs Mallory Of Florids, Iverson of Georgia,
and Polk of Missouri, concur in report which
oyerrules the unanimous judgment of two tribunals
of competent jurisdiction is fact which can only
be explained upon the supposition that members OF
this as of other Committees, are in the habit OF
seeing with each sther's eyes and judging with each
Others minds.