The Washington union. [volume] (City of Washington [D.C.]) 1857-1859, 1858-07-30
WASHINGTON CITY.
THE COURT OF CI4AlMS--WHAT III is, AND
WHAT IT OUGHT TO BE.

/
thousand volumes of law books defining and declar-
ing the rights duties and privileges Of individuals
among themselves, with minute and precise rules
for asserting and rendering them available, not
can DO found devoted to an exposition of the rela-
tive obligations Of the government and its citizens
The law bearing upon this subject is limited to a
few pages in small number of volumes. The minu- |
test rights between and provided for
by statute OF elastic and adjustable common law.
The statutes of Congress contain many provisions,
but mostly OF the loosest character, declaring the
rights Of the government against the citizen, with
very few defining those of the latter against the
former, while there 10 an absence of all etfectual
means by which the rights of the individual citizen
can be asserted against the aggregate which forms
tho government. Duties may be omitted and rights
invaded by the government still the citizen is with
out remedy except at the hands of the legislative
power which neither has the time nor possesses
the means Of investigating and determining his
rights The records of Congress show that years of
fruitless effort often ranspre before honest claim
ant can secure his just and legal rights.
Various expedients have been resorted to for the
avoidance Of this evil Boards aud commissions have
whose decisions have usually been submitted to Con-
gress for final action. These have only been estab-
lshed where large classes Of claims were known to
exist and did not relieve individual claimants whose
cases were not included in them. Congress repeat
edly discussed and occasionally acted upon, propo-
sitions for establishing tribunal for hearing and
determining the validity Of all claims which the ex
ecutive officers of the government had failed to al
low Its deliberation resulted in establishing the
Court of Claims, whose decision is only recommen-
datory, and it depends upon the affirmative action Of
Congress to render its awards in favor of claimant
effective After mourning the labor and expense Of
trial in the Court of Claims, the claimant has made
but one step towards securing what its Judgment
may award him. He has then to go to Congress to
get the Judgment of the court affirmed and appro
priation made for payment. This is usually attend
cd, not only with anxiety, but with labor and ex-
pense. The claimant must attend in person, OBJ
tain the services of COUNSEL in order to secure
ton upon his oasc. As most claimants poor and
needy, they are usually compelled to mako compen-
saton in contingent fees, payable out Of their claims
and Of course, from that circumstance, large, which
not only consumes large portion, but creates
prejudice against it. system which leads to such
results must have error at its foundation. If the
government owes the claimant he should be prompt
ly and fully paid, and as nearly without expense
to himself as possible. He should neither be
compelled to wait nor to sacrifice largo portion
Of what is due to secure the residue. The
fact that he u.s. from the circumstances surround
ing him, compelled to do So leads to the pre-
sentation of claims for exorbitant amounts, there
by creating dstrust against them, and at tho same
timo subecting the treasury to unjust demands upon
It in cases of The tendency of tho present
state of things is to immortality and abuse From the
very nature of things, the court Congress- and the
public are suspicious that the government is to be
wronged all Of which is injurious to the honest and
fair claimant This should not be 80. Justice is best
administered where circumstances excite the
picon that there is to be overreaching by those who
are professedy seeking Justice
The remedy is simple and one which stern justice
demands. The experience Of ages has led to the
adjustment of judicial tribunals best suited to
finally determine all controversies between man and
man. Few cases are left without the privilege of
ono or more reviews, at the instance of the losing
party. Parties are generally better satisfied where
they have been heard a second time. The govern
ment and its litigants enjoy these privileges in
existing courts and both parties yield to the final
decision Of the judicial tribunals. The government
makes it's defendants pay, when finally beaten, the
same as the losing party does in contests between
individuals. BY paying final Judgments against it
the government places itself in the same situation
as individuals, and then the temptation to swell
clnsvn IN ~ +1,o a.