Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1862-07-04

the Occf VINO employed the slave In the unuspuftn
ton OF troops across the river was drowned when the
elave himself ! cannot myself sec very well how
the evidence could properly to the quarormasers
department Sul that an exceptional case. In ord.
nary where the slave Is employed impressed,
this slave was suppose the officer gives certificate
which is presented al the Quartermas Generals Office
and there the service is paid for.
The gentleman from Tennessee Mr.. Maynard and
the gentleman from Maryland Mr.. Wcbsterl cannot see
the why the tenth section Of the bill should be in
serted. Well confess doubted somewhat It's ncoessi
~ or proptcty since the bill does not touch personal
service, until heard brief argument made against it
in committee by the gentleman from Maryland. then
become perfectly satisfied that the section ought 20
main. The third section pro" les that the commissioners
shall have cogni1ance Of all claims against the United
States which shall be presented 10 them by any person.
who, during the rebellion has sustained may
sustain damages by the loss Of any property which has
been OF may be taken by public authority for the
occupation " the Army Properly that is the word
Now know that my friend from Maryland may
claim and think he did substantially IN his speech,
that The Government ought to pay not only for the sory
ice Of the slave but II he IL killed. captured, lost il
ought also 70 pay for his value.
Mn. WEBSTER. | know my friend does not want to
misstate my position and that he will, Therefore, allow
me 20 correct him. II is that where slave had been
impressed into the service without bis masters CONSENT
aud without any contract being made there the Govern
men ought TO pay his owner for him In he is killed
or lost But that whore the slave has gone into the serv
ice with the consent " his and where the master
makes contract with view 70 the consequences ana
takes upon himself the risk NJ the consequences he
not claim compensation for the loss Of his slave.
Mr. WALTON. In the rule that has always been
adopted by the Government, no distinction has been
made between the services VI person impressed and the
services ofone who voluntarily joins the Army. Now
the Of putting this tenth section is that %
apprehended that claims would be made n a the slave
States for the loss Of slaves where they killed in
battle captured lost and u for the purpose "
excluding the commissioners from considering any claims
Of that character that the section drawnup think
tits right because the rule " the government Is not 90
pay Tor anything exceptthe actual service rendered aud
that is the rule with regard 20 all persons serving 10 the
Army without distinction Of position race condition Or
color. IL may De contrndcd that slaves are property
and il is upon that plea, apprehcnd, that the commits
snners will or may be called ON 70 consider claims for
the value Of slaves lost Now | think that under the
Constitution 0f the United States slaves property
within the meaning NJ that word applied % horses
mules cattle, wagons, carts boats Sc for which pro-
vision was made by the act # 1876 and will add by
the way that that is still in force this bill docs
not touch that class Of property.
The Constitution defines exactly and explicitly what
Is the right u master over his slave IL Is nothing but
his right TO the Slaves service OF labor II is precise
y the right Of master the service labor u APP
prentice and think that illustration given by the
supreme Court in the bred Scott case, 1t is like the
claim Of father To the lsbur service " his minor
Now, it known that any master. who had
lost his apprentice in war, % the Goycmment and
claimed and received compcnsa on for the loss Of the
service Of that apprentice Was It known that
father who had lost his minor IN battle, made
aclam or received compensation for the loss Of The
vice Of that son No sir. Nothing Of the kind, either
in regard to fathers masters, or owners and IL strikes
me that TO pay for the lost service o slaves and TO refuse
payment for the lost service VI free white men, would be
monstrous have here Of those interesting works.
published by Gales and Seaton which " friends
appear not 70 like very we'll Us very valuable book
for reference all questions Of this kind. You go
back to from the origin Of the Government up, and
there ind the principles which these and other great
questions growing out Of this ought TO be decided
find necessary and convenient consult these books
they quickly settle knoity questions which otherwise
would be solved with dihcuy consulted these books
on this very question: and propose to site few
cases in support ofmy position. find in page i53, Of
the volume Claims the American State Papers the
Of claim made. by his master, for negro boy lost
killed the fall Of Fort Minis | observe that the
report Of the committee was mede by Mr. Yancev Of
line e1, Ha
scented slaveholdng State aud in fact every report
am about to cite made by Representative from the
saNehodng state Of North Carolina so TANK the com
mittee could not have been prudcod account Of col
This is the first case
December %, 1918, Mr. YAnccy, Of North Carolina,
from the Committee Of Claims, reported on petition OF
Lieut.. Andrew Montgomery
"As the claim for the value Of the negro boy, the
committee are Of the opinion that the United states are
under no obligations to pay for him. Officers Of the Ar
my by law entitled to servants walters and for the
purpose Of procuring them, adequate is allowed
but II officer Of the Army prefers taking his slave
IN the capacity Of waiter drawing from the United
States the allowed for walters compensation for
the hire Of his servant 1t is conceived the United States
ought not TO be liable for the value of the slave If he
should be killed by any other accident lost TO the
owner II compensation were to be made for the value
Of the slave the claim Of the officer in selecting his own
servant would have the effect Of compelling the United
States to become the warAnter Of the value Of the
want instead Of making a reasonable allowance for the
hire Of waiter, contemplated by the act Of Con-
gross "-AmericaH state PdpcTs, "Ciaips." 453
The next reported also by Mr.. Nancey, Of n
e. oath February 1916, on the claim Of surgeon in the
Army for servant who died in the service The com
mitteo said
rhe committee Of the opinion he is entitled
relief II an officer Of the Government thinks proper
take into his service his slave in the capacity Of
servant and receives the pay allowed Tor servants in
stead Of employing free man for that purpose the Unit
ed States should not be considered liable for his value in
in Of death or other loss 10 the owner
And then the committee declared the general rule, APP
phoahe alike To free and slave black white, and that
Is pay only for service rendered to Government and
and not for service lost or the value Of slaves lost
thus
alt was the obvious and correct policy of the act OF
Congress, and II is evidently its intention, make
the Government liable for the value Of the servant bu
ia provide sufficient compensation for his services ~
fDieriCGn State Papcrs, "Ctgt0s,' 46S.
There is still another where slave, who ser
want Of an officer was killed in the battle Of New Orhans
Nh WIckLiFfB. What was the name ofthc claiman
in that case
Mn. WALTON. Major Shaw.
This is claim Of assistant adjutant general To-
the loss Of servant killed in the battle Of New Orleans
Mr.. Williams, Of N. C., from the Committee Of Claims
reported on the Sd Of February, 1918, that
"lhe committee decidedly Of opinion that Congress
under no obligation whatsoever to remuneIae the pc
TONER, No principle Of legislation is perhaps better
tied than This hat for such LOSSES Government canno
be liable "-AmoricaH State Papers Claims p jlS
This was extremely hard case. The officer had hir
ed the servant OF another man, and actually paid 5000
the owner for his loss For this the claimant asked in
/ identification, and Congress refused it.
The next case one ofimpressment, when the negr
died Of disease contracted in the service. January 6
/ 1920. Mr.. Williams, Of n. c., reported that
III the facts were established beyond the possibility
doubt that tho negro contracted the disease Of which
he died while ia the service Of the United States it wo
be considered consequential INJURY for which the peti
TONER Is not entitled to pay.'dHertc1H State Papers
CLAIMS p CSC
There are other similar which will not take TIM
Ia refer the House To, Suffice IL say, Mr. Speaker
that have examined this book thoroughly and canuu
ind single instance in which Congress has ever pu
t1r the value Of slave lost killed captured in battle
or for any loss Of the occasuncd by tn
death loss Of the slave In every case the rule ha
been the other way Every claim has been reject
Cd and rejected the broad principle that the Govern
mont only pays for actual service while the person is il
the employment of Government, and for the value
slave OF lost service. We must stand by the rule
1--WE reverse II now, justice will require 20 back an
pay for every slave st in the Army from the Of tn
| Revolution to this day.
Mr. Speaker have only word two to add in refc
enco 10 the substitute presented by the gentleman from
! Kentucky and desire 10 call his attention to H. NJ
first objection to the substitute Of the gentleman is tina
imposes the duty Of nquring into and settling thes
claims upon the commissioners OF chancery IN the
al States, who consider all the claims which arr
provided for in this substitute Now, sir, object
trusting the settlement Of these claims class Of per
holding office in the States which are in rebel
lion My objection is that these officers many Of them
may be themselves disoyal. surely man who is pre-
oludod Tor his disoyal,y from himself bringing CLAIM
against the Government ought not to act in my iudg
ment upon the claims Of others
Mr. WiCKLiFfR These are commissioners uf tn
States oouIts they are not u the Stat
courts at all.
Nj WALTON. That may obviate the objection 10
certain e2Hnti but even in the courts u the Unite,
States there disoyal officers. We are nov tryinp q
impeach one Of the Judges aud | am very much affa