Indiana State sentinel. (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1861-1865, 1864-05-23

= S@AA 11K@NANA ~ VIZ "
Judge SroRER. whose loyalty" and Republican
ism cannot be Questioned. BE felt "constraiDed
to say that the whole of the trade. as disclosed
in the proceeding. was not only disgracefui. but
tends directly to disgrace the country. IL is the
price OF blood"
After these remarks of the Court, it is unnec-
essary for US to add a word Of condemnation
upon the infamous ouirages which have been.
and are being committed. similar to those devel-
oped in this case, and with the consent, il not the
participation Of high civil and military officials.
Says a loyal" Judge, this trade is a disgrace
to the eountry'-nay more, at is the price Of
blood Here is the damning evidence that the
nation is being impoverished and hundreds of
thousands Of valuable lives sacrificed to crafty
the cupidity and avarice CT shoddy officials, con-
tractors and spectators. II all sense OF honor.
pride and justice is not paralyzed in tie public
mind. the day Of retribution. fearful and over
whelming, will not long be delayed.
The following is the opinion Of the Court, as
reported:
General Term-Jesse r. Grant vs.. Mack
Brothers. Judge Hoadly delivered the opinion.
The case was reserved from Special Term on a
demurrer to the petition. The action was in
stituted for the settlement of a partnership ac-
cnunt. The plaintiff AYERS that in December,
1862, be entered into a partnership with de
PENDANTS for the purchasing of cotton in the
military department Of u. s Grant; the condi-
tons of the agreement that defendants were to
furnish the capital and the men to purchase and
ship the cotton, aud the plaintiff to procure at
the headquarters Of General Grant a permit to
purchase it, secure transportation, and such other
facilities as might be consistent with the usages
and interests of the army. The plaintiff was to
receive one-fourth share Of the ret profits of
sale, after deducting from gross proceeds the
necessary expenses. The petition states further
that there was a realized profit u the defendants
hands of not less than $40, 900, and that they re-
fuse to render any account. or pay plaintiff his
proportion.
The defendants claim that the plaintiff con-
tributed, by his own showing, neither capital nor
lawful service TO the copartnership, and that their
agreement to pay him a share of the profits is,
therefore. without sufficient consideration. The
Court can not presume that the plaintiff intended
to allege that he undertook that which was for
hidden BY law. His acts and promises may have
been illegal, and the partnership. one for a for
hidden enterprise, but in the absence of an
answer so avering. the Court can not assume it,
unless the averments are Inconsistent with any
other theory.
The purchase of cotton in the military depart
ment commanded by Gen. Grant, was illegal, un
less carried on by permission OF the President
obtained through the Treasury Department. The
plaintiff AYERS that he was to 90 to the head
quarters Of Gen Grant. and procure a permit to
purchase cotton. Whether this was expected to
be obtained from the General himself, from some
member Of his staff. or a treasury agent at head
quarters, is not stated. Whether the plaintiff
waa IN nrncura IL n a parsOual favor mr. nv tho
use of personal. political or other illegitimate in
auence, or in the ordinary mode of business, is
not shown.
The Court could not presume he was to get his
permit from AN officer not authorized by law TO
give it. or that he was 10 procure il as the reward
OF personal. political or other illegitimate infu-
ence They must rather infer that he proposed
to solicit and procure a permit in the ordinary
and proper way from a treasury agent having au
thOrity TO issue it
Again, il is averrei that the plaintiff was TO,
and did. secure transportation.
This may have been done by procuring from
some Q~uartermaster or other officer controlling
it, the improper aud illegal use of government
horses and wagons, or steamboats,: or, he may
have hired horses and wagons from the people of
the country, and secured steamboat transDOrta-
ton in the usual way. The mere fact that he was
to secure transportation at the headquarters of
Gen. Grant is notdecisiye
The other item of service. 1.-The procuring of
such other facilities as might be consistent with
the usages and interests OF the army" is open to
the same double reading. These facilities.
whatever they we're, may have been procured by
honest or dishonest influences.
For these reasons. the defense suggested. must
be presented by answer. The theory that the
employ ment of the plaintiff was to procure the
illegal corporation of the military in a private
enterprise, must be alleged BY sworn answer. If
true. it was equally disgraceful to the defendants
and the plaintiff. and if proved, would insure the
dismissal of the petition, with Reproduction to
both parties. upon the principle among others.
I'm pori deliei0 est cOnditio defendenfis. De
murrer overruled and leave TO answer.
Judge Storer agreed with the other members
of the Court on the question of the pleadings.
and felt constrained to say that the whole of the
trade. as disclosed in this proceeding, was not
only disgraceful. but tends directly to disgrace
the country. 1t is the price Of blood. II Snow
for plaintiff; W. B. Caldwell contra.