Virginia free press. (Charlestown, Va. [W. Va.]) 1832-1916, 1867-11-21
AnImnortant Decision.

At the July term of the United States Dis
trict Court at Grand Rapids, a 'claim agent"
residing at Niles, Michigan, was indicted for
violation of the 18th and 18th sections Of the
act of July 4, 1864 The offences charged
consisted in the withholding by the agent of
SO pension due and allowed a pensioner and
in the demanding and retaining the amount as
fees for prosecuting the claim.
The fee allowed an agent, and specified in
the 18th section of the act, is ten dollars, no
part of which is due until the pensioner shall
have received the certificate.
The case was called for trial at the Septem
Der term of the court, but the counsel for the
accused entered demurrer 10 the indct-
ment, assuming tlco objections to the same:
First That Congress had no power to enact
law which provides punishment for an offence
cognizable under law of the State.
2 That Congress had no right to fix a value
upon an agents services; that this was thesubect
of contract as between the employer and
employee The Government replied that Con-
gresS had a right, and was bound to follow the
bounty it might prescribe by law, into the
hands Of the beneficiary And, again, that
Congress, TO the end that Justice might be
Il. Il
perfect right not only to designate the persons
to act as agents in paying amounts due upon
claims allowed, but TO appoint the persons
: fixing their compensation who should prose-
cute these claims before the Department. 1t
was further urged with great force on the part
of the Government, that if the State alone had
the power to deal with offences of the kind
described, and IL failed TO exercise it, in many
instances guilty men would 60 UNPUBLISHED,
and many private and public wrongs would
forever remain unredressed. The Government
has no desire, it was argued, to destroy the
business Of "clajm agents, but simply to pro-
vide that the pensioners should receive all the
money to which they had been declared euti-
tied.
The argument was conducted with ability
by the Hon. Lucius Patterson in support of,
and Hon. Z. A. Eggeston, United States at
torney against the demurrer"
The question involved being Of great impor-
lance in transacting the business of the Pension
Bureau; the decision of Judge Whitney
was looked for with unusual interest by the
Commissioner Of Pensions, at whose instance
the proceedings were commenced. The Judge,
after considering all the points and authorities
produced in the course of the argument, has
set aside the demurrer" and consequently
sustaius the indictment" The trial of the
case has been continued until the present term
of the court and whether a conviction ensues
or nos, this decision, the first of the kind, rem
ders beyond dispute the validity of the partic-
uar act of Congress referred to.
James p. Tustin, Esq, of the Pension Office,
was charged by the Commissioner Of Pensions
with the duty Of assisting, as far as was neces-
sary, in preparing and conducting the case.
Mr.. Tustin, lawyer by profession who may
be remembered by our readers as once aresi-
dent of this town, occupies an important posi-
ton in the Pension Office, being charged with
the duty of preparing cases for trial in the
Federal Courts
The Hon. Joseph H Barrett, the Commits
sioner of Pensionsis, we believe, an accomplish.
ed gentleman, as well as an an able and efficient
public officer.