The New York herald., 1872-12-20

s0thern Cotton Claims and the Move
nent TO Refund tho Late Cotton
rax.
number of cotton planters of Alabama
ha~ petitioned Congress for indemnity in the
mater Of considerable stores Of cotton, of
which, t the close Of our late civil war, they
contend they were unjustly deprived by the
government They represent that during the
war the had agreed with agents of the then
Confederate States to ship their cotton to their
own commission merchants in Mobile and to
allow thl proceeds to be invested in Confede-
rate boids that the petitioners, however,
made nosuch shipments, but retained posses
of the war; although on their agreements to
sell the, had, in many cases, received Confed-
crate States bonds, which they held with the
cotton. They claim that by the results Of the
war this cotton reverted to their individual
possession, though seized by order of General
Candy a Confederate States cotton and ap-
propriatd by the Secretary of the Treasury as
captured or abandoned, or surrendered, or
conhscaHe property. The petitioners, con-
tending that they were thus unlaw-
fully deprived of their cotton in the prem
ises by the Secretary Of the Treasury. task
the passage of q law authorizing payment to
be made to the owners Of cotton thus unlaw-
fully seized, to the extent of the market value
of such cotton at the time of seizure, with
interest thereon, or that the claimants may
be allowed to sue In the Court of Claims for
their cotton, and that their cases may be tried
upon their merits, without the embarrassme
Of any statute Of limitations
The act ~ C~.,-----
---.-. xs..s.... passed y ses lsss sss-
sion, directing the Secretary Of the Treasury to
pay 'for all cotton seized after the sOth Of
june, 1865, by the agents of the government
unlawfully and in violation Of his instruc-
tions," affords no relief to these claimants.
because these very seizures of which they
complain were made under the Secretary's
instructions The privilege which these
claimants ask of suing in the Court of Claims
for their lost cotton is certainly not unreason-
able, and as their suits would involve only the
question Of the legality of the Secretary's
instructions on the subject. surely the two
houses OF Congress cannot refuse the refer
ence which these claimants ask. As
for the direct indemniAcation Of these peti-
TONERS, BY the Secretary of the Treasury,
setting aside his instructions, we apprehend
that it is out of the question. Mr.. Boutwell,
viii adhere t9 his position Of sustaining Mr.
,McCulloch, his predecessor. But an appeal
to the Court of Claims cannot with justice be
denied these petitioners, especially as in this
Court the rights of the government are per-
fectly safe.
In the next place there is said to be q
perfect lobby organization forming at WASH
ington to push through bill for Tho
refunding of the tax on cotton-three cents q
pound-collected in the years 1865, 1865 and
1867, while the law was in force The amount
of the tax thus collected, it is estimated,
exceeds seventy millions Of dollars, and the
lobby, with the receipts in its hands, rumor
has it, can afford to pay ten or fifteen millions
to push through the bill This tax, further
more, being clearly unconstitutional the lobby
considers the movement for refunding it o
splendid speculation but as the question is
before the Supreme Court Congress may wait
for the decision ef that tribunal, and as the
matter is to be brought up in Congress, the
Court may await the action of the two houses
for ten or twenty or forty or fifty years. The
history of those French spoliation claims is
very instructive in reference to any heavy bill
upon the government, the payment of which
is dead loss to the Treasury and so we fear
that If there is man now living who will live
to share in the cash of this cotton tax when
refunded he will be too old to enjoy it or to
anything about it.
President Thiors and the French
Army.
One Of our latest cable dispatches informs