Wyandot County Republican. [volume] (Upper Sandusky, Ohio) 1869-1903, 1872-10-24
filed in the following decision. t
which I call your special attention.
PosT OFFICE DEPARTMENT
Washington, D. C. Oct. u, 1869.

Washington, d. G. Oct. IL, 1869.
On the 22d of September last. William ].
Jones, attorney for George Chorpenning.
claimant, fled printed argument IN sup
port ut his petition, praying tor rehearing,
and addiuonal allowance. under the Act OF
Congress approved Sd of March, 1857. en-
titled. IAN aot for the relief Of George ChOr-
penning, Jr.
This case was taken mp by Postmaster
General Brown, aud after most labUrrous
con,id-rat on, he awarded 10 Chorpenning,
aud Chorprnuig actually received ali extra al
| vance OF $195 072 95. ''-'-
In determining the pro rata increase for the
| distance by San PedIo, for the service t. Car
sons Valley, and for such part ot the T. ist-
ern mail as was carried by California, he
construed tile act OF Congress to require him
to take for his basis OF calculation the Gull
tract prices, rather th n the increased rate
of compensation established by tile third sec
ton. This position was assailrd as al error
in the law. and as Incompatible with the iu-
| tention Of Congress But on reconsideration
Postmaster General Brown reofh rm-d his in
depreciation OF the law and sfterward. repor
ted toCungress the grounds aud principles of
| his decision. rs the same time Calling on the
legislative branch of the Guvernmrnt TO cor-
rect hts decision if erroneous. To this day
| Congress has taken no action in the matter
| True, the Committees of the Two houses have
| adopted report 50 Interpreting the act OF
March 3, 1857. as to allow Churpsnning n pro
rata Increase of pay, To be calculated upon
the basis of the pay allowed bin by the same
act for services unde r the contract, but n-i
ther house adopted the report.
Ii thus appears that the case has been
carefully c"n-id-r-d and squarely decided by
Postmaster General Brown, that his decision
hinged upon the construction which he gave
to the law. and that Congress has allowed
his decision to remain uLTevrrsed
to this day. Application have been
made to several If the successors Of P.'stmas
ter General Brown for a rrop-ning of tho
| case, aud for another aud larger award to be
0asrd upon a diff -r-nJ construction of thr.
law. Bus M-ssrs Holt, Blair, and Randall
have all decided against the p-titi"nrr. 'ol
the grounds that the Case was res od1udicato.
CONCUR IN their opinion, and n-nce r. ta--
the prayer of the petitlon OF the 22d 1T Sep
t-inb-r 1869. base this action upon the IN,
firm practice at the Department and the de-
cisi"n of the Supreme Court. in Is Peters
4O1, United States vs.. Bank Of Metropolis.
Now, fellow citizens, you observe
that in this decision / sustained nv
predecessors. before whom this case
had been brought, and the ruling of
the Department through four success
i've terms had been uniformly the
same, namely, that the decision of
Postmaster General Brown having
exhausted the powers conferred up
on the Postmaster General. the case
was res aJudieata, IN the language
of the profession, and, therefore, we
should not disturb it until Congress
should take some further action upon
the matter, changing the rule of con
struction as established by the De-
partment. Now, mark you, the point
between us was simple one-whetll'
er the allowance should be made for
the pro rata increase of service as
tue Department contended, upon the
contract price, or whether. as Chor-
penning contended upon the increas-
ed price mentioned in the third Sec
ton of the act OF 1857 1t was no
complicated case. The whole of it
was just there, the Department hold
ing one way and Chorpenu;ng the
her. After l gave my decision
Chorpenning went TO Congress. aud
the Committee of the House recon-
mended unanimously with the excep
ton of Mr.. Farnsworth, who was
not in the city. that his bill pass. 1
will ask my friends to read the bill
as passed, in 1870, on the 15th day
of July. 1t reads rs follows: =
The Postmaster General is hereby author
lied and di' ected 10 investigate and adjust
rhe claims of Geurge Chorp-nning. und-r the
first section of all act for his r lief approved
March 3 1872. nn the basis of Compensation
allowed by -aId act for the regular service .
aud the Glenn growing out of the curtailmrut
aad annulmeht Of his contract, ON route NUN.
Der II SOL, IN the basis of his agreement
with the Postmaster General for the service
To b. s-ttled As provided tor the services
named IN said act of March 3, 1851, and III.
right OF app-sl. from the findings "f The Post
master General to TIL Court of Claims, is re-
served and allowed said claimant
Now. fellow citizens, you will oh
serve that in this act of 1870 Con-
gress directs the Postmaster General
to adjust this claim of George Chor-
penning upon the basis OF extra com
pensation; $50. 900 per year, allowed
in the act OF 1857.
That was the whole controversy
between US, that was precisely whist
we of the Department ruled should
not he done. We held him to the
contract price. but Congress directed
that we should do otherwise Now
what election was left ME p Not
only does Congress refer tu the act
of 1857, and say that we shall exc
cute law, upon the basis of S30,000
for the regular service under the first
and second contracts, but Congress
goes for lie first time and directs the
Postmaster General to settle
and adjust the Chorpenning
claims under his contract of 1853,
according to the basis of his agree
nent with the Postmaster General
Now, then what was left TOR me to do
except to execute that law in good
.ailh2 had nothing in the world
to do with its passage. l never
spoke to a member of Congress up
on the subject. That is not nv
business. My business is to take
care Of the affairs of the Post Office
Department and to execute the law
l have no power of repeal Il have no
power of suspension; Eut when
rule in good faith, and Congress
rules the other way, directing me. as
an officer of the Government to rake
tneir construction oj the law, and to
abandon my own, l hold that as an
officer sworn to execute the laws it
is my dety to do so. (Applause
Mr.. Blair says that he called for the
yeas and nays. but did not procure
them ; but just here let me say that
if he new there was anything wrong
in that act Mr.. Blair had a nple time
when / delayed my decision upon it