Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1872-01-24

NOTION TO QuAsH THEFUL ON THE sEcRE-
TARY OF The TREASURY.
To-day, in the Supreme Court OF the District
of Columbia, the case OF the United States on
the relation Of Lewis ct g.. agt G. S. Boutwell,,
Was taken up-Mr. X. NJ. Corwine for petition
ers, and Messrs. Fisher, Clark and Weed for
respondent. This Is an application for a writ of
mandamus on the Secretary OF the Treasury to
command him TO issue to petitioners holders
OF an order from certain parties claiming tn rep
resent the Choctaw nation, 80 bonds OF g GOO
each, which IL Is claimed were due said Choctaw
nation.
TO quash the writ on technical points, that it
shows such right would entitle them TO the
bonds in question, not showing that the parties
Pitchiyn, Folsom, &c--Nere properly anthor-
lied TO act for the Chociaw nation; that the
contract by which the petitioners came i'm poe
session of the order was in violation OF law that
has the discretionary power to decide the ques-
ton TO whether the sigBers OF the orders had
the power and right To sign the same as repre-
sentaiives OF the Choctaw nation. and having
decided that they had not taat power, the writ
will not lie.
Mr.. Clarke read the petition fled in the case
under treaty OF 1855 and that Pitchlyn and Full
som were appointed 10 look after the trust bonds
deposited with the government, with power to
withdraw them II they sswft, under an act of
the general council Of the Chcctaws of February
9Th. 1861. lie claimed that these agents had no
power 10 sell the bonds. and tie holders of the
order knew II, and that the transaction was n
fraud upon the Quilted States. and the object OF
these delegates was to aid their nation in the
rebellion.
Mr.. COrwine, for the petitioners, said the
question Of whether Memphis vas in rebellion
at the time of the signing of the paper did not
enter into the case He claimed that the dele
gates were entitled to receive the bonds and to
dispose of them in such manner as will hest
subst rye the interests of the CbCctaw Indians
He read from the act of March I'd, 1861, and
called attention to the act OF March Sd. 1911
which he claimed gave the Secretary of the
Treasury, no discretion as to the matter. He
claimed that the requsitiOn wSs regularly
drawn, and that 10 was not in the province OF
the Secretary of the Treasury or TIE court TO
inquire as to who the parties are, except as to
whether it was drawn by the proper parties.
Mr.. Clark said that that was one OF the points
OF the respondent.
After recess, Mr.. Corwine continued his argu-
ment, and quoted from I'd Wallace, 1852 He
dwelt on the fact Shat the holder Of this order
had been Uniformed at the Treasury. that the
requisitiOn would be all right that the Treasury
Department had receipts from Pitch1yn sid the
other signers, and regarded them as genuine;
that + had owledged the genuineness of the
order. III these delegates had the power to
receive the money they had the power to draw a
requisition for the bonds This was not eues-
ton whether Secretary OF the Treasury should
be commanded to do q certain act, but he stood
in the place OF a trustee Only, Mr.. Corwine Was
still speaking when our report closed.