The Cecil Whig. [volume] (Elkton, Md.) 1841-current, 1872-08-24
gress approved Sd of March, 1856, entitled,
SAn act for the relief of Geo. Chorpennng

and CnorpennlnS aCIuaIiy e'ea du eX-
ira allowance of $195, 072.9
In determining the pro rata increase Of
compensation for the distance by San Pedro,
for the service to Carson's valley, and fol
such part of the Eastern mall as was car
ried by California, he construed the act of
Congress to require him 10 take for his
basis of calculation the contract price rath-
er than the increased rate OF compensation
established by the third section. This po-
sition was assailed as an error IN law, and
as incompatible with the intention of Con.
oress But. on reconsideration, Postmast-
er General Brown reatfirmed nus interpre-
tation of the law, and atterward reported
to Congress the grounds ana principal of
his decision, at the same time calling on
the legislative branch OF the Government
to correct his decision II erroneous. To
this day Congress has taken no action in
the matter. True, the committees of the
two houses have adopted report so inter-
preting the act of March 3, 1887, as to al
low Chorpenning pro rata increase ofpay,
to be calculated upon the basis OF the pay
allowed him by the same acc for services
under the contract, but neither house
adopted the report.
II TINS appears that the case has been
carefully considered and squarely decided
by Postmaster General Brown; that his
decision hinged upon the construction
which he gave to the law, and that Con-
gress has allowed his decision to remain
unreversed to this day. Applications have
been made to several OF the successors in
office of Postmaster General Brown for re-
opening of the case, and Tor another and
larger award, to be based upon different
&Lo1 ow IToJS
Blare, and Randall have all decided against
the petitioner, upon the ground that the
case was res adjudicdta.
I concur in their opinion. and hence re-
fuse the PRAYER of the petition of the 22d
of Sc ptember, 1869. base this action up-
on the uniform practice OF the Department,
and the decision of the Supreme Court in
Is Peters, 401, United States VS.. Bank of
Metropolis.
Now, fellow citizens, you observe that
in this decision l sustained my predecess-
ors. before whom this case had been
brought, and that the ruling of the Depart
ment through four successive 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 adjudicata' in the language of the pro-
fession, and therefore, we shall not dis
turb it until Congress should take some
further action upon the matter, changing
the rule of construction as established by
the Department. Now, mark you, the
point between us was simple one-wheth-
er the allowance should be made for the
pro rata increase of service, as the Depart
ment commended, upon the contract price,
or whether, as Chorpenning commended,
upon the increased price mentioned in the
third section of the act of 1867. 1t was
no complicated case. The whole of it was
Just there, the Department holding one
way and Chorpenning the other. After
l gave my decision Chorpenning went to
Congress, and the committee of the House
recommended unanimously with the single
exception of Mr.. Fransworth, who was
not in the city, that his bill pass. | will
ask my friends to read the bill as passed in
1870, on the 18th of July. 1t is as follows:
That the Postmaster General is hereby
authorized and directed to investigate and
adjust the claims of George Chorpenning,
under the first section of an act for his
relief, approved March 3, 1857, on the
basis of compensation allowed by said act
for the regular service, and the claim grow
ing out of the curtailment and annnlment
of his contract on route number IL, sol, on
the basis of his agreement with the Post
master General for the service, to be set
tied as provided for the services named IN
said act of March 3, 1857, and the right of
appeal from the finding of the Postmaster
General to the Court of Claims is reserved
and allowed to said claimant
Now, citizens, you will observe
that in this act of 1870 Congress directs
the Postmaster General to adjust this
claim of George Chorpenning upon the
basis of extra compensation $50, 900 per
year, allowed in the act of 1857.
This was the whole controversy between
us; there was precisely what we of the De-
partment ruled should not be done. We
held him to the contract price; but Con-
gress directed that we should do otherwise
Now what election was left me? Not only
does Congress refer to the act of 1857 and
say that we shall execute that law upon
the basis of $50, 900 for the regular service
under the first and second contracts, but
Congress goes further, and for the hrst
time directs the Postmaster General TO
settle and adjust Chorpenning claims un-
der his contract of 1858, according to the
basis of his agreement with the Postmast-
er General. Now, then, what was lett 1or
me to do except to execute that law IN gooa
faith? had nothing in the world TO 90
with its passage. I never spoke to
member of Congress upon the subject.
That is not my business. My business Is
to take care Of the affairs OF the fost ofiicg
Department and to execute the law.
have no power of repeal; have no power
of suspension; but when l rule IN Soou
faith. and Congress rules the otIer way
directing me as an officer of the Govern
ment to take their construction OF the law
and to abandon my own, hold that as an
officer sworn to execute the laws IL Is my
duty to do SO. Applause Mr; niali
says that he called for the yeas ana nays,
but did not procure them; but just nele ieI
me say that if he new there was anytnlns
wrong in that act Mr.. Blair had ample
time when l delayed my decision upon IL
until the 23d Of December, ana wi,en a;. ny
decision never went to the eixtn AuulIor
until the 18th of January; to have lntroauc-
ed any resolution of inquiry, or any lesolu
ton to hold the execution of 1t IN cneck,
OF any resolution of repeal, 0uI ,, ne n1 1i
did anything of the kind. Mr. biair nau
ample time if he objected to TINS eeons son
by Congress to address me a noIe , vi ;ou
me in person, and tell me that lIe ueIisio W
of Congress was wrong. and that inc ell
feet would be to award Chorpennlns more
money than he was entitled to, and there-
fore that should not execute the Jaw.
From the duty thus peremptorliy lnpus,
ed upon me would gladly nave =. eou na
if had seen way of escape open t " 80 ne foce
Nothing was left me- however, pus W W a axa
the responsibility and to endeav1i - ~ 80
cute the law. When the counsel o. odo ~
penning appeared before me tei a1o 10
make any decision on any part OF his CAIN
until all the testimony, together with tne
written arguments of counseis aiI =" q" ronn
ed brief of the whole case, shouid 10 ioS"-
larry filed in the Department, g. .o two acts
When came to interpret tno s;o s"o hv
of Congress found that was uii'o'o" ~
the plain words of the law.
I. To allow -, -, rata increase OF COIL