The Democratic advocate. [volume] (Westminster, Md.) 1865-1972, 1874-06-27
public affairs.



The Geneva award has occupied good
deal Of attention in Congress for two
sessions, and will, perhaps, after all, have
to be settled by committee Of conference.
This money-iifteen millions, Ave hundred
thousand dollars -has been since Septem-
Der last reposing in the Treasury invested
in a Eve per cent. bond, accnmulating
interest, aud awaiting the disposal Of
Congress. But Congress finds great diff
Guilty in deciding upon any system Of dis
tribution. Several weeks ago the Senate
passed bill, which was reproduction Of
the measure which passed that body at
the last session, and this Senate bill, COM
ing over to the House, found several other
bills there all designed to effect the same
object Mr.. Tremaine, Of New York,
had a bill Mr.. Poland another; and
General Butler a third; whilst Mr. Ed
ridge, Of Wisconsin, also had plan which
was very simple, yet not very just, viz. to
refuse to distribute the award at all, cover
ing il into the Treasury for the use Of the
United States. 1t was upon these four
differing plans that the earnest, and at times
acrimonious, debate was carried on in the
House last week, and finally General
Butler carried his bill, by vote Of 1872 to
l0l, as an amendment, in the nature Of
substitute for the Senate bill.
The Senate and House have thus again
passed radically different measures for the
distribution Of the award money among the
claimants. The bill, as amended or substi-
tuted, now goes back to the Senate, and If
that body refuses to accept the House bill
il may become the duty Of a conference
committee to reconcile them--if it can
and produce, out Of the conflicting legisla-
ton thus far, such bill as both Houses
can agree upon. The first difference Isl
to the tribunal which is to make the dis
tribution. The Senate bill says it shall be
by Board of Commissioners, to be ap-
pointed by the President, whilst the House
bill instructs the President TO designate
one Of the Circuit Courts Of the United
States, which shall adjudicate the claims.
Each bill, having named its tribunal, then
lays down rules under which the distribu-
ton shall proceed, and Classics the claims
which are to be allowed. In re ference to
the direct losses Of owners Of ships and
cargoes, aud of seamen for wages, &c the
two bills, in the main, agree, these being
allowed and given precedence over the
other classes of claims. But there is
wide difference upon these other classes.
The House bill allows any one who paid
war premiums on account of the depreda-
tions Of the rebel cruisers to put in claim
for the excess Of war over ordinary in
surance rates which was paid. The
Senate bill excludes these claims alto.
gether About the claims of the insurance
companies for losses paid there was also
much difference Of opinion developed in
debate, but in the general principles
| governing this branch Of the subject the
bills seem to agree, although they differ
in detail Practically the insurance com.
pany claims are excluded in both bills, the
companies being allowed, however, to show
their entire business in marine assurances
during the depredations Of the anglo-rebel
cruisers, and if on balance being struck
il is found that any company suffered loss,
then it is to be permitted to make claim
for such loss. In the Senate bill the
purely mutual insurance companies are
permitted to make claims, but they are not
given this special privilege in the House
bill They were included in the House
bill as il was reported by the Judiciary
Committee, but that clause was voted out
in the House. As to all the cases in
which the question Of insurance is inyol- |
we'd, the idea upon which the House bill
proceeds is this Where insured vessels
and cargoes were lost, the losers were paid |
by the insurance companies /; the insurance
companies were in turn reimbursed their |
losses by those who paid the heavy "war
premiums" for insurance but these latter
who had to bear the brunt Of the insur-
ance, harin9 been repaid By nobody thus
far, they are now TO be repaid out Of the |
Geneva award to the amount Of the extra |
premiums paid BY them for swar risks.
There are also many differences in the
method Of construction and in details be-
tween the two measures which would be |
too yoluminous to reproduce, but which |
add greatly to the task Of the Conference
Committee. 1t is believed that under
either bill there will be a considerable
balance of the fund left after the distribu-
ton is made, and this will probably remain
in the Treasury. The balance will be
considerably higher under the Senate bill I
than the House bill, as the latter admits
several millions of claims for war pre-
miums When the Geneva award was
made in 1872, there was surprise expressed
that the Geneva arbitrators did not dis
tribute il direct to the claimants. They
probably foresaw the contention on the
subject that has already been developed, /
and avoided a course that would have
given them almost endless trouble. Con-
gress has found in this matter subject
Of almost equal perplexity with the fnan-
ces, and in neither do We yet see the way |
clear to settlement.--P Philadelphia Led
ger.