River Falls journal. [volume] (River Falls, Pierce County, Wis.) 1872-2019, 1878-03-21
CLAIMS"

The novice in Legislative affairs as
he observes the business brought be-
fore the Wisconsin Legislature is some
what amazed at the number of
claims against the State presented
fer adjustment by the law-maklng
power, and in a number of instances
the ''cheek," not to say the brazen eff
frontery, displayed by claimants is
truly sublime. Two of these claims
appear to be of chronic nature-that
of Morgan L. Martin and the ''Calkins
elaim.''
The Martin claim grew out of the
Fox and Wisconsin River Improve.
neuU, though the claimant twenty Live
years ago signed a release of all claims
against the State on account of this
improvement and with seven others
gave to the State an indemnifying bond
in the sum of two hundred thousand
dollars insuring it against all liability
on account of this improvement. Mr..
Martin sued the Fox and Wisconsin
River improvement Company on this
same claim during the war, in the
Brown County Circuit Court, in which
Judgment was rendered in his favor,
but the Company appealed to the Su.
preme court, the statutes of limitation
securing reversal of the judgment of
the Court below. Failing through his
own neglect in getting what he claimed
of the Company aforesaid, his demand
was transmogrified into claim against
the State and in 1873 he made an APP
peal which, in 1874, resulted in an
award of $24 ,679.56 in his favor, but
| it appears that the Secretary of State
in this particular instance was clothed
with discretionary power and Martin
got only $40, 074. 16, to which, however,
he had no legal or equitable right.
For the balance of the 1914, 678.56
claimed he made application to the
Legislature of 1878. Then it was that
Hon. VIM. E. Carter, Assemblyman
from Grant, dug down into the arch
ives of the State Secretary's Office and
ventilated the bottom facts of the
whole question, showing this claim to
be so transparent fraud that the
Assembly snuffed it out by decisive
vote.
The ''Calkins claim" is based upon
printing done for the State in 1858
which has been paid for two or three
different times. Mr.. Calkins, on the
ninth day of March, 1868, gave a re-
ceipt for g, 925 in full of all demands
against the State--legal or equitable
then, with that superabundanc of
cheek for which he is conspicuous, in
1859 he again laid his printing claim
before the Legislature which, in the
face of the receipt given the year be-
fore awarded him the sum of S., 4S1.6 5
for which on the 18th day of March,
1869, he gave another receipt in full
of al demands against State--elther
of legal or equitable nature. Mr..
Calkins it seems, then rested till
1872 or 1878 when he renewed his
claim, the Legislature granting him
the sum asked; but Governor Wash
burn couldn't see it, and vetoed the
bill making the award. Not to be put
off in this way Calkins renewed his at
tack in 1874 and was given another
award by board of arbitration and
| consented himself with the sum so re-
ceived till 1878 when he put in a
claim of over four thousand dollars
more which the Legislature awarded.
Now, we submit that this ''claim' is
| not only getting old but that it is de-
cldedly thin, and it is about time
that the Legislature of Wisconsin
choke off this leech. It is a matter
of surprise to all who have watched
this claim for the last ten or twelve
| years that representatives of the peo-
pie will year after year vote to this
| cormorant the sums of money demand
ed, and if the Legislature continues to
audit his claims hereafter some public
spirited citizen could make himself
famous. besides becoming public ben
efaetor, by testing the validity of these
awards, in the Supreme Court.