The Jackson standard. [volume] (Jackson C.H., Ohio) 1847-1888, 1878-09-05

4 oIdISS tu0 SO-CdIlSA oAAN
Abandoned property Acts of 1868 ant
1864. Those acts provided that an.
owner of such products so seized ant
sold might file his petition in the Cour
of Claims within two years after the wa
closed; and upon proof of his loyalty t.
the Government during the war and hi
ownership of the property he should bt
| paid the net proceeds of the sale. The
time for filing such petitions expired
August 20, 1868, and has never been ex
| tended. AS most of the owners Of prop
| erty seized and sold under the acts were
| in fact disloyal during the war they die
| not avail themselves of the right of peti
| ton to the Court of Claims. But after
the time had expired for ting theil
claims, the Supreme Court decided that
the Presidents general amnesty proc
lamation of December 25, 1868, removed
the taint and disability of disloyalty from
everybody who had supported the rebel
lion; and these belated claimants have
ever since been clamoring to be admitted
to their rights under the amnesty proc
lamation. This is not all the relief de
manded, however The Acts of 1868 and
1864 give only the net proceeds of the
property seized and sold, and where the
Government agents who made the seiz
ures and sales were dishonest in not
turning over property seized or the pro.
ceeds of it, or when they were wasteful
in running up excessive bills of charges
the loss falls wholly on the owners of the
property, even where they were loyal
and ought not to have been stripped OF
their property at all. The amount real
lied by the Government from sales OF
such property was nearly $27 100000, OF
which more than 100000 have been
paid to owners who have proved their
claims; but the lowest estimate of what
remains to be paid to owners under any
legislation at all consistent with their
demands is $50,000000, or 500, 100000
over and above the balance legally pre-
sumed to be in the Treasury, but not
there in fact.
g. Claims for the value Of cotton seized
by agents of the Government after June
80, 1865, contrary to law and in violation
of their orders. Seizures under the Cap
tured and Abandoned Property Acts were
not made after June 80, 1865, but the
Treasury agents continued to search for
and seize cotton sold to the Confederate
Government, and which, though paid for
by that Government, had not been re-
moved from the possession of the vend-
ers. These claims are based upon the
legal argument that the sales were in
themselves unlawful, and for an unlawful
and worthless consideration and as
there had been no delivery, the title had
not passed from the individual owners,
who are, therefore, entitled to the value
of the cotton so taken from them by the
Treasury agents. These claims are esti-
mated to amount to SIS, 100000. They
are in reality among the most shameless
which have yet come to light. They are
exactly parallel with those of the South
ern mail contractors lately presented in
the House of Representative by Mr..
Reagan, of Texas, which it was shown by
reference to the Confederate archives had
once been paid in full by the Confederate
Postmaster General out of funds belong
ing to the Government of the United
States. The seizures of cotton were made
in accordance with records found on the
books of the Confederate Treasury, which
showed that the cotton had been bought
and paid for, and that the venders were
merely holding it subject to the orders of
the Confederate Government
PROPERTY, RENT, SLAVES.
4. Claims for stores or for supplies in
cluding steamboats, and other vessels
taken for the military or naval purposes
of the United States. These claims are
the most numerous as well as the most
indefinite and uncertain in amount
Partial relief has been afforded to the
holders of these claims but what has
been done bears only a small ratio to
what is wanted. Persons who were loyal
and have been able to submit proof of
that fact have had through the Southern
Claims Commission an ample avenue for
the preferment and establishment of
their claims against the Government; and
it is probable that the majority of this
class of claims have already been paid
Those who were disloyal in fact but who
have been renovated by the general am
nesty, Lave not yet been allowed to recov-
er anything, and they are among the
most persistent and loudest of the classes
which are now clamoring for a standing
before Congress or the courts. Any esti
mate of the amount of these claims is
necessarily loose, but as the claimants
means of proof have strengthened and
the Governments means have weakened
by lapse of time, any legislation of the
kind desired by claimants will take from
the Treasury 100000 900 at the least.
5. Claims for rent of buildings, wharves
and lands, occupied by the United States
in the insurrectionary districts during the
war. The Federal authorities being ham
pered by no contracts and having no rent
to pay were quite free in appropriating
private buildings and lands to the public
use No relief of any sort has been
granted to the claimants of this class
They were, with rare exceptions, disloyal
to the Government, and no precedent
exists for the payment OF such claims
The claims are, however, numerous and
are vigorously pushed by their agents,
1t would probably take $50, OOO, 600 to pay
them even under rigid scaling of prices
6. Claims for property destroyed or
damaged in a deliberate and orderly
manner by competent authority, as mil
itary necessity on the part Of the United
States in furtherance of the operations OF
the Federal forces, or in obstruction Of
the operations of the enemy. There are
no means of getting very closely at the
amount of such claims, but they would
hardly 60 below $10,000,000.
7. Claims for slaves enlisted into the
Federal Army from the loyal border
States, and only partly settled when pro-
ceedings were suspended by Act of March
80, 1867 These claims, from a strictly
legal point Of view, are among the most
which have yet been produc
ed. They are numerous, but of small
amount, and probably do not amount to
more than $6,000,00O.
AN ENORMOUS AGGREGATE.
The foregoing enumeration takes no
account of claims for the value of slaves
as war measure or under
the Constitutional amendment; claims
for loss or damage caused by the depre
dations of the troops, or the casualties Of
the march or battle, and claims for the
spoliation or damage inflicted by the
Confederate authorities Or forces upon
loyal citizens of the South. Leaving all
such out of the reckoning, it appears that