The Wheeling daily register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1864-1878, 1878-02-12
at'hesling gcal5tsr.
THE WAR CLAIMS.
nyC,,IoNs OFTnECOURIsINTHE
PREMISES.
What Cong RET sman wilson sal" on
the subjecs Last Friday.

hill for the relief OF Mir. w. Ii. Newman
and l.. A. Van Hoffman, of Alexandria,
Virginia, for property taken by the
United States during the late war. Mr..
Wilson said:
Mr.. CHAIRMAN, l do not propose to
discuss the facts in this particular case.
| know very little about it, but propose
to say something upon tie law. The
principles involved in this question to q
very large extent stfect my people IN
West Virginia. l confess l have been
sssonished that gentlemen OF the lsrge
intelligence Of some who have discussed
this question here seem to be so unln-
formed on the subject, snd so mlsconcelv-
ed AID miss.sted the law.
IL can have the attention OF my
friend iron OHIO Mr.. Jones just for 8
moment think can satisfy him be does
himself and he does his party and his
State gross injustice by the construction
be puts on the law which practically re-
pudistes that class of creditors who sub
sisted the Federal Army during the wal.
say the position taken by my irieno
from Ohio 10 his argument, his construc-
lion Of the law-and l say it in all kind
ness-ls practical reputation OF that
class of creditors who subsisted the Union
Army during the war. understood him
% saw that Whatever this Government
NAV paw is only gift, simple donation.
do not understand an obligation be-
tween this Government and It's creditors
to BE- a simple donation. l understand
Il 10 be an obligation Of the highest
character, and that if there be an obllga-
lion more binding and involving the
honor of the Government more than the
obligation to It's bondholders, II is the OBJ
igstion OF this class of creditors whom
our legislation OF late years has practical
ly repudisted. -,
The wrong done'this people calls loudly
! for redress; and at this late day this
| Congress can do no act that will more
cover it with honor than By providing for
the payment OF the claims OF that class o.
creditors who have been thus wrongei.
We are all familiar with that tunda-
mental principle laid down in the Federal
| Constitution tbst private property snail
not be taken for public use without just
compensation. l understand my friend
upon the other eide to say there is no OBJ
| LEGATION. Well. If there is no statutory
obligation, there is higher and more
binding and more honorable obligation
in the Federal Constitution. l say also
that it Is one which has been adjudIcs!eG
by the courts of this country, tina! it has
been accepted by the Federal Govern
ment; and the decision to which refer,
| i decision of toe Court of Claims, is pre-
dIcated upon and sustained by the de-
clson of the Supreme Court of the United
States.
| read from the case of Grout u.s. the
United States, decided in 1868. (See
volume l, page II, and Huntington, page
Al Circuit WAS the owner OF a mill in
Arizona Territory in July, 1861. %
the 18th day of that month upon the ap'
proach of the confederate army, by order
| of Captain Moore of the Federal Army,
TO prevent that property from falling IN
TO the hands OF the rebels, he commanded
| his subordinstes TO seize the movable ei'
focts and to burn the mill. This was
done.
Ia the limited time l have, Mr.. Chair
mar, | cannot read in detail the entire
csso 70 which / refer. Ard | desire t.
gsy that the decision has been accepted
by the Government and stands to-day
| unrever:ed, accepted as the law.
The owner brought suit before the
Court of Claims in this city of Washing
ton, and that court, after most elaborate
/ argument, unanimously held that there
was y liability on the Government; oul
there was division as to the value o.
property.
l can better answer here than else
where my friend from Michigan Mr.
| COnger as to the existence OF contract
Here the property was burned. MY
friend from Michigan laid great stres:
on the Alexandria case because there wa;
no written contract, no verbal contract
no contract made by a man who wa;
authorized to represent and bind the
! Government | desire TO say TO thai
gentleman that the court in the case Of
Grout held very differently from him. !
read from the decision of the court:
We hold in this case that the property
was DESTROYED by the rightiul order oil tht
| commanding officer and upon an urgent
and pressing necessity and 10 prevent II
| from falling into the hands OF the punH'
| enemy and those hostile 10 the lhlteH
| States that IL was taken Tor pupilc use
| and that the Government Is OOunu unutl
! the Constitution to make Just compehsa
| ton to the owner. The Legal duty 10 MAKE
| CONDENSATION raises an implied promise
| 10 do so; and bere Is found the JurlsulCtIol
| of this court To entertain this proceeding
II WAS thus held that where private
propertv is taken for public use the TAX
| ing implies contract when the party
taking it has the right to take 1t or th'
right to destroy it
| | have not time now to refer to tht
various writers on international law, but
will say that Grotius, Vattel, aid ever
the later writers upon constitutional OF
international law, fix upon the Govern
menl responsibility in cases OF this KIND
IL was IN the power OF the Government
to take an appeal from the decision have
read from; they failed to take the appeal
and a few years stterwsrd that oplnioT
WAS affirmed by the Court of Claims.
| mus, Gail dlkCElluI w WV iS'"S "
opinion Of the Supreme Court OF th'
United States, by Chief-Justice fancy
referred to and relied upon in Grout
case:
There are occasions in which private
| property may be lawfully taken or ues
! froVtd TO prevent II from falling into lh'
| hands OF the public enemy; also wher'
the it,ry officer charged with a rartc
u'ar duty may impress private property
into the public service or take II !or pup
| lie use.
This is the opinion of the Supremt
| Court OF the United States:
Unquestlouably in all such cases th'
! Cove nm,nt is bound 20 make iul! com
penSation.
Now, Mr.. Chairman, ! have given tht
decision Of court established by Law
with special view and Tor the purpos'
Of deciding upon all claims against tn
Government which are founded upor
sc,s Of Congress, regulations of the eN
ecutive department. or upon any con
trSc. express or implied. This court haC
full power and authority 10 pass upon tbs
CASE Of Circuit rs. The United StsteS, JUS