New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1878-01-12
CHARGES AND COMMISSIONc
THE STATUS OF THE NETWORK CASE.


TIE OBLIGATIONS TO PAY THE JUDGMENTS
IBY TELEGRAPH TO THE TRIBUSgI -
WASHINGTON, Jan. ia letter written nv \.
trict.AttOrney Woodford to the Solicitor ~ ~
Treasury less than q year ago. throws some li0h,
the so-caled charges and commissions cases al '
which a controversy exists between the Treas.@
Department and certain merchants in NJ
York. Payment of judgment in these e,.'.
it may be remembered, has been susnena,
by order of the Secretary of the Irsas,
on the ground that there is no appropr,t.'
available for their liquidation. In submittno N
estimates to Congress, Secretary Sherman includss.
statement of the amounts for which judgmen, h,
been given in these cases, but added that he did !,
recommend an appropriation for their paym.,.
Subsequently he sent a letter to Congress on a.
subject, inclosing report of Judge French. Asa
ant Secretary of the Treasury, extracts from win.
have recently been printed. The letter given b.,'
with sets forth. in brief the history of the cases:
DIsTRICT-ArTORNEY OF THE UNITED sr.rxs
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NRy.Yopv
NETWORK, March 90, Is7T-'
The Hon. GEO F. TALBOT, Solicitor fMe Treasury,
SIR Your letter OF the oath, covering letter fssm A.
Secretary of the Treasury, was received You y.
whether any OF the cases known as charges and an,
missions are in position to carry the suprr
nearly all the open cases are IN position where an q,
peal could he taken. could take the exceptions a.,
the referee to his allowances OF the ,ar0..
items OF refund, and make q bill OF TIA
The question OF an appeal has often been ca,
sdered and at the time Of the decision OF the Crp,
Court the test and for time thereafter "a
a question mertiDg attention. The was not an
pealcd, however, has any subsequent case h..
appealed: and the Government has paid as nearly A,
can ascertain, Sl,750,000 OF the S2,500000 clanet
in these cases In the course OF these payments Il;
Government to me to have taken such an at,va
and TO have obtained such concessions from the csn
appeal case now would inyolve the good faith Of o,
Government in its dealings with fts citizens. az
resume of these cases. I think, VIII show this
Secretary Chase very early recognized the duty D
Government to make refund in these cases and in e.
cuIar dated May 81, 1868, he cOncurred in the dscsn
OF the courts and his Commissioner OF Customs 10 ak
ter dated May %, 1853. to the Collector OF this port
Iected the refund to be made without litigation u
the decision I'm the OF Hutton agt. schell IN 1864
refunds had been made sometimes with and somerin
without suit. The claimants always claim that this +
cIsion, which was made upon second trial Of a
case was made upon agreement by IL Il
Government TO abde by it, The report % BlachfoFd
shows that the second trial was had upon consent d;
plaintiffs, who then having the amount due TIA
adjusted under tAer victory on the 1rs trial The
torneys for the plaintiffs claim that they consented
toe vacation OF the first Judgment with the undersn
ing taat the rial would be- accepted Dy the Gown
ent as final In lieu Of appeal the Government behts
ing 1t had new aud important evidence. An assisiar
from the Treasury Department Oar T0wlel appear
upon the record assistant to RE United sus
Attorney In this case. II was apparently uat
a test ease Your predecessor Mr. Banteii, u sts
dated November 10, 1859 10 the then United States a.
tOrney appears 10 contemplate Gnappea but none vi
taken Tine Judgment was not. am informed, paG
til 1873. The failure to appeal this ease, coupled yn
fact that refunds began 60 be made IN ISL ee es
OF solicitor BsDicd 20 District Attorney Davis FebrJ
Z I-7ll. ard continued until 1874, and especially
signify mitch as 10 the duty o. the Government wIas
spect TO the cases Of this character now remaining
adjusted.
addressed letter 10 tne Secretary Of the Treasury a.
M hiS attention to the subject OF the loo yeTdets VIII
had lust been taken consent and IN rel ~ 10 the so
tarys inquiry OF date May %. he set forth under DE
June (. Isl L. the questions which NJ wished reviswcz
ficse ctps OF these the first two rs questions Of t6
n would seem To me be unfair raise AGAIN. nov tf
they have been settled several times 0y Jurios and s9
third seems. IN the minds OF several judges who kE
case of Bruno AIT Marriott 10 Howard 6I9l The fer
has since been settled by the withdrawal al cti8s
cred b. It. Tie NTH II Is claimed has been settled
decision Of the supreme Court last year IN the eax
Watson agt. Barney, e. otto, pp. 4i3-is3. act ia
But this letter Of 9iT Bliss was by SECRETARY Brsos
Juue 10. 1874 referred TO Attorney General Villas
who referred II TO the SOlct0f-GenerTl, ana UT Pap
III report TO the secretary dated June25 1874. adN
that the United states DO NOT bring wits Oi crG
the lblY referred 10 Tor reasons sL1is
to some OF those have suggested above THIS rePnH
Wae approved By the Attorney General lyon IL
cgpi secretary Bits nw replied 10 MI Biss under s
IL The Isl 0i jay, = !, coueufrihs IN us cohdss
and directed that writs OF error ia these eases he
sued ont, provided that tie claimants ALAMEDA
claims growing out % TIER p0sses,l'n' uf
protest tied with Collector bound his suceess3
Toe only attorneys who represent the r.aaI
in the. @ cases then signed stipulation which Vas
dorset tins letter or The Secretary, and l. On le
tis Office, agreeing 10 make no claim ~ virtue
surh protest" In letter 20 the Solicitor OF The To
rr All DpppIuhgP 81 L. flp secretary rtr4f II
ils acqutsencc. and ~ letter O. the COlnnis,loEd
CdstOin>, of date Apr. l.. 1870, h. orders pay me%
March To- 1870, hayng to.c!oiy argued anu AVIS
against IN appeal.
The next Official action Of the department appear
he comprised In letter purpoting 10 be nom me -
tor of the Treasury but unsigned by hi OF d1ic w
1879, L. y predecessor Dir Bliss, which sets iorht
the Secretary of the Treasury had been deceived q
OF his pre- action To the amount inVOSe
these cases ami that this fact " made II Necessary
have the orders oi reference OF tLCSe cases FtFes
that all the legal questions arising IN TIE CO
pending may be Presented To the court for cecisls
exception taken With view OF carr ihL thc cas7' "
supreme Court" Nh Bliss made tie molten % 'es
tAC orders D reference At once. mt on a." heating,
Bliss appearing for the Government, am thc hon
NJ Lyafts in opposition. the motion was Oh TIE IA
NAV, 1879, dcEiod by Ihc Court What occGiFca on y
motion Is set forth ia letter ny my prcicccsor 20
Solicitor of the Treasury. under dat or hay 23 ia
Paylncnl OF these Judgements BclnE stu eStHO-N
dated July =. 1870, transmitted written oher i7on
Griswud, the attorney Tor many ol the claimants ~
verbal ono from Mr.. Douglas. representing Tue reaas
peal these cases tho plaintiffs would waive al ciaL
bc paid IN gold, except In eases Where a. o.
were paid after the passage OF the "
Tender Act. Mr.. Bliss. IN TINT letter, 81 90
reviewing. the action OF the Government IN aecess.
previous concession from the reconi;aeaa
the oncr he acccptedi No immediate repg -&H.
20 have been received, but ON December 81. $50
predecessor, Mr Wilson, directed an appeal 10 DC %
In eases not gone to Judgment. by having cXccp,e.
tered before the referee. On the .d OF Ecbfuar. y
Mr Bliss transmitted, ia letter dated on
day a statement OF facts with EXHIBITS 20
on appeal. but DO not find on the records OF ibse
any reply from the solicitor or any direction 10 sM
But on the l4th of November Same year. Tie Seote-
OF the Treasury, MI Merrill, ia letter 10 ny "
ceSsor Mr. Bliss. announces MS acceptance Oi psi5s
waiver OF payment IN gold, offered a. above SCI ~
aud his decision that hereunder the judgments sN
be paid ,,xu
since that time the judgments have been regularly y
under that stipulation which IL viii I've re'DemeN
waived payment In gold provided the Govern II
should take no appeal. IL THUS appears on lne
record that an important CONCESSION wHFa
plaintiffs attorney estimates az from IN 70 iolcssJH
of their CLAIMS. namely che waiver OF fNSV'
np,faS