New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1892-05-14
A PECULIAR WAR CLAIM.
THE WIDOW AND CHILDREN OF MAJOR SHELLY
WANT ROYALTIES on HIS TENT.

TUE WIDOW AND CHILDREN OF MAJOR s1B1EY
WANT RoYALTIEs on HIS TENT.
Washington, NAV 10 SpeciaD.-The House spent
the day In vain effort to pass bill 10 proV'ue io
the adjudication by the Court OF Claims OF p1Na'e
bill which possesses some unusual ana extraordinary
features The claim arose from a contract Det"esn
the Government and Major Henry ii. Sibley, OF inc
Army, executed by secretary Floyd IN 1905
Jrnder this contract sibey was to receive royalty
~ So On each tent Of the Sbley patent manufacturer
BY the Government prior to January ], looo anu
thereafter until notice Of the termination OF the con-
tract should be given Major Sibley received ABOUT
81 2 900 In ROYALTIES before he threw up MS com
mission in the Army of the United states on May
10. 1861. and entered the Rebel Army, In which he
served during the The tent continued to be
manufactured and used to some extent during The
war and Major Sibley naturally received no n0ucc
OF the termination OF his contract as he was In arms
against the Government. He received a pardon IN
1867 from President johnson, and his political disa
btes were removed by Congress but il was not until
after Mr.. Cleveland became President that Major
sbley applied to Congress for payment account Of
the tents manufactured under his patent while ne
was in the Rebel ARMY. lie died in August, 1855, and
the claim has since been prosecuted in the names Of
his legal heirs.
Here comes In a peculiar feature Of the case. II is
maintained that the wife OF Major sibey was loyal
to the cause Of the Union throughout the war II
Is true That she LETT BrOOkIyn, where she living
the outbreak Of the Rebellion, and with her children
Joined her husband at NewOreans four Or five months
after the first battle Of Bull Run and remained with
him IN the South until fow weeks before the sur
render General Lee when she returned 10 BROOKLYN
with her children They a daughter eighteen
nineteen years Of age and son not yet fifteen years
old at that time. In the words Of her affidavit In
support Of the claim "neher Of the said two children
guilty Of capable OF being guilty o. disloyaly
TO the Government OF the United Statesn although
they had been with their parents In the Confederacy
during the war; and their father an officer I'm the
Confederate Army. The claim Is therefore based on
the asserted loyalty OF the widow and children OF a
man who was VIGOROUSLY and actively dsoyal and IS
for onethrd Of the amount which Major sibey would
have received II he had remained loyal II is the
widows third and amounts 10 S37,1OO II the
claim should be allowed and paid this ground IL
would establish precedent which would open the
door for the payment Of Southern claims of every
description, amounting tn untold millions.
The House voted three propositions TO-DAY
The first one was TO refer the Sbley claim 10 the
Court OF Claims simply for investigation of tie
facts and report TO Congress. This was rejected by
vote Of 80 yeas 13i nays. substitute for ia,
original bill (Which provided tor the payment Of the
clalm without invesucai0n), ordering the claim to
Le sont 10 the Court OF Claims for adjudication and
thus giving il stains As loyal claim then adopted
hy n vote OF 1J6 to Al. OF the SOM hern
Democrats were solid Oh thl2 vote and Their Northern
brethren stood by them. motion 10 recommt the
All WINS then rejected by 80 yeas 10 I5I nays The
Eeublicans then decided that 1t time 10 cali n
half and they did SO. The bill consequently did not
mass the House to-day.