The times., 1897-12-26

opiGents show that the telegraph company
feared tC leave this decision to the court
apprehendihg that the Postmaster Gener-
ais Course would he upheld. If :his
issue lad beeh tried il is possible, if not
pfohable, that tie court might have s,,S-
talnedt tnt action o the Postmaster q en- srli,
and IN that event there would have been
mo judgment aga inst the United States.
IL tae loStp aster General had the pow er
UNDER tht Law 10 fix the rates that he did
designate then the te1egrapll company in
receiving these rates which amounted nc
c0rdlag the referees statement. TO moro
than S30u,OO0 has received all il is en-
titled to Instead OF waiting for lie
cislon o. the court the Western Union
Telegraph Company, through its at
lorney. John c. Fay. enters into negu.
lations with Postmaster Gary and the
Attorney Generals office, which resulted
finally into stipulation hning entered
into by the Government, represented by
Assistant Attorney General Fradt and Mr.
Fay on behaif Of the company, which reads
as follows:
In TIE Court of Claims. The Western Union
telegraph Company, claimant, VS..
ne lHlltt states. NO 1901.
Whereas. about the 27th day of March.
1851 during the pendancy or this SUIT am
agreement was made between the United
States, through its Postmaster General
anu tie Claimant, that the rates for tele-
graphing Tor the United States hereafter
referred to, should be accepted 10y the
clalmiint Tor services rendered for the en-
SUING Year, provided the same rates We're
dlloWeu Tor the period embraced In this
suit and whereas the Hon. w. :. Bissell,
POSTMASTER General, on the 27th day OF
March, 1894, certified To the A ttorDey
General that said rates were reasonable
and Just, and by agreement between the
Claimant and the United States, this cause
was referred to have aScertained the
amount that would become due at the
rates set out In the orders OF the Hon.
Postmaster Uener W. ). Bissell and Hon.
{. Heath, esq, sole referee, filed herein
on the lSt day OF September, 1897, his
report, certifying that there was due to
the claimant, under said order OF reference
the sum OF two hundred and fifty-eight
Thousand, eight hundred and SiXty-nine
dollars and eishty-four cents (S25S,-
SS6S-S4l, and whereas the Hon. James A
Gary Postmaster General, has certified
tnaU SaIu sum Is reasonable and just and
that the Postoffice Department does not
question It's correctness.
IL is, therefore stipulated and agreed that
the report of said referee be confirmed. and
Judgment in accordance therewitl may
be entered in favor Of the claimant.
And ii is further stipulated that such
Judgment shall not in any way estup or
bar the United states IN any subsequent
suit, should any he brought with reference
to any other teieSraphic service, from
contending or pleading that the action of
the Postmaster General i'll fixing rates Tor
teegraphic service rendered the United
States was, or is, ireviewable by the judi
ciary, but such question stall be decided
of anything III tiIiS stipulation,
or i'll these proceedings contained.
tSigned.) LOUIS A. PRADT,
Assistant Attorney General.
for
The rcuals in tins stipulation APPEAR
to he III the nature OF an excuse or
apology for cuneenting that judgment
be entered against the United States in
favor of the Western Union Telegraph |
for more than Il qnarter of !
million dollars without first giving the |
court an opportunity To decide the inn |
purtant legal quest ion at issue, and !
thereby tlet ernine whether the ocmrany |
is entitled To tie money or rot. There |
appears Ia be no rea son for such un- |
seetnlv haste in the settlement of the |
case. for a decision would soon have |
been rendered by the court ami the
nooted question forever settled. The
decision. too, might have saved the Coz
,rnE.cut S25S coo, sim certainly SUI
'iciantly large to, under the circun
tances, warrant the Government in
waiting Tor a decision. TIE last clause
n the stipulation indicates and eX-
,reSsIy sets forth the belief that the
Government lad n coed case, and IrJ
ides that the settlement of tho present
me sliall not he deemed precedent in
he fRture and eStop the Government
rom claiming that the act of tie Pest
ers OF this kind If the Assistant Al |
master General is irrcviewab bic in mat
ers of This kind. If the Assistant At
orney General deemed this reservation
"a Important why did hc not wait until
he court decided the point?
The stipnlato undertake 10 Justify their
iction III consenting TO this large judg-
nent against the Government on the
found that Postmaster General BiSSen
Il fixing the rates for telegr1phic serv
c. during his o.gn term agreed that the
anne IatcS should be allowed for the pc
iod embraced in this suit. II would be
II, n,erestinf TO knew hy what authority of
aw Postmaster General BisSell made any
uch agrecnent, or assumed To sit in re-
lew upon or fix the rates for the term
{ his predecessor. and especially while the |
,eaiity of those rates was question pend
c before the court.
A further excuse assigned for this gen
rous donation 10 the Western Union Teie-
raph Company is that the referee has
He'd a report (Which report is based on
he Bissell rate( showing due the claimant
ne sum of S25S,S69.S4, and that Post
master General James \. Gary has certi-
led that sand sum is rea soma ble and Just, |
nd that the Postoffice Department does
OF question its correctness.
BY what authority of law does the
resent Postmaster General assume to pass
pom lie reasonablencss or justncsS of the
ites fixed by Postmaster General Wana-
laker, and increase them for service dur
IL Mr.. Eanamak ker's tenn, to the Bssell
ate?
The Fist Assistant Postmaster General
the first referee whose report the Post
lficr Department does not question tile
'rrectneSs of. 1t could hardly be ex.
ected that the department would Ques
On tie correctness Of IFS own report.
Dngress viii be asked fo appropriate the
I'M which Mr.. Pradt has certified IS
ne The company. Perhanps, Congress, be-
re paving this Judgment. may take the
outie tn make an investig8 ton and
'certain WHY the SGit was mutually sat-
EaNTs nf [