The evening times., 1900-03-09

Representative Weeks, from the Com
mittee on Claims, has presented a favor
able report on the bill for the relief of the
administrators of William b. Moses, de-
ceased, and Lebbeus H. Rogers.
William B. Moses and Lebbeus H. Rog-
ers were sureties for Henry W. Howgate
upon a bond to the United States in the
penalty of 1000, to secure the faithful
performance by Howgate of his duties as
property and disbursing officer of the Sig
nal Corps of the United States Army.
On December Z. 1880. Howgate tenderel
his resignation to the Adjutant General,
which was accepted by the President, TO
take effect December 1S 1880. The Treas
ury Department. under dates of October 1
and December 10 and 23 1880. January G..
and April 26. 1881. certified that the ac-
counts of Howgate had been examined
and adjusted and that they were found to
balance At this time Rogers. one of the
sureties. had in his custody about s., 600
| in cash belonging TO Howgate. In order
to secure this money. and with the view
Of satisfying both of his sureties that his
accounts with the United States were fully
settled. Howgate applied to the Treasury
Department for letter to show them
| The original of this letter was produced
at the hearing before the committee
| Howgate showed It to Mr.. Moses and gave
him copy. The original he took 10 New
York and gave 10 Mr.. Rogers, who retain
ed it in his possession until the presenta
ton of this matter before Congress
| Upon seeing the letter the Treasury De-
| partmoDt Rogers maid nvar To HnyCrata
the $1,000 cash held by him. About three
| months thereafter, on July 25, 1881 How
! gate secured from W b. Moses his in
/ dorsement OF thirty-day note for s.. 500
| On August "A, 1881 it having been discoy-
/ cred that Howgate was defaulter to an
| amount exceeding 100000, the Govern
ment instituted proceedings against him.
/ by an action in assumpsit, and al once at
! tached his property. both real and per-
sonal The records show that the real es-
tate alone was appraised at over SIG Coo
This suit against Howgate was not on the
bond.
The note which Moses had endorsed for
Howgate being unpaid, ii was taken up
by Mr.. Moses. On August 81 1881. one
week after the Government had entered its
suit against Howgate and had attached
what was supposed to be all of Howgate's
property within the District OF Columbia
Moses entered suit against Howgata for
the face OF the note and an open store ac-
count, amounting in all TO s., ,702 30. Upon
( inStituting this suit Moses attached prop
erty of the defendant, the existence of
which was unknown to the Government.
and which was not included in its attach
ment of Howgate's property. The returns
show that Moses levied on securities of a
face value Of $50, ,627.26 The attachment
by the Government and that by Moses
were laid upon the filing Of their respec-
tive suits
Thereafter an agreement was entered
into by the attorney for the United States
and the attorney for Moses wherein ard
whereby il was provided that house in
cluded in the Governments attachment
should be fitted with certain furniture Sc
cured in the Moses attachment and rented
fer the mutual benefit of the plaintiffs in
the two cases. This agreement between
the parties was ratified by an order of the
court. Judgment was obtained by Moses
in his suit against Howgate on April II
1882, and in the following month. May "a.
lSS2, judgment was entered in the Govern
ment suit against Howgate. On July ).
1882, the Government made a mo ion to
quash the attachment levied by Moses. and
fer an order 10 have the securities obtained
by him applied to its attachment against
Howgate. This motion the court over
ruled
After all this had transpired on Septem-
Der 2S, 1884, more than three years after
the defalcation of HOwgate was discoy-
cred, the Government brought suit against
W. B. Moses for the penalty of the bond.
and in March. 1885. a separate suit was
brought against Lebbeus II. Rogers. the
co-surejy. The suit against Rogers was de- |
cided in June 1886, and after an appeal TO
the Circuit Court and the judgment of the
court below had been affirmed the case
was carried by writ of error to the Su- I
preme Court of the United States under a |
supersedeas bond of $2S, 00O The Judgment /
In the summer Of 1898 the sureties on the !
supersedeas bond in the Rogers suit be-
came insolvent. Mr.. Rogers is also in |
solvent. No action was ever taken against |
his sureties
Mr.. Moses, before the trial of the suit
against him. died on May &c. 1892 and the |
action, being continued against his per /
sonal representatives, was tried March |
%. From the judgment in favor of the
Government an appeal was taken TO the
Supreme Court of the United States That
court being equally divided in its opinion |
"a full bench not being present., the judg- |
ment of the court below was. under the |
prevailing rule, affirmed. After a rehear- |
ing before a full bench. the decision ap-
pealed from was affirmed on April IS
1897. Neither of these actions at law D.
sented the equitable grounds of relief upon
which this petition to Congress is based.
The judgment against Mr. Rogers is for
sl3,476, with interest from April 1887, and
costs The judgment in the Moses suit is
for $4,000, with interest from September
%, 1884. and costs. 1t is from these judg-
mentS that Congressional relief is sought