The times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1897-1901, 1900-05-29
AGAINST DBREY'S CLAIM
Decision of the Supreme Court in
the Prize Money Case.

| Opinion Announced by Mr.. Justice
HnrInn-Land Batteries mt MANILA
Excluded From Considerations
Chief Justice Fuller Disscnts
The patriotism and gallantry of Admiral
George Dewey and his men at the battle
of Manila Bay. May 1, 1898. has been
judiclally rated at just half the estimate
put on it by the Admiral and the public
generally. In that battle the American
vessels taking part were the Olympia. Bal
timore, Boston. Raleigh, Concord. Petrol
! McCullcch, Naushan, and Zafira,. carrying
1896 men ami officers. Four vessels of the
Spanish were captured by the Americans
the rest destroyed. The total number Of
men on the Spanish vessels was 1913. OF
| which 1914 were on the ships destroyed
and who form the basis of the Admiral's
claim for prize money. The law regarding
prize money provides that where the force
OF the enemy is greater than that of the
captor the officers and men shall receive
| $500 each for every man Of the enemy's
|
lowance shall be s1OO each.
Admiral Dewey brought suit in the Court
of Claims for $40, 1i0 that being his part
| of the wEele amount that would be due
under the law to the whole force engaged
$SS,2S0. The Court of Claims decided tina!
| the Spanish naval force wa. inferior to
! that of Dewey, and that the whole amount
| of prize money due was $l9. $40. Dewey
| had claimed that the whole force captured
| destroyed, or silenced by him. including
the land batteries and mines in the harbor
was superior to that under his command.
| The case was appealed to the Supreme
| Court, from the judgment of the Court OF
Claims, for $3.50. upon the basis of s10O
for each person ON the enemy's vessels
Justice Harlan, announcing the opinion
| and the judgment of the court, reviewed q
| number of priZe-money decisions, and con-
cluded that none of them meet the pre-
else question now presented. They throw
| 10 light on the enquiry whether, in esti-
mating the force of an enemy's vessels, the
support furnished by land batteries, mines,
and torpedoes is to be taken into consid-
| eration.'
The texts of the several laws regarding
prize money were recited, and the Justice
continued:
1T thus appears that Congress. In pro-
viding for bounty to be paid by the United
States in account OF enemys vessels sunk
! Or otherwise destroyed by any ship or ves-
sci belonging to the United States has
never prescribed any other rule than to
give the smaller amount when the enemy's
vessel was Of inferior force. and the larger
, amount when the enemy's vessel was of
equal or superior force. We are asked to
construe the words in the present statute
800 II the eremy's vessel is Of inferior
force. and 5000 il Of equal or superior
force to mean just what II would mean If
the question Of the inferiority or superior
ity OF the enemy's vessel was made by ex-
press words to depend upon the enquiry
whether it was or was not supported in
the naval engagement by land batteries,
mines. and torpe6oes, under the charge OF
of the enemys vessels. We cannot DO that
without going far beyond the obvious I'm
port of the words employed by Congress
There is undoubtedly some force in the
suggestion that in rewarding officers and
sailors who kave sunk or destroyed the
enemy's vessels IN naval engagement it
is not unreasonable that all the difficulties
of every kind with which they were
actually confronted should be taken into
consideration. But that is matter which
we cannot suppose was overlooked by
hold that il proceeded upon the broad
basis suggested when it is expressly de-
clared that the amount OF its bounty shall
depend upon the question whether the
enemy's yessel-not the elemy's vessel
and the land batteries, etc, by which 1t
was supported-was of inferior or equal
or superior force.
I'VE have not forgotten the skill and
heroism displayed by the distinguished
commander of our fleet and by his officers
and sailors in the battle of Manila. All
genuine Americans recall with delight and
pride the marvellous achievements of our
Navy in that memorable engagement.
But this court cannot permit considera-
lions of that character to control its de-
termination of a judicial question or to
induce 1t to part from the established
rules for the Interpretation of stat
utes -
Nor can we allow our Judgment to be
influenced by the circumstance that Con-
gress has recently repealed all statutes
giving bounty to officers and sailors of
the Navy for the sinking or destruction
hereafter in time Of war of an enemy's
vessels. thereby, II may be assumed, in
dicating that il the Judgment of the leg
islative branch Of the Government the pol
icy of giving bounties to the Navy was
abandoned. This court has nothing to do
with questions Of mere policy that may be
to underlie the action of Cen
gress. What is termed the policy of the !
Government in reference to any partic- |
ular subject of legislation this court has |
said is generally very unstable thing |!
upon which all sorts of opinions, each |
variant from the other. may be found By |
different persons. 1t is a ground much too
unstable upon which to rest the judgment
of the court in the Interpretation OF stat
utes.
The Court of Claims did not err in
holding that in determining whether the |
Spanish vessels sunk or destroyed at NJ
Mia were of inferior or superior force to
the American vessels engaged In that bat
tie. The land batteries, mines. and tor
pedoes rot controlled by those in charge
of the Spanish vessels, but which sup
ported those vessels, are TO be excluded al
together from consideration. In that view
the decree below was right and 1t is af-
frmed."
Chief Justice Fuller read dissenting |
opinion, holding that the intent Of the |
law was to take into account all the forces |
OF the enemy. land as well as sea. and |
to give a bounty for overcoming them. |
Justices White and McKenna cclcurred in |
the opinion.
Later in the day. former Secretary Her
bert. counsel for Admiral Dewey, obtained
leave to file a petition for a rehearing Of
the case.
SCHOOL DAYS ENDED.