The evening times. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1895-1902, 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 sureues for Henry W Howgate
| upon bond to the United States in the
| penalty Of $4,000, to secure the faithful
performance by Howgate of his duties IS
! property and disbursing officer Of the Sig
nal Corps Of the United States Army.
On December T. 1880. Howgate rendered
his resignation to the Adiutant General.
/ which was accepted by the President. TO
take effect December IS. 1880 The Treas
! ury Department. under dates OF October l
and December 10 and o. 1880. January 6.
and April 90. 1881. certified that the &C
/ counts OF Howgate had been examined
and adjusted and that they were found 10
halance At this time Rogers. one Of the
suretes. had in his custody about s. 900
In cash belonging to Howgate. In order
to secure this money. and with the view
or satisfying both OF his sureties that his
accounts with the United States were fully
settled. Howgate applied to The Treasury
| Department for a letter to show them.
The original Of this letter was produced
~ the hearing before the committee
hoWgate showed II 20 Mr.. Moses and gave
MN q copy. The original be took 10 New
ork and gave 70 Mr. Rogers, who retain
60 IL IN his possession until the presenta-
ton Of this matter before Congress
Upon seeing the letter the Treasury De-
partment, Rogers paid over 10 Howzate
the $1,000 cash held by him. About three
months thereafter. on July 25. 1851. How
gate secured from w. b. Moses his in
dorsement OF a thirty-day note for 81 500
On August p, 1881, Il having been discoy-
cred that Howgate was defaulter to an
amount exceeding 800. 600 the Govern
ment instituted proceedings against him.
by an action in assumpsit and at once at
Jached his property. both real and per
sonal- The records show that the real es-
tate alone was appraised at over $1,000.
Ihis suit against Howgate was not on the
bond
The note which Moses had endorsed for
HoWgate being unpaid il was taken I'D
by Mr.. Moses. On August 81. 1881. one
week after the Government had entered its
suit against Howgate and had attached
what was supposed 10 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 mounting in al 70 s., 702. 30. Upou
instituting this suit Moses attached prop
cTty Of the defendant the existence q
which was unknown 20 the Government.
and which was not included I'm fits 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
md the attorney for Moses wherein and
whereby j, was provided that a house in
cluded in the Governments attachment
should BE- fitted with certain furniture Sc
cured in the Moses attachment and rented
ICr the mutual benefit OF the plaintiffs in
the two cases. This agreement between
the parties was ratified by an order OF the
drt. Judgment was obtained by Moses
IN his suit against Howgate on April u
1852, and in the following month Nav "A.
lSS2, judgment was entered in the Govern
ment suit against HOwgate On July )
1852, the Government made a noion To
qussh the attachment levied by Moses. and
fer an order 20 have the securities obtained
by him applied TO its attachment against
Howgate. This motion the court oye~-
ruled.
After all this had transpired. on Septem-
Der p, 1854 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 1888, a separate suit was
brought against Lebbeus X. Rogers. the
/ co-surety. The suit against Rogers was de-
cided in June. 1886 and after an anDell IN
the Circuit Court and the judgment Of rha
court below had been affirmed the case
was carried by writ Of error 10 the Su
preme Court OF the United States under a
supersedeas bond OF SOS. GOO. The Judgment
was there affirmed on November 16 1891
In the summer OF 1898 the sureties on the
supersedeas bond IN the Rogers sui. he
came insolvent Mr.. Rogers is also in
solvent No action was ever taken against
his sureties.
Mr. Moses, before the trial Of the epit
against him. died on MAY 20. 1882. and the
action, being continued against his per-
sonal representative. was tried March
-'3- From the judgment In favor OF the
Government an appeal was taken 10 the
supreme Court OF the United States. Thar
court being equally divided in its oDini9n
Ga full bench not being present.. the iudg-
ment Of the court below was under the
prevailing rule, affirmed After a rehe9r-
ing before a full bench. the decision an
pealed from was affirmed on April IS
1887 Neither Of these actions AT law ne
scented the equitable grounds Of relief upon
which this petition to Congress is based
The judgment against Mr.. Rogers is for
Sl3,4t6, with interest," from April 1887. and
costs. The judgment in the Moses suit is
Tor $4,000, with interest from September
y, 1884. and costs Ii is from these judg
ments that Congressional relief is sought.