Evening journal., 1915-03-06

amendments. The claims bill was
accessible to the gentleman for the
last year and a half. But that is
neither here nor there. II does not
contain a single claim for the de-
struction OF property in war, and the
Committee on War Claims have re-
fused to put into the claims bill any
claim for the destruction of property
by the Army. They have not only
refused to put those claims in the
omnibus war claims bill. but they
have refused to refer the claims to
the Court Of Claims for a finding
Mr.. MOORE. viii the gentleman
yield?
Mr.. MANN. will yield for ques-
tion.
Mr.. MOORE. Has every claim in
the omnibus claims bill been approved
by the Court of Claims?
Mr.. MANN. That is so stated.
Mr.. MOORE. Has this claim been
approved by the Court of Claims?
Mr.. MANN. 1t has not. say zap
proved by the Court of Claims" The
Court of Claims does not approve or
disapprove.
Mr.. MOORE. I mean an adiudica-
tion by the court.
Mr.. MANN They are not adiudi-
Gated They are claims. There has
been no finding here. as far as know,
/ by the Court of Claims.
Mr.. BURNETT. viii the gentle
man yield2
Mr.. MANN. For a question.
Mr.. BURNETT. Is it not fact that
we paid a number Of claims for de-
struction Of property In the Philip
pines, where there was actual de-
struction of property by the Army?
| Mr.. MANN. / think not. That is
not my understanding.
Mr.. BURNETT. That is my rccol-
| lection.
Mr.. MANN. That is not my recol-
lection of it at all
Mr.. GOULDEN. VIII the gentleman
yield?
Mr.. MANN. Tor brief question.
Mr.. GOULDEN. Has this matter
ever been referred TO the Commit
| tee on War Claims. and If so-
Mr. MANN. Why, it is reported
from the Committee on War Claims;
but it was entirely by personal
solicitation that they got this report
I
a fairly meritorious case IL has
great sympathies in it; but il you
adopt the principle the next case will
not have so much of sympathies in
| it. Pretty soon it will be a mere
matter of paying the claim. What
are the facts? This destruction OF
property occurred in June 1864, at a
critical period in the war. with great
] armies in Virginia, and great effort
on the part Of the Confederate Army
TO reach Washington. Gentlemen say
that the general ought not to. have
destroyed the property. Well. II
there had not been destruction OF
property and life there would have
been destruction of the Union. I
prefer to have had life and property
destroyed and the Union saved Per-
haps they were not so nice about Il
as you and / would be, taking break
fast or dinner, but it was war. The
commanding officer, for reasons
which he believed we're right, ordered
the property destroyed. | have heard
1t said. by gentlemen who said they
we're familiar with the case. that there
, was firing on the Federal troops from
these buildings. l do not know.
, do not care. / know that If Congress
undertakes to pay these claims fol
destruction of property by the Army
the Treasury will become a waste.
reserve the balance of my time
Mr. FLOOD of Virginia. Mr. Speak.
er, how much time have l remain
ing?
The SPEAKER. The gentleman
has four minutes remaining.
|, Mr.. FLOOD Of Virginia. I yield
two minutes to the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Graham). CAP
plause)
Mr.. GRAHAM of Pennsylvania. Mr.
Speaker. it seems to me that this
, matter has been discussed from an
J altogether improper viewpoint. This
, claim ought to be considered lin ;
fair and judicial spirit. There is NJ
room for recrimination or charges
! against a Union general or agains
! those who represented this college
The simple question is, What are tn
) facts, and have we precedent for thi
E bill? / think an examination of botl
these questions will result in al
affirmative answer, that we hav
e precedent and that the facts in thi