Year: 1874

TIE ISSUES INVOLVED IN JUDGE BENEDICr's
OPINION.


The precise points of the decision of Judge
Benedict the United States District Court of Brook
lyn Tuesday last by which the prosecution OF San
born land his coworkers stopped have been 30 me-
what misunderstood or rather not fully understood II
apparent that Sanborn, vanderwerken and Hawley
were declared any conspiracy against the Gov
ernmen but beyond that is claimed that Judge Bene
diets decision virtually arragns the authorities at Wash
ngton for making illegal contract which IL therefore
void. An opinion the legal points involved was
sought yesterday by TRIBUNE reporter from the As
sstant United States District Attorney Of Brooklyn,
George W. Hoxie, who made the following statement
In the question: what is the precise point OF
Judge Benedicts opinion In the San60rn caseF ~ MT
HOxie answered as follows:


No intelligent idea be obtained from that opinion,
except by reading the contract and the contract which
hold in hand reads: "That the said party OF the
second part" meaning sanborn, shaving been desig-
mated the Secretary of the Treasury Of three
to assist the proper officers OF the Government
in discovering and collecting moneys belonging to the
United States, withheld by certain persons under one
OF the provisions Of tho Legislative Executive and
Judicial Appropriation bill, approved May g. 1874 and
the said party Of tho second part having fully set forth
therein required In written statement under oath
10 the Secretary Of the Treasury filed in his Office that
he proposed assist in recovering for the





lows the list Of tho claims. at the conclusion of which
the contract reads as follows: "Now 1t Id agreed by
and between the said parties that the said party
Of the second part may proceed to collect
the said taxes so alleged to be due to the
United states by the said persons" It. reads further In
this languages whenever any money shall he collected
from said upon said CLAIMS either by legal pro-
ceedings by settlement compromise OF said claims,
such shall be paid by said persons to the credit
OF the Secretary of tho Treasury and out OF any money
collected and received there shall be paid to said
party OF tho second part In full his services and for
all the costs expenses OF such collection, equal
per Of the gross collected recovered


The law under which this contract was made was that
OF May g. 1872 which reads "that from and after the
passage this the Secretary OF the Treasury shall
have power to employ not than three persons to
the proper officers OF tho Government in discover
ing and collecting the money belonging TO tho United
States whenever the shall be withheld by any per
son corporation, upon such terms and conditions as
he shall deem best for the interests OF the United
Now, in the first place it will be perceived that the
law itself authorizes the secretary OF tne treasury 10
make contract with SanbOrn to ald ana ASSIST tne
officers OF the Government In collecting these taxes
make any contract by which sanborn receive any
money except by aiding and assisting the proper officers
Of the Government in receiving as well as discovering
it, Judge Benedict has held, in his OPINION that tho
not require Mr. sanborn by its terms TO
| preliminary to his right 10 receive so per cent.
The Distrct.Attorney; in the first place. has





terms as we'll as by spirit, does require that Mr. San
should aid and assist IN recovering the money, ana
that without such aid and assistance ne can nave no
right receive his share But II Judge Benedict Is
his conclusion that the contract does not re-
quire him to aid and assist the officers then the contract
| was made without authority OF law ana TaS c0nse-
queny void But Judge Benedict mas held that under
this contract, which by the position he has taken he
must admit be void MI sanbQrn acquired the right
to EeceYe, upon the collection OF the taxes included I'D


his contract the stipulated portion Oh sucn taxes now
| ever and by wb0msoeyer collected


To this conclusion Of Judge Benedict the District


place. that the Judge has msterpreed the CONTRACT
and that does require Mr. SanbOrn 10 per-
these services and give this to the officers
condition of his right to single dollar OF the puDlo
money He also claims that, II the Judge was correct
| in his Interpretation OF the contract, SanbOrn was
entitled without any aid assistance on his part
law 5snbOrn could nave no right TO any payment OF
| the moneys collected and tho assumption or the
| Judge that he had vested right in the money,
| in any view OF the contract, Cannot
the Government, and Sanborn could have right 10 1t
through Secretary Of the Treasury only By means OF
valid contract. The Judge took the position that MS
Of the contract disposed or the case ana hat tnere
could be nothing go 10 the jury wtn Tor the reason
that conspiracy could be formed to defraui the Gov
| erDment out OF that which SanOOrns Dy rlght.
But the claims that In either view or
the contract 5auDorn was not entitled TO dollar OF the
| money. He was prepared TO show that SanD0rn hau
done nothing toward aiding and assisting the oncers IN
recovering IT, but represented falsely 10 the secretary
of the that he had aided aud asssted the
and by OF such false representations ODtilneu
the mouey from the Secretary He was. furtnermore,
prepared show, under this Indictment that con-
spracy Wander werken, HaWley, ana Sanoorn
had been entered into by which this money was Sc
cretly collected without the knowledge or collector
Freeand and by deputy in his office. Tne Judge nav
ing stated, however, tnat Ms wow OF tno oonIac. US
posed Of tho case, such proof Was not allowed to DO
offered,