Imatges de pàgina
PDF
EPUB

ments made by the petitioner. The lot sold for $449 83, being $ 207 17 less than the sum at which it was originally appraised and set off to the United States. But Mr. Huntington states that lot No. 7, directly opposite, which, in 1818, was appraised and set off to the United States at $1,227, at the same sale, in 1829, brought only $256 25. The value of the improvements made by the petitioner are estimated, on oath, by William J. Barry and George M. Bolles, as follows, viz:

To clearing stone, broken brick, hauling down the hill, levelling the ground, mould, and, manure, and making embankment Well, stoning and blasting

Fencing

Fruit trees

Ice vault and house
Removing house

Removing barn

- $95 00

40 00

30 00

9 00

28 00

54 00

19.00

$275.00

The

George Putnam, the Deputy Marshal, who sold the lot in 1829, testifies, that the house and barn were reserved at the sale as the property of the petitioner, and that all the other improvements were sold with the land. annual rent of the lot was paid by the petitioner to H. Huntington, District Attorney. The appraisers state, that, in their valuation of the fence, they did not estimate the value of the materials, having been informed that they were furnished by H. Huntington. The committee are satisfied that the improvements made by the petitioner on the lot were of a permanent character; that they have enhanced the value of the lot, and its price at the sale; and that the case of the petitioner is similar to that of Henry Kilbourn and Sylvester Havens, in whose favor bills were reported during the present session. The committee therefore report a bill for the sum of $202, the appraised value of the improvements made on the lot by the petitioner, deducting from the valuation $73, the sum allowed by the appraisers for removing the house and barn.

1st Session.

BRIDGE ACROSS THE OHIO.

APRIL 29, 1830.

Read, and laid upon the table.

Mr. WICKLIFFE, from the Committee on the Judiciary, to which the subject had been referred, made the following

REPORT:

The Committee on the Judiciary, who was instructed by the resolution of the House, to inquire into the expediency of granting the assent of the Congress of the United States to the Ohio and Kentucky Bridge Company, incorporated by the act of the Legislature of Kentucky, to erect a toll bridge across the Ohio river, report:

That the committee have had referred to them a copy of the act of incorporation, which they have examined, and ask leave to report their opinion, that legislation by Congress upon this subject is unnecessary. The whole bed of the Ohio river to low water mark on the Northwest side of said river, at the point where it is proposed to build the bridge, is within the territorial limits of the State of Kentucky, and by the terms of the charter it is provided, that the navigation of the said river shall not be obstructed by said bridge. If the company shall, in violation of its charter, impede the navigation of the river by the erection of the bridge, it would be in the power of the State of Kentucky, and no less her duty, to cause the charter to be annulled, and the obstruction in the navigation removed. If the United States have the right or power either to grant the privilege to build the bridge, contemplated across the Ohio river, or to prevent its erection; in this case, the committee have been furnished with no evidence which would enable them to form an opinion upon the propriety of granting or withholding the assent of Congress to the chartered privileges of the said company; and therefore, prefer to leave the subject under the control, and subject to the Legislatures of Kentucky and Ohio, to which it more appropriately belongs, as the two States united possess over the territory, within which the bridge is proposed to be erected, an unquestioned jurisdiction.

[ocr errors]

1st Session.

STAFFORD AND YATES.

APRIL 29, 1830.

Read, and laid upon the table.

Mr. CONNER, from the Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads, to which was re-committed the report of the said committee, in the case of Stafford and Yates, of the 25th of January last, made the following detailed

REPORT:

The Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads, to whom was refer red the petition of Spencer Stafford and John V. N. Yates, report: That the petitioners set forth, that, in the year 1816, John V. N. Yates and Spencer Stafford, in conjunction with John Stafford, (now deceased) executed a bond with Solomon Southwick, as his sureties, to the Postmaster General of the United States, in the sum of six thousand dollars, conditioned that the said Solmon Southwick should well and truly execute the duties of Postmaster at Albany, in the State of New York, &c. &c.; that, in 1822, Solomon Southwick was found to be a defaulter to the amount of $6,853 88 cents, when he was removed, and a suit instituted by the Postmaster General against Solomon Southwick and his sureties, in the Circuit Court for the Northern District in New York, to recover the penalty on said bond.

The petitioners claimed to be allowed by way of set-off, the following itėms:

1st. For receiving and despatching foreign mails from 1816 to
1821, being 22 quarters, at 25 dollars per quarter,
2d. To receiving night mails from 1816 to 1821, at 50 per cent.
additional,

$550 00

1,250 00

3d. To keeping mail register of arrival and departure of mails, for 5 years and 6 months, at ten cents,

[ocr errors]

30 80

4th. To hire of two bedsteads, beds, and clothes, for 5 years,

at $20 per year,

[ocr errors][merged small]

5th. To washing bed clothes, and cleaning bed room, 280 weeks, at $1 50,

420 00

6th. To finding and washing towels for the same period,

35 00

E. F. Backus's receipt for post office rent,

J. B. Southwick, for salary,

Jos. Wands, 2d,

D. F. Pruyn, salary,

S. W. Southwick, for do.

H. C. Southwick, for do.

G. Wood, for do.

S. Rice, for do.

[blocks in formation]

Of this account, two items, the 1st and 3d, were admitted by the counsel for the United States, but were not permitted by the court to be deducted from the penalty of the bond. The petitioners state, that, had this account of of $6,577 50 been allowed, it would have exonerated them from liability on the bond; but was refused, without proof of an agreement on the part of the Postmaster General, to allow the same. The damages of the Postmaster General were assessed by the court at $6,000; that the cause was removed by writ of error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York, and was brought from that court, on a certificate of the judges of disagreement of opinion, to the Supreme Court of the United States, who, without argument, decided in favor of the Postmaster General; that, acting under the advice of counsel, they caused a writ of error to be sued out, by virtue of which, the record and proceedings in the said Circuit Court were removed to the Supreme Court; and, by motion of the Attorney General of the United States, the writ of error was dismissed for want of ju- · risdiction. The petitioners further state, that, in January, 1820, through their representative, application was made to the Postmaster General, to know, among other things, if Solomon Southwick was a delinquent Postmaster, and received the following answer:

GENERAL POST OFFICE,
January 13th, 1820.

DEAR SIR: In reply to yours of to day, I have to state, that I know of no attempt to remove Mr. Southwick, or any charge against him.

Very respectfully,
Your ob't serv't,

Hon. SOLOMON VAN RENSSELAER.

R. J. MEIGS, jr.

The petitioners also state, that, in account marked B. (in the printed doeument in this case, and among the papers,) there was then a balance of over $2,000 against said Southwick; and, in April, 1820, as will appear from the following letter from Abr'm Bradley, the sum has increased to $3,547 24

cents:

GENERAL POST OFFICE, April 22, 1820.

SIR: A balance amounting to $3,547 24 appears against you on the books of this Department, which it is indispensably necessary should be reduced. In making your subsequent deposites to the credit of this office with the cashier of the New York State bank at Albany, you will have regard to the reduction of the above, as well as depositing the amount of your current quarterly balances.

I am, Sir,

Your obedient servant,

SOLOMON SOUTHWICK, Esq.

AB'M BRADLEY, Jr.

« AnteriorContinua »