2d Session. No. 87. THOMAS PLUMSILL. [To accompany bill H. R. No. 741.] FEBRUARY 8, 1855. Mr. MAY, from the Committee on the Judiciary, made the following REPORT. The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the memorial of Thomas Plumsill, report: The memorialist states that he has for ten years been a faithful bailiff, attending the courts of the District of Columbia; that while he has been paid for his services at the rate of two dollars a day, his said compensation has, by existing laws, been limited to the number of days that the court have been actually in session, while his duties have required his services for many days and weeks both before and after the sessions of the courts, and during such intervals as have occurred in term time; that these duties have been very constant and laborious, and have required him to keep a horse to aid in performing them. They concerned the serving of process for jurors, witnesses, &c., in all parts of the District of Columbia; and this at all times of the day, and often at night. His memorial is sustained by the certificate of a large number of the grand jurors of said district, and the greater number of the respectable members of the local bar-all of whom have had opportunities of knowing the truth of the facts stated by him. They strongly certify to his integrity and fidelity in serving the public interests in his said office. He prays for compensation upon three distinct grounds, as exhibited in his account presented with his memorial. 1st. For said services while the courts were not in session. 2d. For the same services during the terms of the courts, rendered in intervals of their sessions. 3d. For the expense of keeping his horse. The committee think that the first item of his claim is well founded, and reject the others. In settling the amount to be paid under this item, they have considered the expense of keeping his horse, and allow for himself and horse for the whole period of his services out of term time, at the rate of two dollars a day, and report herewith a bill for his relief on these principles. 2d Session. No. 88. HENRY M. SHREVE-WIDOW AND CHILDREN OF. FEBRUARY 9, 1855. Mr. WALLEY, from the Committee of Claims, made the following REPORT. The Committee of Claims, to whom was referred the memorial of the executor of Henry M. Shreve, in relation to the removal of snags, sawyers, &c., from the great western rivers, by the use of his patented steam snag-boat, have had the same under consideration, and respectfully report: This claim has been the subject of several very elaborate reports from committees of this House-one from the Committee on Public Lands, and three from select committees, in 1842, 1843, and 1844-concluding that the memorialist is entitled to the favorable consideration of Congress. Subsequent to these dates the Committee on Patents, on the 28th of February, 1846, made the following report, which your committee adopt in part; and, having prepared a bill in conformity with these views, earnestly recommend that this act of justice, so long withheld, should now be granted; and that the accompanying bill should be passed, appropriating the sum of twenty thousand dollars in full for all claim of the estate of Mr. Shreve upon this government for the use of his patent. The case is this: "Previous to 1829, Captain Henry M. Shreve, then employed by the United States in the improvement of the navigation of the Mississippi river and its tributaries, invented a very ingenious and powerful machine for the removal of snags and sawyers. The United States commenced using it in 1829, and have continued to do so to the present time. "In 1838 the memorialist obtained a patent for his invention, and now asks compensation for the past use of his invention. "As to the use from 1829 to 1838, before the patent was obtained, it is a past consideration which carries with it no legal obligation. Between individuals it has no sanction but gratitude; and as to the public, it furnishes no inducement to give an equivalent or a reward, except the policy of calling to its aid the mental as well as the physical energies of those in its service. True, it has generally been though wise as well as just to reward the public agent who introduces a labor saving or expense-saving machine, with a portion approaching one-third or one-half of the value saved. "The appeal of the memorialist for compensation for the use of his machine for this portion of time must be left entirely to the policy or magnanimity of Congress. "Not so with reference to the remaining period from 1838 to the present time. On the 12th day of September, 1838, letters patent issued to him under the authority of the United States, guarantying to him the exclusive right to his invention. This appears fully in the report of 1843 (and the documents thereto attached) of a committee of the House of Representatives, (No. 272, 3d session 27th Congress,) and also by the recognition of the public authorities of the United States on eight several occasions. (See House report No. 538, 28th Cong., 1st sess., page 9.) Notwithstanding this solemn guarantee, the government of the United States, without the license of the patentee, and in disregard of his protest, have continued to use his invention without compensation to the present time. Between individuals this would be a gross infringement of patent, which would subject the party to exemplary damages. In the United States it can hardly be anything less than the taking of private property for public use, for which the constitution guaranties the party just compensation. "From the testimony, it appears that this invention has been indispensable to the safe navigation of the western waters. As to its value and importance, the evidence is full and satisfactory. The committee, however, will content themselves with one or two brief extracts, and refer to the reports of 1842 and 1844 for more ample details. In the report of 1842 it is stated that 'the important improvements effected through its agency in the navigation of the Mississippi, Ohio, Arkansas, Red, and other rivers, are of public notoriety. It appears from a statement made by twelve steamboat captains and others, citizens of Louisville, Kentucky, presented to the House of Representatives in 1830, that in the brief space of seven months after the first boat commenced her operations, some of the very worst channels of the Mississippi' were 'rendered safe and easy;' and that Plum Point, and islands Nos. 62 and 63, previously considered the most dangerous passes of that river, presented the appearance of smooth sheets of water, and could be traversed with perfect safety.' Subsequently, and still prior to the date of the patent, the great raft of Red river, consisting of an accumulation of trees, logs, and drift-wood, of every description, firmly imbedded in its channel for more than one hundred and sixty miles, was removed, and the navigation of that river opened, inclusive of the raft, a distance of nearly twelve hundred miles. This work alone, on account of the immense quantity of the public land reclaimed in the raft region, and rendered fit for cultivation, the enhanced value of other lands on the upper part of the river, and the reduced cost in the transportation of supplies to Fort Towson, and to the Indians located in that neighborhood, has been worth millions to the government.' "The Committee on Public Lands in the House of Representatives, in the year 1834, (1st sess. 23d Cong., No. 509, page 2,) in speaking of the advantages of this invention in the anticipated removal of the raft in the Red river, hold the following language: 'The committee are |