Imatges de pàgina
PDF
EPUB

correspondence appended. In looking, however, at the history of the period, the testimony presented, and the admissions made from time to time in the various treasury reports, the committee cannot doubt that the facts are as averred by the memorialists, and that the 80 per cent. paid on the negotiation of the 31st of August was entirely illusive, being paid in the depreciated currency of the times. The deposition of Dennis A. Smith, one of the contractors, distinctly proves the fact. And it further appears, that during the period from the 20th of September to the 10th of December following, in which the monthly instalments were to be paid, the paper received varied from ten to twenty-four per cent. below par.

But, while the committee are satisfied of these general facts, they deem it inappropriate for them to attempt to determine, absolutely, either the fact of depreciation in the funds received at the treasury, or the amount to which it would entitle the claimants. In their judgment, however, it would be eminently just and proper that the accounting officers of the treasury should be authorized to hear testimony as to the fact and amount of depreciation, in order that the faith of the government may be redeemed, and the legal rights of the parties under their contract with the government secured, by paying the amount found to be due. Considering with what cheerful patriotism Mr. Jacob Barker gave his energies, his eminent financial talents, and his great pecuniary means, to sustain his country in the darkest and most perilous hour of the war of 1812, it can hardly be supposed that Congress will deny him the privilege of establishing, if he can, a clearly legal demand, arising out of a recorded contract, which, while it benefited the government, resulted in his own ruin. The committee, therefore, report a bill for the relief of the memorialists, and ask the favorable consideration of the House.

COMMITTEE ROOM OF THE JUDICIARY,

House of Representatives, Washington, July 12, 1854.

SIR: The enclosed papers in relation to the claim of the assignees of Jacob Barker, arising out of the ten-million loan of 1814, have been referred to the Committee on the Judiciary for examination and report. That committee has instructed me to ask information from your department upon the following points:

1st. Were any other contracts made for any part of the $25,000,000 authorized by the act of the 24th March, 1814, except those of the 2d May, 1814, for the ten millions; and of the 31st August of the same year, for six millions? If any other contracts were made, please state the terms, &c.

2d. What persons, according to the books of the treasury, were the actual holders of the stock in the ten-million loan of the 2d May, 1814, at the time the second loan, to wit: that of the 31st August, was made?

3d. Upon what precise terms the second or any subsequent loan, for part of said twenty-five millions, was made? Whether the contractors agreed to pay in money or in bank paper or credits; whether

******

may be, there can be no question as to the propriety of de plete justice at the present time.

1

The memorialists do not claim any remuneration for done to the value of their stock by notifying the parties th dition was exhausted; or by the subsequent act of setting loan of March and resorting to that of November. Tha ceedings did result in great injury, must be admitted fro nature of things, though it might be difficult to determi of loss incurred. But leaving these particulars entire' case, the memorialists place themselves upon the groun well-established fact, upon which they claim what they an unquestionable legal right. This fact is, that the lo on the 31st of August, 1814, were taken at the rate of in the hundred, payable; and actually paid, in de paper. In settling with the holders of the original basis of this second loan, the Secretary paid only t tween eighty and eighty-eight, estimating the depr per, paid under the second contract, as equivalent cie. The memorialists now claim the difference bet money and the currency in which the payments we received.

It does not appear, so far as the committee hav that the parties made the claim in this form at transactions. The only questions then discussed holders and the government were those already a port: first, as to the parties entitled to receive the and, secondly, as to the continuance of the condi: negotiation. But it will be readily seen that, un then existing, with the certainty that other neg quired for obtaining the balance of the twentyquestion which is now so material was then of cause, upon any subsequent negotiation, in wh have been still more favorable to the lender, th would have been entitled to a sum equal to t of the stock, and it was not very material w continued attached to the original stock or v the supplemental stock. But the parties s mercy of the department, and were forced t could obtain. The power of the government regard to rights of the parties, and the occa vorable to the assertion of the present dem:. tractors then knew the terms of the secor evidence that they were apprized of the fa was received, especially as the department is nothing remaining on the books or reco

If the loan of the 31st of August was act or in fact was paid, in a depreciated curi see how the claim of the memorialists can certain the facts, application was made for such information as could be furnish they received nothing satisfactory in re

[merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]

7

1, on aims,

enate,

e last

ding to stock in nd loan, .ust state

è contract

have been, ary of the the respect

re the stock per amounts ence that the to the credit banks as had inmissioners of s of the stocktanding certifior each quarter, nent of interest nges of the holdnt, except where Office books of one l'his could only be nd the amount of rtment to issue its ne Loan Office was ransferred, and the e offices changed ac

it into operation, the l States were turned harter, and the Loan custody of that bank its charter expired in Office books and papers, he Treasury. A large red to the several Loan t officer, but none of the ry in regard to the issue the books from the larger hat it is impossible to rearticular loan at any speci

during the late war with ockholders and the amounts 1 time appear on the books the rtificates were issued

the banks, whose paper was received, were paying specie, either at the time of the contract or at the time of the payments, or any of them?

4th. To what persons the supplemental stock, being for the difference between the rates of the first and second parts of said loan, was issued?

5th. Whether the parties receiving the supplemental stock accepted it in full satisfaction of their claim, and whether any objection was made upon the ground that the loan of the 31st August, 1814, was advanced to the government in depreciated bank paper?

6th. Please set out, in words and figures, the exact form of the certificates issued for the original loan, and of any which may subsequently have been substituted for them; the form of the certificates for the second loan, and of those for the supplemental stock.

I have the honor to be, most respectfully, your obedient servant, FRED. P. STANTON, Chairman Judiciary Committee, H. R.

Hon. JAMES GUTHRIE, Secretary of the Treasury.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT,

July 19, 1854.

SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 12th instant, making certain specific inquiries in relation to the claim of the assignees of Jacob Barker, arising out of the ten-million loan of 1814.

In view of these inquiries, I must beg leave to state, that all the original correspondence and records of the office of Secretary of the Treasury, previous to the burning of the Treasury building in 1833, were then destroyed, with the exception, as I understand, of one volume of the records of letters addressed by the Secretary to certain banks and public offices in 1826 and 1827, which happened to have been previously carried to another office for a special purpose, and was thus saved. That fire is believed to have commenced in one of the rooms of the building then occupied by the Secretary's office, and none of the papers and archives of that office were saved from destruction, with the exception above stated. It is accordingly out of my power to furnish any information directly from the correspondence or records of my office, on the subject of your inquiries.

I will, however, give with pleasure such information as is within my command in relation to your inquiries, in detail:

1. In reply to the inquiry, "were any other contracts made for any part of the $25,000,000 authorized by act of 24th March, 1814, except those of 2d May, 1814, for ten millions, and of the 31st August, of the same year, for six millions. If any other contracts were made, please state the terms,"-I beg leave to refer you to the report of the Secretary of the Treasury on the subject of this loan, published in Gales and Seaton's State Papers, Finance, vol. 2, page 845, and subsequent pages; to the report of the Secretary of the Treasury on the state of the finances, of 8th December, 1815, stating the precise terms on which the loan in question had been negotiated, published in Gales and Seaton's State Papers, Finance, vol. 3, page 7; to the report of

the Committee of Claims of the Senate, of the 25th January, 1821, on this claim, published in Gales and Seaton's State Papers, Claims, page 771; and to the report of the Committee of Claims of the Senate, of the 11th February, 1822, on this claim, published in the last named volume of State Papers, page 824.

2. In answer to your second inquiry, "what persons, according to the books of the treasury, were the contract holders of the stock in the ten-million loan of 2d May, 1814, at the time the second loan, to wit: that of the 31st August, 1814, was made," I must state that the books of the treasury do not show the names of the contract holders referred to.

The course of such transactions at that period appears to have been, that the proposals for loans were decided by the Secretary of the Treasury, who instructed the Commissioners of Loans in the respective States from which the accepted offers came, and where the stock was to be held, to issue the certificates of stock for the proper amounts to the parties entitled to the same, upon the usual evidence that the amount called for by the proposals had been deposited to the credit of the Treasurer of the United States, in such bank or banks as had been designated for that purpose. The books of the Commissioners of Loans in the several States, alone, contained the names of the stockholders at any given time. The amounts of the outstanding certificates were reported at the close of the transfer books for each quarter, in order that the necessary remittance for the payment of interest thereon might be duly made; but the individual changes of the holders of the stock were not reported to this department, except where stock was required to be transferred from the Loan Office books of one State to the Loan Office books of another State. This could only be done by reporting the name of the stockholder, and the amount of his stock to be so transferred, to enable this department to issue its warrant directing such transfer, upon which the one Loan Office was credited and the other debited with the sum so transferred, and the sums remitted for the payment of interest at these offices changed accordingly.

When the late Bank of the United States went into operation, the duties of Commissioners of Loans in the several States were turned over to that bank pursuant to the terms of its charter, and the Loan Office books and correspondence went into the custody of that bank and its branches in the several States. When its charter expired in 1836, its officers, who had custody of the Loan Office books and papers, were directed to send them to the Register of the Treasury. A large number of the stock-books which had belonged to the several Loan Offices were received, as I understand, by that officer, but none of the correspondence or orders given by the Secretary in regard to the issue of stock, and the sequence and relations of the books from the larger Loan Offices are found to be so imperfect that it is impossible to report the names of the stockholders of any particular loan at any specified time from them.

The only portion of the loans negotiated during the late war with Great Britain, of which the names of the stockholders and the amounts held by them respectively at any specified time appear on the books of the treasury, is that for which the certificates were issued by the

« AnteriorContinua »