« AnteriorContinua »
collusion or combination. The occupants of these lands, who paid their money and improved and gave it value, have not been connected in any shape or form with the treaties referred to, or had anything to do with any of the proceedings in the courts, until the action of ejectment was brought against them. The record discloses a defence and contest in good faith, and the only difference between this case and ordinary cases of ejectment, consists in the submission of the case to that pure and upright judge, John McLean, rather than to a jury. When it is considered that the whole case turned upon one naked legal question, and that the facts could not be controverted anywhere, this mode of trial is but natural and proper. It may be added that the legislature of Ohio have unanimously memorialized Congress in favor of the relief prayed for. In conclusion, the committee report a bill herewith for the purpose of ascertaining the unimproved value of the lands without any appropriation, and recommend its passage.
R. L. B. CLARKE.
JUNE 20, 1862.-Ordered to be printed.
Mr. HUTCHINS, from the Committee of Claims, made the following
The Committee of Claims, to whom was referred the memorial of R. L.
B. Clarke, who contested the seat of Augustus Hall, as representative in the 34th Congress of the United States from the first district in Iowa, praying for mileage and per diem, report:
That the following report from the Committee of Elections, made during the 1st session of the 35th Congress, states the facts in the case, and your committee therefore adopt it, and report the accom. panying bill and recommend its passage.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, March 12, 1858.
Mr. I. WASHBURN, from the Committee of Elections, made the fol.
The Committee of Elections, to whom was referred the memorial of R. L.
B. Clarke, who contested the seat of Augustus Hall, as representotive in the 34th Congress of the United States from the first district in Iowa, praying for mileage and per diem, report:
That it appears that said Clarke presented his memorial at the cominencement of the last Congress, in which he claimed that he had received a majority of the legal votes cast at the election for member of Congress from said district, held in August, 1854, and ought to be admitted to the seat occupied by said Hall, and prayed that the House would so adjudge and decide; that owing, in good part, to delays occasioned by applications of the sitting member for further time to answer to the allegations of contestant, no definite action was taken in committee till the third session of said Congress, when, on the 4th day of February, 1857, Mr. Bingham submitted, as the unanimous report of the committee, the following resolutions:
" Resolved, That Hon. Augustus Hall was legally and duly elected as a representative of the first congressional district in the State of Iowa for the thirty-fourth Congress.
" Resolved, That the Clerk of the House of Representatives be directed to pay out of the contingent fund of the House to R. L. B. Clarke, contestant of the seat of Hon. Augustus Hall, the usual mileage for the first session of this Congress, and a per diem compensation at the rate of eight dollars per day, to be reckoned from the first day of the first session of this Congress to the sixth day of last May."
That upon report being made to the House, the first resolution was ruled to be a question of privilege, and adopted; that the second was decided not to be a question of privilege, and being objected to, was not received at that time; that afterwards, on the 14th day of February, 1857, on the call of committees for reports, said resolution was reported from the Committee of Elections, and the question being on its passage, a motion was made to lay it on the table, which was negatived; that, pending a call for the previous question, the morning hour expired, and the House, in its anxiety to take up the tariff bill, then before Congress, passed from the consideration of the resolution: and that thenceforward to the close of the session the committee were unable again to bring the question before the House.
Your committee are advised and informed that the Committee of Elections of the thirty-fourth Congress did not doubt that the contestant made his claim in entire good faith, fully believing that he was entitled to the seat occupied by Mr. Hall; that while they were all agreed that the legal evidence before them would not justify a report in his favor, they perceived that he had reasonable ground for making his application to the House, and could well see how he might honestly suppose he was entitled to the seat; further, that a majority of the committee were strongly persuaded that, upon a full and legal investigation of the case, this fact would have been apparent.
Upon this state of facts your committee recommend the passage of the accompanying bill.
JUNE 20, 1862.-Ordered to be printed.
Mr. Walton, from the Committee of Claims, made the following
The Committee of Claims, to whom was referred the petition of Hannibal
That the petition was drawn by honorable B. B. French, Commis. sioner of Public Buildings, and is officially certified by him to be correct so far as the facts depend upon the records of his office. It seems that Graham was a laborer employed by the Commissioner at $30 per month ; that in December, 1843, William Noland, esq., the then Commissioner, employed Graham in extra night service as scavenger, which required him to employ a horse, cart, and driver, and that Noland promised extra pay for this necessary service, and that Graham continued in the duty constantly from that time until March, 1856. Graham states that he presented his claim at the close of Noland's term, but was informed that he was too late, as the Commissioner's account had been closed. Noland died without settling the claim, and the petitioner, from time to time, applied for pay, and was put off with assurances that he ought to be paid, and would be paid. He is an aged man of good character, and has been timid and modest in urging his claim. He is undoubtedly entitled to compensation, and almost any other man would doubtless have secured it long ago. The question with the committee is as to the amount to be paid. It does not appear that any specified sum per month or year was ever agreed upon. It is in proof that, for the same service in 1842, $18 per month was allowed, and that subsequently, and when Graham was in service, $16 per month extra was paid for ten months to Bazil Patterson, another laborer, for the same kind of service, and that, too, when Patterson was receiving $46 50 per month as laborer. In other words, he received $62 50 per month, when Graham, for the same service, received only $30 per month. It is presumed, however, that Patterson's service was mainly during the session, when the task was nightly, while Graham's continued through the year, and in the recess the extra work was done only once in two or threw days. The committee at the last session reported $10 per month. We recommend $8 per month, being half the price allowed to Patterson. It is a reasonable charge for a man, horse, and cart, in a very unpleasant service, and were commend its allowance.